50
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 23:
Line 23: − +
Removed incorrect use of the gambler's fallacy as an argument against miracles
== Arguments against the Existence of Miracles ==
== Arguments against the Existence of Miracles ==
Skeptics would say that miracles are simply improbable stuff happening and because there are billions of people on the planet, the odds of finding numerous stories of improbable happenings interpreted as miracles increases. This, however, along with many other atheistic arguments invokes a logical fallacy. The [[Gambler's fallacy|Gambler's Fallacy]] states that the more one tries something, the more likely an event will happen. In reality, if one spins a roulette wheel, the odds of it landing on one number will always be exactly the same every time.
Skeptics would say that miracles are simply improbable stuff happening and because there are billions of people on the planet, the odds of finding numerous stories of improbable happenings interpreted as miracles increases.
The fact is in order for a skeptic to dismiss miracles, they must literally accuse thousands upon thousands of people of either lying, or hallucinating. The probability of 100 percent of the witnesses matching this description is questionable at best. One example would be the documented miracle at Fatima where thousands of people saw the sun explode and then come back together. Skeptics argue that no one outside the area of the town recorded this but this is using the logical fallacy that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Also, the probability of thousands of people lying needs to be called into question.
The fact is in order for a skeptic to dismiss miracles, they must literally accuse thousands upon thousands of people of either lying, or hallucinating. The probability of 100 percent of the witnesses matching this description is questionable at best. One example would be the documented miracle at Fatima where thousands of people saw the sun explode and then come back together. Skeptics argue that no one outside the area of the town recorded this but this is using the logical fallacy that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Also, the probability of thousands of people lying needs to be called into question.