Philosophy of religion: Miracles — AQA A-Level Religious Studies
Philosophy of religion: Miracles explained
Philosophy of religion: Miracles covers 5 specification points, including Differing understandings of ‘miracle’ and realist and anti-realist views.
Read the full explanation
Open a point below for its explanation and revision guidance.
Differing understandings of ‘miracle’
A miracle can be understood in several ways, and each definition shapes what counts as evidence. A theistic realist view treats a miracle as a transcendent act of God breaking into the natural order, often linked to revelation. A naturalist or immanent view explains apparent miracles through unknown natural laws, as Hume's scepticism and later thinkers suggest. A relativist or language-game view holds that 'miracle' is meaningful only within a religious form of life. A question may ask you to identify which definition a scenario fits, so match the key feature: divine agency, violation of natural law, or interpretation within belief.
realist and anti-realist views
This element asks you to distinguish realist from anti-realist approaches to miracle claims. A realist holds that a miracle is a feature of the world independent of what anyone believes: either an event occurs that exceeds or breaks the regular course of nature, or a natural event is recognised as religiously significant because it points to God. Truth here is mind-independent, so a claim about a miracle is true or false regardless of the observer. An anti-realist holds that what counts as a miracle depends on the religious interpretation placed on experience within a believing community; the language of miracle expresses a religious attitude or commitment rather than describing a special physical occurrence.
violation of natural law or natural event.
This element asks you to handle two competing definitions of miracle. The first treats a miracle as a violation of natural law: an event that cannot be explained by the regular operations of nature and so requires a supernatural cause. The second treats a miracle as a natural event that carries religious significance: the event itself follows natural processes, but a believer interprets it as an act of God or a sign of divine purpose. In an MCQ, identify which definition an option expresses. A stem describing an event that suspends or breaks a law of nature points to the violation view; a stem describing an ordinary event given religious meaning points to the natural-event view. Keep the two apart, since they disagree about whether the event must be physically extraordinary.
Comparison of the key ideas of David Hume and Maurice Wiles on miracles.
This target asks you to set Hume's and Wiles's accounts of miracle side by side, not merely to describe each in turn. Hume, writing in the eighteenth century, treats a miracle as a violation of the laws of nature and argues that the evidence for any such violation can never be strong enough to outweigh the uniform experience supporting those laws; he also sets out criteria for weighing testimony, such as the character and number of witnesses and the kind of reports they give. Wiles, a twentieth-century theologian, questions whether a God who created an orderly world would act by intervening against that order, and he links miracle-language to religious significance rather than to breaches of natural law.
The significance of these views for religion.
This target asks you to work out what difference the philosophical views on miracle make to religion itself. Once you have set out positions such as Hume's evidential scepticism and Wiles's theological objection to intervention, you must ask what follows for religious belief and practice. Consider whether miracle claims function as evidence for God's existence, as signs pointing to divine action, or as expressions of religious meaning; consider how a religion's scriptures, liturgies and doctrines may depend on reported miracles; and consider whether accepting a non-interventionist account weakens or reshapes faith.
Your focus
- Identify the key feature distinguishing each understanding of miracle.
- Match a described scenario to the correct definition.
- Distinguish realist, naturalist and relativist accounts.
Show all 15 objectives
- Distinguish realist from anti-realist accounts of miracle claims
- Explain what each view says about the truth and meaning of miracle language
- Apply the distinction to a short scenario or statement in a multiple-choice item
- State the violation-of-natural-law definition of miracle
- State the natural-event definition of miracle
- Apply both definitions to a described event in a multiple-choice item
- Explain Hume's account of miracle and his evidential argument about testimony.
- Explain Wiles's theological position on miracle and intervention.
- Compare the two positions and evaluate which better accounts for miracle claims.
- Explain the consequences of philosophical views on miracle for religious belief and practice.
- Assess whether sceptical or non-interventionist views weaken or reshape religion.
- Reach and justify a judgement about the significance of these views for religion.
Philosophy of religion: Miracles exam tips
Marking Points
- Identifies a realist understanding in which a miracle is a direct act of God within or beyond nature.
- Recognises a naturalist understanding that explains apparent miracles by unknown or as-yet undiscovered natural laws.
- Distinguishes a relativist or language-game view in which 'miracle' has meaning only inside a religious form of life.
- Matches a given example to the definition whose key feature it displays, such as divine agency or violation of natural law.
- Identifies realism as the view that miracle claims are true or false independently of human belief or interpretation
- Identifies anti-realism as the view that miracle language expresses religious attitude, commitment or community practice rather than describing objective fact
- Distinguishes a realist claim that an event breaks or exceeds the regular course of nature from an anti-realist claim that a natural event is interpreted religiously
- Selects the option that correctly matches a stated position to either realism or anti-realism rather than to a different debate
- Defines the violation view as a miracle being an event that breaks or suspends a law of nature and so exceeds natural explanation
- Defines the natural-event view as a miracle being an ordinary natural event interpreted as religiously significant
- Distinguishes the two definitions by asking whether the event itself is physically extraordinary or whether its significance is religious
- Selects the option that correctly matches a described event to the violation view or the natural-event view
- Identifies Hume's definition of a miracle as a violation of the laws of nature and explains why that definition shapes his evidential argument.
- Explains Hume's argument that uniform experience against a violation outweighs testimony for it, and applies his criteria for assessing testimony to a concrete example.
- Explains Wiles's theological objection to intervention, grounding it in the idea of a God who sustains a regular created order rather than suspending it.
- Compares the two thinkers directly, showing that Hume argues from evidence and testimony while Wiles argues from the nature of God and providence.
- Evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of each position and reaches a supported judgement about which better accounts for miracle claims.
- Explains how miracle claims can function as evidence for God's existence and assesses whether sceptical views weaken that evidential role.
- Explains how reported miracles feature in scripture, doctrine and worship, and considers what reinterpreting them would mean for religious practice.
- Assesses whether a non-interventionist account of miracle weakens religious belief or reshapes it while preserving religious meaning.
- Reaches a supported judgement about how significant the philosophical views are for religion, weighing arguments on both sides.
Examiner Tips
- 💡Read the stem for the key feature named, such as 'violation of natural law', and match it to the correct definition.
- 💡Eliminate options that describe a different thinker's view before choosing.
- 💡Check whether the option concerns divine action, natural explanation or interpretation, since these distinguish the accounts.
- 💡Read the stem for the key phrase describing the status of the claim, such as independent of belief or dependent on interpretation, before choosing
- 💡Eliminate options that describe a different debate, such as the existence of God or the problem of evil, rather than realism and anti-realism
- 💡Check that your chosen option uses the term consistently with how the stem frames the miracle claim
- 💡Look for the phrase about natural law in the stem to decide whether the violation view is being tested
- 💡Eliminate options that describe a different topic, such as realism and anti-realism, rather than the definition of miracle
- 💡Check that the option you choose matches the exact wording of the definition, not a loose paraphrase
- 💡Plan a comparison structure so each paragraph names both thinkers and states the point of similarity or difference.
- 💡Anchor abstract arguments in one concrete reported miracle and show what Hume and Wiles would each say about it.
- 💡Reserve time to weigh the two positions and state a justified conclusion rather than merely summarising.
- 💡Keep the focus on significance for religion rather than re-explaining the philosophers in detail.
- 💡Use one or two concrete religious examples, such as a scriptural miracle account, to show the practical consequences.
- 💡Build towards an explicit judgement about how far these views matter for religion and justify it.
Common Mistakes
- Assumes all definitions require a violation of natural law; recognise that some accounts stress divine agency or interpretation instead.
- Treats one definition as the only correct meaning; distinguish the competing understandings the question offers.
- Ignores the role of the observer's beliefs; note that relativist accounts locate meaning in the religious context.
- Confuses anti-realism with atheism; keep the distinction clear, since anti-realism concerns the status of religious language, not belief in God's existence
- Treats realism as requiring that every miracle be a violation of natural law; note that realism also covers a natural event understood as objectively significant
- Assumes anti-realism denies that religious people sincerely believe in miracles; recognise that it reinterprets what their claims mean
- Treats every miracle as necessarily a violation of natural law; recognise that the natural-event view counts ordinary events as miracles when religiously interpreted
- Assumes the natural-event view denies divine action; note that it locates God's action in the interpretation of a natural process
- Confuses a violation of natural law with a coincidence; keep the definition focused on whether natural law is broken or suspended
- Treats the two thinkers separately and never compares them; draw explicit points of agreement and difference in each paragraph.
- Assumes Hume and Wiles make the same argument because both are sceptical; distinguish Hume's evidential focus from Wiles's theological focus.
- Describes Hume's view without applying his criteria for weighing testimony; use a specific reported event to show how the criteria work.
- Lists religious examples without linking them to the philosophical views; connect each example to what Hume or Wiles would conclude.
- Assumes scepticism about miracle necessarily destroys religion; consider reinterpretation and the survival of religious meaning.
- States a conclusion without weighing counter-arguments; balance the case for and against before judging.