If nobody believed in superstition it would be unable to hurt anyone

 

MIRACLES - NOT "CAN HAPPEN" BUT "DID HAPPEN"
 
The sceptic holds that supernatural events, such as statues of Jesus coming to life, do not happen for nature works in a regular way. For example, the dead stay dead.
 
The believer agrees but holds that there are exceptions.
 
Who has the stronger belief? The sceptic and the believer in so far as they agree the supernatural does not happen do. That is the strongest belief. The weaker is the one that there are exceptions. Thus the strongest belief takes priority. This is not bias but commonsense. Christians lie that it is bias.
 
In the defence of evangelical Christianity, Answers to Tough Questions, it is declared that a miracle is a unique event that has no precedent and cannot be explained like you can explain anything else (page 79). It then makes the extraordinary statement that when we hear of a miracle the first question we should ask is not can it happen but did it happen? Obviously miracle believers have to say this.
 
If you hear of something as incredible as a miracle you must ask can it happen before you ask did it happen. Because if it cannot happen, all the evidence in the world that it did happen is no good. Christians want us to be fools to please them. Let us prove this. If the police hear of a paralysed man committing murder and ignore the question, “Could it have happened?” and prefer to focus on, “Did it happen?” then they could easily end up charging him with the crime.
 
If a coven of witches said they managed to resurrect a dead witch, the Christians would NOT be asking then, “Can it happen?” Evidently, it is only when it is Christian miracles that you should ask, “Did it happen?” and not ask, “Can it happen?” Their approach is dishonesty – all miracle believers who say that miracles provide evidence for their religion being correct are as bad. They are desperate to trick people into belief.
 
The statement of the Christians, “Don’t ask can it happen but did it happen?” translates as,
 
“I reject the question about if it can happen so I don't care if it can happen or not. I will believe in the possible or impossible such as a man rising from the dead if the evidence says it happened EVEN IF IT CANNOT HAVE HAPPENED!”. That is saying that you will believe that 2 and 2 are 3 if somebody can get evidence for it which is absurd for evidence needs 2+2 to add up to 4 to exist and to be acceptable. It is admitting to the fact that they feel he rose and are trying to dress it up as belief. Feeling a man rose is not the same as believing in it.
 
The thought, “I believe that it is possible for men to rise from the dead so I will believe that they did if the evidence is good enough” has its problems too. Instead of letting the evidence tell if you if it is possible, you assume that it is possible in order to believe the evidence.
 
This is evil because you should only believe that that could happen as a result of evidence. But you cannot for you have to assume it can happen first. It is far more evil to assume a thing like that than it is to believe in it because of evidence because then you are regarding law, the thing that gives you your being and your welfare, as unstable all because of an assumption. Obviously it is evil to assume that the school will be closed by some miracle tomorrow. If you can assume miracles are possible and stake things on that then there is no reason why you shouldn’t do this.
 
Assumption in relation to the possibility of miracles is heinous in matters so serious and is as bad as assuming that when a murder happens that your neighbour did it. You may say you don't care if something can happen, and ask did it happen . You may say it is possible for it to happen and believe it did if the evidence is good enough. But whatever you do you are twisting logic and breaking its rules.
 
You can’t say you have to be open-minded for there is nothing to be open-minded about for both options are impossible. It follows then that faith in miracles perverts and despises reason. It is a faith that needs deception to survive. Thus it is not faith at all for faith that does not believe in reason is not faith for belief is what your reason tells you is likely. Miracles do not result in faith or belief at all. A counterfeit yes but not the real thing. Miracles are not intended to create faith no matter how much it looks as if they are. Religion has no right to use them to try and get people to believe in a God or a saint.