One of the most perplexing questions for anyone examining the claims of religion is the absence of miracles that can be verified by objective means, such as cameras. Since the invention of cameras, there have been countless opportunities to document religious miracles, yet no such evidence has emerged. One might argue that the lack of documentation is due to the rarity of such events, but this seems implausible given the frequency with which religious figures in the past are said to have performed miracles.
The question of how religious figures like Jesus, Moses, or Muhammad knew that their miracles were real is another mystery. Some might argue that their personal experiences convinced them, but this raises further questions. How can we distinguish between a genuine religious experience and a hallucination or a delusion? What if these figures were simply charismatic leaders who convinced others to believe in their claims of miraculous abilities without any actual evidence?
When it comes to religious texts, there is a circularity to the argument that is often presented. One asks for proof of a religious text's claims, and the answer is that the text itself is proof because it is the word of God. However, this creates a problem when the text contains statements that contradict scientific knowledge. For instance, some religious texts suggest that the earth is only a few thousand years old, which is inconsistent with geological evidence. Similarly, the theory of evolution conflicts with the creation accounts in many religious texts. If a text makes a claim that is demonstrably false, how can it be considered the word of a divine creator?
Most Helpful Opinions