C.S. Lewis and Richard Swinburne argue that laws of nature are descriptive regularities, not governing necessities, so divine intervention adds an uncaused event rather than violating a prescription.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

C.S. Lewis(as a philosopher cited on divine intervention): A 20th-century British writer and Christian apologist (someone who defends religious beliefs through reasoning) known for works like 'The Chronicles of Narnia' and philosophical books arguing for Christian theology.
Descriptive regularities(as one interpretation of laws of nature): Patterns that we observe happening repeatedly in nature, rather than rules that force things to happen a certain way.
Governing necessities(as the opposing view to descriptive regularities): Rules that absolutely control or force events to happen—the idea that laws of nature command how things must behave.
Richard Swinburne(as a philosopher cited on divine intervention): A contemporary British philosopher of religion who uses logical arguments to defend belief in God and explores questions about miracles and divine action.

Based on where you are in your exploration