Question
Why should I believe a miracle?
Not because miracles are common, but because this one is the best reading of a public, early, enemy-checked event.
Hume said uniform experience is against miracles. But uniform experience is exactly what is at issue if a resurrection happened. Doug Geivett’s framing helps: miracles are not violations so much as signs from the One who wrote the laws.
You should not believe every miracle report. You should weigh this one as you would any other historical claim, with the theological door not locked in advance. Week 9’s investigation short is the method: treat it like a cold case. Stack medical certainty, the facts even skeptics grant, and the sudden cultural shift. That is not a request for blind faith.
See it
Shorts, slide decks, and infographics that belong with this page.
Slide deck · 15 slidesThe resurrection evidence
Slide deck · 12 slidesThe modern classical foundation
Slide deck · 15 slidesThe philosophical arguments for faith
ShortHow historians investigate the resurrection
InfographicThe inescapable death of Jesus
InfographicThe empty tomb
InfographicThe transformed livesTalking points
- Prior probability drops if you already know God does not exist. That is the question being asked, so do not smuggle the answer.
- A two-thousand-year-old miracle is not proved by volume. It is investigated like a cold case — three lines, not a leap.
Say this
I do not believe in miracles because I am gullible. I believe this miracle because I am not willing to throw out a stack of historical facts to protect a rule I made up.
“Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs.”