Why are miracles acceptable as evidence but not other things? Sye: he's a cessationist, so miracles as evidence is tongue-in-cheek — if you believe in miracles today, go do them; otherwise that evidence is unavailable

Audience question on consistency of Sye's position on miracles

Hebrews 2:3-4 — salvation was 'confirmed to us by those who heard him, God also bearing witness with signs and wonders' — miracles as confirming witness to the gospel

Winger's Hebrews 2 argument for miracles as apologetic confirmation

Ehrman opens his classes by describing Apollonius in language deliberately crafted to sound like Jesus — 'divine birth', 'son of God', 'miracles', 'aroused opposition', 'ascended to heaven' — then reveals he was describing Apollonius, creating a psychological shock designed to undermine students' faith before they can evaluate the claim.

The healings attributed to Apollonius are based on his superior insight and knowledge — massage therapy for a dislocated hip, carrying a rabbit around a laboring woman, eating owl eggs to prevent a child from wanting wine. These are presented as natural knowledge, not divine miraculous power. This is not parallel to Jesus commanding 'Lazarus, come forth' or 'stretch out your hand.'

Scholars broadly agree that during his ministry, people viewed Jesus as a miracle worker and exorcist. Even without affirming the miracles themselves occurred, historians confirm this was the contemporary popular perception.

1 Kings 18 — Mount Carmel contest as evidence-based faith: Elijah's challenge to prophets of Baal

Mike's first biblical example demonstrating that God operates through evidence, not blind faith.

John 5:31-38 — Jesus presents three specific evidences for his identity: John the Baptist, miracles, and Scripture

Mike analyzes Jesus's own self-defense in John 5 as a model of evidence-based persuasion.

No other religion has a comparative apologetic to Christianity

Mike makes a comparative religion claim after discussing Christian evidential resources.

Matthew 9:5-7 — Jesus heals the paralytic as evidence of authority to forgive sins

Mike uses Jesus's healing of the paralytic as another instance of miracles functioning as proof.

Hebrews 2:3-4 — signs, wonders, miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit as confirmation of the gospel message

Mike's final direct positive scriptural argument that Christianity is evidence-based.

Q&A: Salvation of severely mentally handicapped people — accountability proportional to awareness

Q&A segment begins; first question about soteriological edge cases.

Tim McGrew and Lydia McGrew's paper on miracles and the resurrection as a sophisticated cumulative case for Christianity

Cameron recommends a freely available academic paper

Q&A: Why doesn't God interact visibly today as in Bible times? Mike's answer: miracles were always rare; God interacts spiritually now; the Bible establishes the foundation

Q&A question from "I'm Zen"

David Hume as possible earlier source of the idea behind the slogan

Mike traces the philosophical lineage of the slogan back to the 18th century.

The slogan formalized as a syllogism — and why it fails at premise 4

Mike reconstructs the argument in syllogistic form, attributed to critics of Sagan's argument ("argumentum Sagani").

The prior probability of the resurrection cannot be assessed by counting how many people have naturally risen — category error

Mike drills into the specific error of applying natural-process probability to a theistic miracle claim.

David Hume's confirmation bias: he used the prior improbability of miracles to refuse even examining the evidence

Mike connects Hume's philosophical approach to the confirmation bias critique (Problem 3).

Hume's anti-evidential stance is the philosophical ancestor of New Atheist ridicule tactics

Mike traces the intellectual lineage from Hume to modern internet skepticism.

The cumulative case for the resurrection: what evidence we actually have

Mike assembles the positive evidence for the resurrection after dismantling the slogan's objections.

Peter Williams — Can We Trust the Gospels?

Winger recommends Peter Williams's book as a resource for the general reliability of the Gospels.

Virtual scholarly consensus on historical facts about Jesus: lived in Palestine, believed special relationship with God, performed astonishing deeds, taught in parables, criticized Jewish leaders, crucified under Pilate

Summarizing the bedrock facts about Jesus accepted by virtually all historians including non-Christians

Bart Ehrman is in a small minority who deny Jesus was known as a miracle worker during his lifetime; most scholars disagree

Noting limits and minority positions within the broader consensus

Methodological principle: dismissing miracle claims in historical sources reflects worldview bias, not following the evidence

Responding to the claim that miracle claims in historical sources can be safely dismissed

Audience question: "Consensus holds Jesus existed but was not the Christ of the Gospels" — Licona: that is not a consensus position

Audience Q&A — addressing the claimed scholarly consensus against Gospel accounts

Resource recommendation for documented modern miracles: Craig Keener's two-volume work "Miracles" provides medical/testimonial evidence catalogued by a respected scholar.

Q&A — viewer asks for visible evidence that gifts of healing are active today.

Historical question: sign gifts did not begin at Azusa Street; early church fathers (Justin Martyr, later Augustine) attest to prophecy and miracles continuing post-apostolically.

Q&A — viewer claims modern tongues/gifts stem from the 1906 Azusa Street revival. Winger corrects the historical record.

Q&A: Why did God stop doing big signs and miracles (burning bush, parting the sea)?

Question from a listener puzzled by the apparent cessation of large-scale miracles after the Old Testament.

Q&A: Did Jesus perform miracles as God or purely as a human in right relationship with God?

Viewer raises a Christological claim used to support charismatic miracle theology.

Elijah on Mount Carmel: biblical example of knowing vs. showing — he knew God was real, he showed others through evidence

Old Testament narrative case study illustrating the knowing/showing distinction

Moses and the plague of frogs: God let Pharaoh choose the time so Pharaoh could know no one is like the Lord

Second OT narrative case study illustrating knowing vs. showing

Jeremiah 28:9: the test of a true prophet is whether his words come to pass — an evidential approach to prophetic verification

Third OT narrative example of knowing vs. showing, this time about prophetic credentials

John the Baptist's doubt from prison: Jesus responded with fresh evidence rather than rebuke

NT case study: how Jesus handled the doubt of a believer who already had abundant witness

Apparitions of Mary at Fatima — three interpretive options; not sufficient to validate Catholic Marian dogmas

Question from Cody Skinner about Catholic apparitions at Fatima and messages to the shepherd children.

Critique of Bethel/Bill Johnson teaching that everyone works miracles and is a prophet

Application of the 1 Corinthians 12 argument against charismatic excess

Root cause of New Age adoption: absence of Holy Spirit necessitates manufactured methods

Theological diagnosis of why Christians turn to New Age practices

Hebrews 6:4-6 — the most difficult passage in the Bible; three main interpretive options explored

Question from Delante Dingo about whether the Parable of the Sower clarifies Hebrews 6 and whether salvation is eternal.

Craig Keener's book on miracles — medically verified miraculous accounts

A viewer asks for a good example of raising the dead today.

False signs and wonders: miracles do not authenticate a religion; Satan has real but limited supernatural power

Question from 'spazzy jazzy' about a Japanese friend who believes a false religion because of a miraculous healing her mother received.

Q15: Matthew 11:22-24 — If Sodom would have repented at Jesus's miracles, why didn't Jesus go to Sodom? Christians need not have an answer to every question

Viewer Lawrence H asks why Jesus did not perform miracles in Sodom to prevent its destruction, given Jesus's statement in Matthew 11.

Mark 8 feeding of 4000: disciples may not have expected another miracle because Jesus did not multiply food at every meal; also, Jewish messianic expectation may not have extended to feeding Gentiles

Responding to why the disciples in Mark 8 seem unaware that Jesus had already fed 5000 in Mark 6

The claim that Jesus was based on Jesus ben Ananias (from Josephus) is historically untenable given the robust bedrock consensus of historical facts about Jesus.

Q16 from Aaron Rampersad: what do you think about the claim that Jesus Christ was based on Jesus ben Ananias in Josephus's Jewish War?

God physically appearing to everyone would not necessarily eliminate unbelief; unbelief is often a heart issue, not an evidence problem.

Question 8 from Amanda about why God does not appear physically and audibly to eliminate all unbelief.

Objection: this only gets you to generic theism, not the Christian God. Response: each attribute (spaceless, timeless, etc.) was justified, not ad hoc; the Kalam is meant to be followed by evidence for the resurrection to identify the God.

Objection — doesn't prove the Christian God

Fourth option: written literature is the BEST medium for communicating detailed, specific information that can be preserved, studied in community, and shared worldwide. Other communication methods (prophets, dreams, miracles) are either also subject to interpretation, subjective, or lack specificity.

Response to Q1 — written text as optimal communication

Building a case for Jesus's miracles with kids: (1) If God exists, miracles are possible — this is a worldview starting point. (2) Earliest sources (Mark) describe a miracle-working Jesus — 40% of Mark's narrative involves miracles. (3) No sources describe a non-miracle-working Jesus. (4) Miracles are integrally woven into the narrative — you can't remove them without the story collapsing. (5) Virtually all historians agree Jesus drew large crowds doing something remarkable. (6) The resurrection is the central miracle with significant historical evidence.

Case for Jesus's miracles — for kids

Each chapter has a conversation guide: (1) "Open the conversation" — easy questions to get kids talking without intimidation. (2) "Advance the conversation" — deeper questions with tips in parentheses guiding parents on key points to cover. Designed to move from kids' heads to actual parent-child dialogue.

Conversation guide structure

Four things to know before historical investigation of Jesus: (1) Historical investigation is limited — historians intentionally bracket inspiration of Scripture. (2) Failure to confirm ≠ denial it happened. (3) History is probabilistic — the best verdict is "extremely likely," never 100%%. (4) Scholars are people with biases — Bart Ehrman rejects miracles by methodology, not evidence ("as a historian you're not allowed to posit miracles").

Framework for historical investigation of Jesus

Mountain-moving is a euphemism for what is humanly impossible but possible for God. Faith is weak (mustard seed), not strong — the emphasis is that you don't earn miracles; God does everything, you just believe.

Correct interpretation of the mountain-moving promise in Mark 11

Your part in prayer is faith, but GOD does the miracles — the power is not in your words or your belief, but in God's response. Forgiveness of others and repentance of sin are prerequisites for effective prayer.

Analysis of active/passive language in Mark 11 and the forgiveness requirement

First-century magic (witchcraft) forced the gods' will to obey the practitioner. A distorted Mark 11 teaching that sources miracles in MY will rather than God's will moves into the realm of magic, not prayer.

Historical context: prayer vs. magic in the first century