Critically assess the view that the concept of miracles is inconsistent with an omnibenevolent God?

The question asks students to critically assess the view of philosophers and religious texts about whether an omnibenevolent (all-loving God) could show favouritism and partiality towards his creation. Students should immediately be able to see the links between the Problem of Evil, and could make reference to the theodicies throughout their essay.

Students should begin by giving a definition of a miracle, I like to David Hume’s definition of “a miracle is a transgression of a Law of Nature by a particular volition of the Deity or by the interposition of some invisible agent”; however other definitions can be used. They could also give an example of a biblical miracle that may seem arbitrary or partial, like God defeating the Amorite kings or Jesus only healing those who met him.

Students should discuss the Problem of Evil, and how miracles help some but not others. A good quote on this is by Maurice Wiles who says "seems strange that no miraculous event prevented Auchwitz or Hiroshima”. They could make reference to how suffering and the absence of miracles benefits humanity, like Job from the Bible, or by Irenaen theodicy/J.L Mackie’s “soul making factory”.

Students should constantly embed and critically analyse quotes from philosophers, perhaps even starting a paragraph with a quote. A good formula to follow is to make the point, explain it in detail, follow it with a quote by a philosopher that best fits the explanation, and then discuss for at least two sentences what is meant by this. You should offer a view agreeing with the question and one disagreeing.

The student should finally come to a clear conclusion about whether miracles are inconsistent with an omnibenevolent God. They should surmise all of their arguments and give a brief summary of what they are.