But I think all of us hold many contradictory beliefs.
Yep. And I think your example of the inflated opinion we each have of our own abilities shaping our destinies is a good example of this.
So how do we deal with the contradictory thinking that all of us are heir to when it is displayed by Christians in discussions here regarding matters relevant to the debate? I notice we didn't have any luck talking RAZD, presumably one of our own, out of his special pleading arguments in the recently concluded Pink Unicorn discussion. How can we think we'd have any better luck with Christians? Contradictory thinking again?
Whilst the example you gave of the resurrection etc. is more extreme and thus "obvious" I think that the argument of "simplicity" or "least miraculous" is not so clear cut in many other cases.
Far be it for me to speak for RAZD (I am not sure he would appreciate that from me) but it
could be argued that the simplest explanation for perceived experiences of the supernatural is to accept that the supernatural exists.
Likewise those who believe in God (without necessarily being absolute biblical literalists) might (and I think I have seen this argument here at EvC from the likes of Rob and Iano) well make the claim that God
is simplicity and that God is by some sort of definition the simplest and least miraculous argument.
Don't get me wrong. I am not putting forward these positions. There are numerous flaws I would be happy to point out to anyone who did want to go down that route.
My point is that the theistic position is not always able to be so trivially dismissed if the person holding that position is willing and able to reshape the argument into the whole area of what is meant by "simplest" or "least miraculous". These are
arguably subjective terms that open the gates to valid debate on these issues.
Factor in this potential complexity of showing why these theistic positions are requiring of greater "complexity" or "miraculousness" in some sort of objective terms and combine this with the ability of us all to self contradict anyway and you end up with a position that really takes some dismantling. A position strong enough that even those who are obviously intelligent are able to retain whilst clinging onto the idea that it is intellectually justified.
In summary - All I am saying is that if the argument were as simple as you seem to be suggesting there would be very little debate left to have. By adding some extra layers of argument on top I can see how even intelligent theists can convince themselves that the argument of "least miraculous" applies perfectly to their beliefs.
™ Version 4.2
