Fundamentalist Christians say non-Christians should be open to examining evidence for modern-day miracle claims, but these fundies likely haven't though of how cost-prohibitive any respectable investigation would be. One such example is the book Craig Keener's book, Miracles (Baker Academic, 2011). Keener supplies a large list of miracle claims but doesn't purport to prove them true, only show that miracles are alleged far more often than most people allow.
How much time and money should the objective non-Christian be willing to spend on doing their own investigation into claimed miracle-healings?
Suppose a skeptic lives in California, and hears about a miracle-healing happening in Florida.
Suppose she googles the name of the allegedly healed person and finds a webpage purporting to document the event.
How much investigation should this skeptic engage in?
Should she attempt to authenticate alleged medical documents appearing on the website?
Should she she attempt to gain further medical history of the healed person to make sure there is no "more to the story" that might change things?
Should she attempt a face-to-face interview with the healed person, or do you say interview by phone or email is sufficient? What makes you think everything that could be gained in a face-to-face interview could be gained through email or phone? If that were the case, then maybe courts of law are wasting public money and time by requiring live witnesses to testify in person before the fact-finder? If you were accused of rape and the witness against you was not available to testify for the jury except by phone or email, would you accept that as sufficient?
What's wrong with wanting to make sure the person you are communicating with is really who they say they are? Can you really do that if you simply talk on the phone or email?
Should she attempt to interview the diagnosing physician? Should she get a second medical opinion?
Should she try to identify and contact others who have an opinion on the credibility of the healed person?
This skeptic would have to fly to Florida (pretend she is married with kids, and needs to get there and back as quick as possible), buy food the whole time, rent a motel for at least 2 or 3 days to conduct interviews with witnesses who may live near the claimant, and this is all multiplied if other witnesses exist who live out of state, she would have to likely rent a car, she would have to pay the expenses of a doctor for a second medical opinion if the claimant has only a single diagnosis of the claimed healing, etc, etc.
Isn't it obvious that a seriously thorough miracle investigation that is most likely to expose any fraud that may exist, would cost somebody a few thousand dollars for each miracle claim?
If fundies wish non-Christians to be open to examining modern day Christian miracles claims, they cannot blame those potential investigators who make the enterprise irrational by wanting to do the kind of thorough investigation that would end up being cost prohibitive for everybody except those who are super rich and super lonely. And the time required to do such investigating would be sufficiently long that most mature adults with normal lives would rather continue raising their kids and going to work everyday instead of taking two weeks off to go tracking down all available evidence for and against any given miracle claim.
For all these reasons, it is the Christian fundamentalist who is irrational for telling non-Christians to be open to examining modern day miracle claims. But if we don't have an obligation to rip apart our current lifestyle just to satisfy fundie apologists, then we can continue to view those claims with suspicion despite the fact that they are available to be investigated.
How much time and money should the objective non-Christian be willing to spend on doing their own investigation into claimed miracle-healings?
Suppose a skeptic lives in California, and hears about a miracle-healing happening in Florida.
Suppose she googles the name of the allegedly healed person and finds a webpage purporting to document the event.
How much investigation should this skeptic engage in?
Should she attempt to authenticate alleged medical documents appearing on the website?
Should she she attempt to gain further medical history of the healed person to make sure there is no "more to the story" that might change things?
Should she attempt a face-to-face interview with the healed person, or do you say interview by phone or email is sufficient? What makes you think everything that could be gained in a face-to-face interview could be gained through email or phone? If that were the case, then maybe courts of law are wasting public money and time by requiring live witnesses to testify in person before the fact-finder? If you were accused of rape and the witness against you was not available to testify for the jury except by phone or email, would you accept that as sufficient?
What's wrong with wanting to make sure the person you are communicating with is really who they say they are? Can you really do that if you simply talk on the phone or email?
Should she attempt to interview the diagnosing physician? Should she get a second medical opinion?
Should she try to identify and contact others who have an opinion on the credibility of the healed person?
This skeptic would have to fly to Florida (pretend she is married with kids, and needs to get there and back as quick as possible), buy food the whole time, rent a motel for at least 2 or 3 days to conduct interviews with witnesses who may live near the claimant, and this is all multiplied if other witnesses exist who live out of state, she would have to likely rent a car, she would have to pay the expenses of a doctor for a second medical opinion if the claimant has only a single diagnosis of the claimed healing, etc, etc.
Isn't it obvious that a seriously thorough miracle investigation that is most likely to expose any fraud that may exist, would cost somebody a few thousand dollars for each miracle claim?
If fundies wish non-Christians to be open to examining modern day Christian miracles claims, they cannot blame those potential investigators who make the enterprise irrational by wanting to do the kind of thorough investigation that would end up being cost prohibitive for everybody except those who are super rich and super lonely. And the time required to do such investigating would be sufficiently long that most mature adults with normal lives would rather continue raising their kids and going to work everyday instead of taking two weeks off to go tracking down all available evidence for and against any given miracle claim.
For all these reasons, it is the Christian fundamentalist who is irrational for telling non-Christians to be open to examining modern day miracle claims. But if we don't have an obligation to rip apart our current lifestyle just to satisfy fundie apologists, then we can continue to view those claims with suspicion despite the fact that they are available to be investigated.
Comment