既不能因为全能的神行神迹在逻辑上可能,也不能因为历史上有关神迹发生的说法,就证明神迹确实发生过。必须有令人信服的证据,明智的人也不应在未经审视的情况下接受关于神迹的记载。正如人们常说的那样:“非同寻常的断言需要非同寻常的证据。”然而,我们必须分辨自己是否真正对证据保持开放(哪怕是非同寻常的证据),还是盲目固守自己的既定前提。

Neither the logical possibility of an omnipotent God performing miracles, nor historical claims of their incidence, constitutes proof that miracles took place. There must be compelling evidence, and no sensible person should accept accounts of miracles without scrutiny. As is often said, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” However, we must discern whether we are genuinely open to evidence—albeit extraordinary—or blindly committed to our presuppositions.

一致性是检验立场是否站得住的好标准。我们是否也用同样严格的标准审视自己对生命与信仰所持的各种信念？还是说，由于偏见或极端的怀疑主义，一种双重标准悄悄混了进来？许多今天的人可能没有意识到，他们其实是休谟主义者：教条式的自然主义者，认为无论有多少关于神迹的历史证据，都永远不足以证明神迹，并且认为除了我们亲身经历过的事情，什么都无法证明。一致性要求我们承认，没有人真正只接受自己亲身经历过的东西作为证据。这样的立场将意味着否认每一张我们没有亲自测绘过的地图，以及每一项我们没有亲自确立过的科学事实。

Consistency is an excellent litmus test; do we question whether all similar convictions we hold about life and faith meet the same stringent criteria, or has a double standard snuck in here due to prejudice or extreme skepticism? Many people today may not realize that they are actually Humeans: dogmatic naturalists who believe no amount of historical evidence for miracles can ever suffice, and that nothing at all is provable except that which we personally experience. Consistency necessitates acknowledging that nobody actually only accepts what they have experienced themselves as evidence. Such a position would entail denying every map we have not charted ourselves and every scientific fact we have not personally established.