For this portion you will write a 500 word response to an es

For this portion you will write a 500 word response to an essay that a classmate wrote, write a response pertaining to the text that you read in the last post. stay in context with the reading, with the essay that you wrote and also the one your classmate has written dont simply say i agree with what you said for example.Nadler tells us that Spinoza challenged traditional ideas concerning belief in miracles. Describe Spinoza’s reasoning for rejecting miracles, and explain how his ideas (according to Nadler) were even more troubling to the culture of the time than similar theories promoted by other philosophers like Thomas Hobbes or David Hume.“No other element of Spinoza’s philosophy provoked as much consternation and outrage in his own time as his sweeping denial of miracles of the supernatural.” To put it simply, Spinoza said that there were no such things as miracles. This was controversial at the time (would even be controversial now) as it related to the Church. All religions believed in miracles. Many philosophers at the time, even if they had other issues with God and religion, put miracles in a different category – nonnegotiable. Spinoza’s main argument in relation to miracles is the thought that there can be no multiplicity of faculties in God. God’s will is eternal and immutable. If anything were to happen contrary to natures laws, it would be contrary to God’s decree. In short, God and Nature’s power are equal and God and Nature’s laws are equal – they are one in the same. Further, if miracles did occur, they would not show God’s power but show his limitations. Nature’s laws are inviolable and everything that happens is necessary. These thoughts leave no room for supernatural or miracles. According to Spinoza, the actual world is the only world. Therefore – there is no room for the impossible that would be associated with miracles. This runs in line with the fact that God and Nature are the same. Spinoza’s claims and writings caused issues because there were religious and political matters at stake in regards to miracles. Because of this, readers were not ready for his full thoughts on nature and God. As a result, he did not reveal all of his views in detail. In a way, he did not support his claims. This shows how important and controversial miracles were during his time. As discussed above, Spinoza’s views on supernatural and miracles are more radical than Hume and Hobbes. Hume stated it is hard or impossible to justify a belief in a miracle as it goes against a firm experience. Although it seems that Hume has the same views as Spinoza, he is simply stating a point about whether a person has a good reason to believe and that miracles are impossible. He is just stating that they are unlikely and if they occur it would be incredible. Hobbes takes an even more careful approach – he does not explicitly deny the possibility of miracles. He even claims there was a time in the past that they did occur. In contrast to both Spinoza and Hobbes, he expresses a little doubt but does not say that they are not possible. I understand how dramatic it could be during that time to challenge miracles or something that the Church supports and claims. I wonder what the backlash as for Spinoza. Also – I wonder if more people believed in what he said but were afraid to support him. Specifically, I wonder if Hume and Hobbes (especially Hobbes) were playing it safe in their writings about miracles.