Added Assessing McIntosh’s Sophisticated Defense of Miracles (2026) by John W. Loftus to the Argument from Miracles page under Arguments for the Existence of a God in the Modern Documents section of the Secular Web Library.
In a previous paper Don McIntosh showed an exceptional awareness of the major objections to belief in miracles. In his attempt at a comprehensive rebuttal to them, his first goal was to argue that there are no fixed, exceptionless laws of nature, and thus nothing to prevent reasonable people from accepting miracle reports from reliable witnesses. His second goal was to argue that miracles are best understood as divine activity that merely defies our expectations and so miracles are akin to “signs” and “wonders.” His final goal was to offer a positive case for miracles that doesn’t lean on human testimony, which is generally considered weak as part of a defense of belief in miracles. Here McIntosh defended three categories: (1) miracles of cosmology; (2) miracles of prophecy; and (3) miracles of experience.
In this reply John W. Loftus offers a comprehensive rebuttal to McIntosh. Loftus argues that there are regularities of nature on a mega scale that can be described by many essential equations, and that this should be good enough. To deny the existence of the laws of nature raises twin problems. On the one hand, such a denial would open the flood gates to include false miracle claims in the absence of any way to check them against laws of nature. On the other hand, such denial would undercut the basis for belief in biblical miracles since it would concede that biblical authors didn’t require solid evidence for their occurrence. Loftus goes on to argue that this is exactly what we find in the Bible—unevidenced, superstitious miracle stories. Finally, he concludes that McIntosh’s miracles of cosmology are based on a kind of ignorance, as are the alleged Hebrew Bible prophecies of the promised land, and McIntosh’s conclusions from his own personal testimony.
New in the Kiosk: The Character of God: A Moral Examination of Scripture (2026) by David Falls
In this article David W. Falls examines the moral character of God as portrayed in biblical scripture apart from the separate question of whether God exists. Through examples from Genesis, Exodus, Samuel, Kings, Judges, Job, and the New Testament, Falls argues that many biblical narratives present divine authority as morally exempt from the standards normally applied to human conduct. The essay considers collective punishment, obedience, violence, regret, suffering, and eternal judgment as recurring problems for claims of divine goodness. It also challenges divine command morality by asking whether goodness can retain any meaning if it is defined only by power or command. Falls concludes that any authority, divine or human, that demands loyalty without moral scrutiny should not be trusted with power.
Recommended reading: Cross and Khôra: Deconstruction and Christianity in the Work of John D. Caputo by Marko Zlomislić and Neal DeRoo
In the volume Cross and Khôra: Deconstruction and Christianity in the Work of John D. Caputo editors Marko Zlomislić and Neal DeRoo analyze the relationship between the influences of Jacques Derrida and Jesus Christ on the thought of John D. Caputo. Given the seemingly abstract character of Derrida’s account of the messianic, how can one reconcile deconstruction and the “concrete messianism” of Christianity, as Caputo tries to do over and over again? How can one hold together the love of a God willing to be crucified and the dry, desert khôra, which doesn’t care? This collection of essays from world-renowned scholars seeks to illuminate the difficulties inherent in this seemingly contradictory pair of influences. With his trademark wit and humor, Caputo responds to his interlocutors while clarifying his position on numerous matters of interest to the Church and in academia. In addition to dealing with the concern for issues of hermeneutics, phenomenology, and negative theology for which Caputo has become famous, these essays also evaluate Caputo’s legacy in fields previously not thought to be affected by his “deconstructive” version of religion: feminism, sacramental theology, analytic philosophy of religion, and Christology.