C. S. Lewis on Miracles

A Book Review of a Modern Classic

Lewis, C.S. Miracles: A Preliminary Study. San Francisco: HarperCollins, 2001.

It is always helpful to the reader when an author spells out their aim in a clear manner: “This book is intended as a preliminary to historical inquiry. I am not a trained historian and I shall not examine the historical evidence for the Christian miracles. My effort is to put my readers in a position to do so” (3-4). While the argument could be made that Lewis is doing more than this, it serves as a fair assessment of his intentions. Though the layout of his position is logical, coherent, and convincing, it does not necessitate a vast, scholarly knowledge base to understand. This is part of the charm of Lewis, adapting an argument to a “crude and ‘popular’” form that many can comprehend (5, fn. 1).

What is a miracle? Often the word conjures up images of the Red Sea parting on one hand, and the birth of a child on the other. In his famous treatise on the supernatural, Miracles, Lewis is precise in his usage, “I use the word Miracle to mean an interference with Nature by a supernatural power” (5, emphasis in original). With this rubric in mind, Lewis outlines the essential elements of the discussion: the difference between naturalism and supernaturalism. While Lewis will eventually bring Christianity to bear on the topic at hand, he does not begin there. It is Naturalism that Lewis tackles first, demonstrating how such a perspective cannot adequately explain the world that real people inhabit (18). When followed to its logical conclusion, Naturalism excludes many of the perspectives that self-professed Naturalist hold dear (23-26). More than that, maintaining a Naturalist view causes a veneration of Nature, leading to naturalistic religions like the cult of Dionysus.

Interestingly, Lewis implies that Naturalistic worldview has run into a dead end. To adhere to the notion that Nature is all that there is, demands that Man step in to fill the role that God once played (66-67). However, such a simplistic notion cannot bring fulfillment, and the Naturalist viewpoint continues to be taken apart systematically through the course of Miracles. After dismantling the Naturalistic view, Lewis goes a step further to claim, “only Supernaturalists really see Nature” (104). He explains how only Supernaturalists can grasp what Nature truly is without demeaning or worshiping it. There must be more to this world for this world to even make sense. He spends considerable space reviewing the issues that many have with miracles, particularly the kind of things that would make God a necessity. In the final stages of this overview, he explores how Christianity stacks up against other faiths, particularly pantheism. “The Pantheist’s God does nothing, demands nothing,” Lewis explains, “He will not pursue you. There is no danger that at any time heaven and earth should flee away at His glance” (149).

Lewis moves on to discuss the probability of miracles, lingering on the idea that the laws of nature are also not all there is to nature (153). Thus, the things of the Biblical world that appear miraculous in the sense that they break the laws of nature are nothing of the sort. For who wrote the laws of nature? By necessity, it must be He who exists in the Supernatural realm. So, if miracles happen, without violating nature, which miracles are to be considered valid? For Lewis, those miracles conform to the pattern of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ (173). This is a powerful point for Christians to bear in mind, returning to the Person that gives the individual life and more.

Lewis ends his scientific argument in a way characteristic of his imaginative prose: “In science we have been reading only the notes to a poem; in Christianity we find the poem itself” (212). Thus, it is important to remember that science is a limited endeavor. Still, one’s reason must not be abandoned as a result, but rather honed to ward off the fallen world that humanity finds itself inhabiting. It is not mere superstition, which will confirm the Christian faith, but a steadfast reason that seeks to hold off the natural inclination to doubt and sin (273). Miracles are those things which the mind cannot escape, though it may seek to explain away what is not easily understood. These questions are not problematic for Lewis, but rather a necessary part of coming to the proper, rational conclusion that Christianity is not only true, but also the source of all true miracles.

Lewis’s claim that Naturalism cannot account for human reason, his most potent assessment in Miracles, continues to be a powerful argument half a century later (36). Authors like Louis Markos and Alister McGrath have highlighted this concept in Lewis’s line of argumentation.¹ Alvin Plantinga has undertaken the most powerful adaptation of this thesis, and he has acknowledged his debt to Lewis in this regard.² Though Lewis’s formulation of the reasonableness of Christianity is less analytical than Plantinga’s, it is nonetheless a vital contribution to the apologetic conversation that finds the militant, New Atheist movement challenging every fact of the faith.

While a strong position, it is also a position with weaknesses to it. In some ways, this argument opens the idea to a plethora of gods, or even Deism itself. Lewis does attempt to dodge this issue at a couple of points. “All the essentials of Hinduism would, I think, remain unimpaired if you subtracted the miraculous . . . But you cannot do that with Christianity . . . A naturalistic Christianity leaves out all that is specifically Christian” (108). Lewis bases this claim on what he sees as the essential miracle of Christianity: the Incarnation (173). Here Lewis asserts that the miracles of the Bible do not break the laws of nature, but rather affirm them. This is Lewis at his strongest, relying on the true myth concept seen in much of his writing. The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus are written into the very fabric of Creation. Unfortunately, his argument will not convince the hardened heart. While narrowly dodging the charge of deism, this line of reasoning is all that a skeptic needs to exploit a particular weak spot.

Lewis’s Miracles stands out as a pillar in the apologetics world. It is winsome, yet thorough; clear, yet embedded in the mystical. While it may not satisfy every skeptic who explores Christianity, the book is a magnificent work serving as a prime place to begin. Lewis encouraged the fervid exploration of questions regarding the Supernatural, noting, “if I am wrong, then the sooner I am refuted the better not only for you but for me” (271). While many more questions could be answered, the job is done for now. Lewis’s work achieves its initial task, reaching beyond the walls of the university to show people everywhere that the miraculous is more than mere superstition.

1. Louis Markos, Apologetics for the 21^st Century. Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway, 2010. Chapter 5; Alister McGrath, Mere Apologetics: How to Help Seekers & Skeptics Find Faith. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 2012. 71-73.

2. Alvin Plantinga, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, & Naturalism. New York: Oxford University Press. 2011. 310, fn. 4.