Historians and miracles: The principle of analogy and antecedent probability reconsidered

Abstract

Most Biblical scholars and historians hold that the investigation of a miracle report lies outside of the rights of historians acting within their professional capacity. In this article, I challenge this assertion and argue to the contrary: Historians are within their professional rights to investigate miracle claims and to adjudicate on the historicity of the events. I present a positive case for the historian’s right to adjudicate on miracle claims and address two major objections to this conclusion: the principle of analogy and antecedent probability. At times I use the resurrection of Jesus as an example. This is the first of two articles. In the second, I will address three additional common objections: the theological objection, the lack of consensus and miracle claims in multiple religions.

How to cite this article: Licona, M.R. & Van der Watt, J.G., 2009, ‘Historians and miracles – the principle of analogy and antecedent probability reconsidered’, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 65(1), Art. #129, 6 pages. DOI: 10.4102/hts.v65i1.129