Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?

[TheBeardedDude]

Miracles are supernatural causes with a natural effect. It doe not matter how because we cannot investigate supernatural causes with natural tools. 

Regarding Matthew 27, if we say that is an inaccuracy, what does that do to the rest? Absolutely nothing. The written accounts do not differ significantly. I would actually hope there were some minor variations--since 100% similarities would actually cause concern.

No, the most likely explanation is that the events are as described by the people who very thoroughly believed them to have happened. You are welcome to alternate theories--but the problem with them is that NONE of them ever deal with the whole picture. I have never heard a theory the explains everything we have available to examine.

We can't examine supernatural causes before we have some evidence of the supernatural existing. 

I would expect the word of god to have no inaccuracies.  I would expect the word of people to have quite a few, especially over the many years.  I would also expect that. if god wanted us to hear and understand his words, he would only allow an accurate book to be written to contain them.  If the bible had no inaccuracies, It would give me reason to pause and reconsider if this was indeed divinely inspired, if only for a fraction of a second, until my education on the subject was recalled.

It all comes down to: you want it to be true.  And your confirmation bias gives it the veneer of plausibility.

I would expect a god to not rely on humans to be the ones delivering its message when it came to communication. If even a mere and imperfect human can see the fatal flaw in such a plan, then an omniscient god should have known it too and would have known a better way of communicating its message (and it would know a way of communicating it, without flaws, in such a way so as not to violate free will. It would know how to do this because it is omniscient and omnipotent)