POINTS
Miracles require hard evidence – God could arrange a miracle so that it leaves verifiable, objective proof, not just reports from witnesses. It is convenient that he never does.
Testimony is weaker than evidence – Even strong eyewitness accounts (e.g., claiming someone committed a crime) are less reliable than hard, verifiable evidence.
Hard evidence matters most – For extraordinary events, direct and objective evidence is far more trustworthy than what people say happened.
Respect for God requires certainty – Before attributing a miracle to God, we must be confident that it truly was His action. Mistaken attribution would be disrespectful.
Rarity demands rigorous scrutiny – Because miracles are rare and unusual, they deserve careful and thorough investigation before being accepted as worthy of belief.
THE ARGUMENT
Testimony about supernatural events is unreliable if we know that people often misreport or exaggerate such experiences. Strong, verifiable evidence is essential.
The paranormal refers to unusual natural phenomena, while the supernatural implies the involvement of a being or force beyond nature. Because supernatural claims go beyond what we normally observe, they require stronger evidence than claims about the paranormal.
Extraordinary claims—those of a miraculous or seemingly magical nature—require evidence of a very high standard. This does not mean the evidence itself must be miraculous; it simply must be strong enough to eliminate reasonable doubt. Some claims may be more thoroughly supported by evidence than others, but a miracle, by definition, demands exceptional proof.
When we describe a miracle as “extraordinary,” we mean:
The event is extremely rare.
It is unusual and atypical.
Its cause is unknown or not explained by current understanding.
While believers may assume that such events are supernatural, the supernatural nature is an assumption rather than a proven fact. Rarity or strangeness does not automatically indicate supernatural intervention. Many events may be rare or unexplained without being supernatural.
To properly evaluate a miracle, one must rely on direct evidence rather than testimony alone. Testimonies can supplement evidence, but they cannot replace it, especially for extraordinary claims. Examining the evidence personally or ensuring it comes from reliable, verifiable sources is essential. Depending solely on others’ word without scrutiny is insufficient for significant claims.
Believing in a miracle is not simply a matter of choice. One must first address logical and moral considerations. For instance, asking whether divine intervention occurs for trivial matters while suffering continues raises ethical questions about the nature of such claims. Encouraging belief without sufficient evidence can also perpetuate harm, as it may discourage practical action or foster misplaced trust.
Both skeptics and believers agree that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. However, some believers overstate the strength of their evidence, treating assumptions as though they were proven facts. The supernatural nature of a claim is, in reality, an assumption, not an extraordinary claim. This means it must be treated cautiously: assumptions should be examined and tested with evidence wherever possible. Unexamined assumptions can cloud judgment and interfere with objective evaluation.
In summary, any claim about paranormal or supernatural events must be supported by exceptional evidence. The assumption of a supernatural cause cannot substitute for proof; instead, it must be scrutinized and, if possible, transformed into a claim supported by verifiable evidence.