Is religious language meaningful, and can a rational person believe that miracles occur?
Paper 1 Philosophical language and the work of scholars: the verification and falsification debates over religious language, the via negativa, analogy and symbol, and the definition and credibility of miracles with Hume and Wiles.
An Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies Paper 1 guide to religious language and miracles. Covers the verification principle (Ayer), the falsification debate (Flew, Hare, Mitchell), the via negativa, Aquinas's analogy and Tillich's symbol, and the definition and credibility of miracles (Hume's objections, Wiles, Swinburne), with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
Edexcel Paper 1 covers philosophical (religious) language and, within the work of scholars, the debate over miracles. The language topic asks whether statements about God are even meaningful, given that they cannot be empirically tested. The miracles topic asks whether it is ever rational to believe a miracle has happened, and what a miracle is. Both are evaluation-heavy: the exam rewards weighing the verification and falsification debates and Hume's case against the replies.
The answer
The verification principle
Replies: the principle is self-refuting (it is itself neither analytic nor empirically verifiable); Swinburne argues we understand many unverifiable statements (his example of toys that dance only when unobserved); and John Hick's eschatological verification ("Celestial City" parable) argues religious claims are verifiable in principle, just not yet, because they would be confirmed after death.
The falsification debate
Non-cognitive and analogical approaches
- The via negativa (apophatic way): we can only say what God is not (not finite, not mortal), avoiding the inadequacy of positive language about a transcendent God.
- Aquinas's analogy: religious terms are neither univocal nor equivocal but analogical. By analogy of attribution God's goodness is the source of ours; by analogy of proportion "good" applies to God in proportion to God's nature.
- Tillich's symbol: a symbol (unlike a sign) participates in the reality it points to, opening up levels of meaning literal language cannot.
The definition and credibility of miracles
Alternative definitions matter for AO2: Aquinas classifies miracles as events done by God beyond, against or unusually through nature; R F Holland offers a "contingency" definition in which a remarkable, beneficial coincidence interpreted religiously counts as a miracle, with no need to break natural law.
Replies on miracles
- Richard Swinburne argues Hume's balance can tip: strong testimony and physical traces can make a violation more probable than not, and defining miracles as "violations" of fixed laws begs the question by ruling them out in advance.
- Maurice Wiles raises a theological objection: a God who works occasional, selective miracles (saving one person, ignoring the Holocaust) would be arbitrary and morally inconsistent, so Wiles prefers to see the whole of creation as the one "act of God" rather than discrete interventions.
Examples in context
Try this
Q1. Evaluate the usefulness of the falsification debate for understanding religious language. [20 marks]
- What the marker wants. An AO2 essay explaining Flew's challenge and the replies of Hare (bliks) and Mitchell (partisan), weighing whether religious belief must be falsifiable to be meaningful, and concluding with reasons.
Q2. Explain Aquinas's theory of analogy as a way of talking about God. [8 marks]
- Cue. Terms are neither univocal nor equivocal but analogical; by analogy of attribution God's goodness is the source of created goodness, and by analogy of proportion "good" applies to God in proportion to God's nature.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of Pearson Edexcel exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
Edexcel 201820 marksEvaluate the view that religious language is meaningless because it cannot be verified.Show worked answer →
A Section C extended essay marked mainly on AO2. The levels reward engagement with the verification and falsification debates and a justified conclusion.
State the challenge. Ayer's verification principle holds that a statement is only meaningful if it is analytic or empirically verifiable; religious claims are neither, so they are meaningless (not false, but cognitively empty).
Respond. The principle is self-refuting because it is itself neither analytic nor verifiable; Swinburne notes we understand unverifiable claims (toys that dance when unobserved); Hick's eschatological verification argues religious claims are verifiable in principle after death.
Evaluate the falsification turn. Flew argues believers let nothing count against "God loves us" (death by a thousand qualifications); Hare's "bliks" and Mitchell's partisan show belief can be meaningful without being falsifiable. Conclude on whether religious language is meaningful, with reasons.
Edexcel 202220 marksAnalyse Hume's argument that it is never reasonable to believe a miracle has occurred.Show worked answer →
A Section C essay testing AO1 understanding of Hume and AO2 evaluation of his case.
Explain. Hume defines a miracle as "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity"; because the laws of nature rest on the firmest, most uniform experience, the evidence against a miracle is always stronger than the testimony for it, so a wise person proportions belief to evidence and rejects the miracle.
Add his practical arguments. Witnesses lack sufficient education and integrity, miracles cluster among "ignorant and barbarous nations", and the miracle claims of rival religions cancel out.
Evaluate. Swinburne replies that testimony and traces can outweigh, and that defining miracles as violations begs the question; Wiles raises a theological objection that an arbitrary, selective God is morally troubling. Judge how decisive Hume's argument is.
Related dot points
- Paper 1 Philosophical issues and questions: the inductive design and cosmological arguments and the deductive ontological argument for the existence of God, with the responses of Hume, Kant, Russell and Dawkins.
An Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies Paper 1 guide to the arguments for the existence of God. Covers the design argument (Aquinas, Paley) and Hume and Darwin's replies, the cosmological argument (Aquinas, Leibniz) and Hume and Russell's replies, and the ontological argument (Anselm) with Gaunilo, Kant and Russell, plus the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Paper 1 Problems of evil and suffering and the nature and influence of religious experience: the logical and evidential problems of evil, the Augustinian and Irenaean theodicies, and the argument from religious experience with its challenges.
An Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies Paper 1 guide to the problem of evil and religious experience. Covers the logical and evidential problems of evil (Mackie, Rowe), the Augustinian and Irenaean theodicies and the free will defence, and the argument from religious experience (James, Otto, Swinburne) with the challenges from Persinger, Freud and Dawkins, plus the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Paper 3 Ways of interpreting scripture and scientific and historical-critical challenges: source, form and redaction criticism, the Synoptic Problem, questions of authorship and purpose, and the impact of critical and scientific challenges on the authority of the text.
An Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies Paper 3 (New Testament Studies) guide to interpreting scripture and the critical challenges. Covers source, form and redaction criticism, the Synoptic Problem and Q, questions of authorship and purpose, the historical-critical method (Bultmann's demythologisation) and scientific challenges, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Paper 3 The social, historical and religious context of the New Testament and the person of Jesus: first-century Palestine, the titles and claims of Jesus, and the debate between Jesus as teacher, prophet and Son of God.
An Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies Paper 3 (New Testament Studies) guide to the context and person of Jesus. Covers first-century Palestine (Roman occupation, Hellenism, Pharisees, Sadducees, Zealots, Essenes), the titles of Jesus (Messiah, Son of Man, Son of God) and the debate over his identity as teacher, prophet or divine, with the scholarship and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Paper 2 The application of ethical theories and ethical language: applied ethics in war, sexual ethics and medical ethics, and meta-ethics including naturalism, intuitionism and emotivism.
An Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies Paper 2 guide to applied ethics and meta-ethics. Covers the application of ethical theories to war and peace, sexual ethics and medical ethics, and the meta-ethical debate over the meaning of moral language (ethical naturalism, Moore's intuitionism and the naturalistic fallacy, and Ayer's emotivism), with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Sources & how we know this
- Pearson Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies (9RS0) specification — Pearson Edexcel (2016)
- Flew, Hare and Mitchell, Theology and Falsification (Edexcel Anthology extract) — Pearson Edexcel (2016)