If nobody believed in superstition it would be unable to hurt anyone
David Hume comments on the miracles of the Bible
Of the Bible which is an account of miracles, Hume writes, "We find it full
of prodigies and miracles. It gives an account of a state of the world and of
human nature entirely different from the present; of our fall from that state;
of the age of man extended to near a thousand years; of the destruction of the
world by a deluge; of the arbitrary choice of one people as the favourites of
Heaven, and that people the countrymen of the author; of their deliverance from
bondage by prodigies the most astonishing imaginable. I desire anyone to lay his
hand upon his heart and, after a serious consideration, declare whether he
thinks that the falsehood of such a book, supported by such a testimony, would
be more extraordinary and miraculous than the miracles it relates, which is,
however, necessary to make it be received according to the measures of
probability above established." (David Hume, Enquiry Concerning Human
Some say the problem is that Hume is describing miracles as intrinsically improbable and that is not fair. It is said to be just writing something off as rubbish without thinking about it properly. But again he didn't dismiss the evidence for miracles as rubbish. He just said that it is insufficient in the bigger picture.
We conclude that believers merely assume that a miracle is a miracle. They are in fact "believers" not believers. They have to distort what logic says. Hume merely voiced logic. They slander him as narrow-minded. There is no real belief in miracles where people are merely assuming they happen and when they have to resort to lies to make miracles look like something that might be believed in by sensible people. Or worse should be believed in. It is as illogical to assume a miracle is true as it is to assume Cinderella is a true story. Presenting evidence only makes it more irrational not less because the evidence is not the reason you support the miracle stories. Your "faith" is based on assuming not thinking or on evidence.
And believers do not have the honesty to admit that if people met Jesus on the third day after his death and that is a miracle then that is all you can say. You cannot say you know or have evidence for what the actual miracle was. Maybe the miracle was that Jesus miraculously seemed to be dead and miraculously healed well enough to go out and meet his disciples again? Maybe aliens from 3000AD were given the miracle opportunity to heal him?