A simple challenge for atheists

[robvalue]

Holy fucking shit batman. My eyes are bleeding.

Why is it so hard for some people to grasp the concept that something being written down doesn't make it true. I mean, imagine how confusing it must be to live life like this. Each time you pick up a comic book...

Science would like to have a word about miracles. Assuming you say miracles are events caused by God, then it's currently impossible to establish any sort of supernatural causality, let alone that of an undemonstrated entity. To just announce what the cause is because no one has been able to demonstrate what the cause is, is an argument from ignorance and blatantly dishonest wishful thinking. It's an error in thinking I see and point out almost every day, but the theists involved just seem not to care. While your arguments contain logical fallacies like this, you have more chance of actually being jesus than convincing a sceptic; which I presume must be part of the motivation for being here. If anyone is actually interested in honest debate and doesn't understand how this is an error, or why it's so important, please ask so that we can sort it out. Otherwise it's the equivalent of someone presenting us with the same key over and over again to a door we already tried it in. "Same key dude. Seriously. This is the fiftieth time you've shown me that key."

The problem with miracles written down is even worse. You have the first problem that being written down doesn't mean anything remotely like it even happened. There's this thing called "making things up". You may be familiar with the concept in fiction. To say the book is true because the book says it is true is circular logic. Again, a very serious error in reasoning. Ask if you need more details instead of making the same mistake again.

Even if what was written down was not made up, what you have is a record of what people thought they saw. And this is assuming the whole thing didn't get distorted in the huge number of transitions of text, which is a huge assumption. So we have what they thought. We have the witnesses (at best) testimony. Witnesses can be wrong, they can be deluded, and they are also making an argument from ignorance themselves if they categorise it as a miracle. So the whole thing is utterly broken all the way through, and to actually believe these miracles not only happened but were undeniably the work of God is to be either exceedingly gullible or breathtakingly dishonest.

Please ask yourself, all theists, are you here to have an honest debate or just to continually reassure yourself even if it means using broken logic?