when evidence is presented and labelled as weak, the response is that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” or something similar. That is an extraordinary claim in itself, highly subjective in nature, and with no evidence to support whether it is valid or not.
Actually it is a mathematical statement, meaning that low prior probabilities have to be offset by high evidential probabilities.
Your nonsense statement about this shows that you are rationalizing excuses to believe whatever you want.
There is always room for more fact checking. It would be rather hypocritical for me to suggest a greater level of humility to others if I was not aware of that need for myself. Right?
I suppose many folks share a similar path to determining whether they believe God is real or not while others travel a different road. For me, initially, it was directly in the front door but then back out and in again through the side door. What I mean by that is I had experiences that I believed were directly attributable to God's intervention in my life but I had to rule out other possibilities prior to becoming a committed Christian so I challenged my beliefs by considering and examining and studying the other options. At this point, based on everything I know, God is the only explanation for "how" and "why" (if you question the “why” I understand the reason). The other option (a naturalistic one) is simply too far-fetched and unsupported for me.
Claiming that the Christian god is the only
explanation shows that you are rationalizing the answer you want to have. I can think of many explanations for coincidences in life. People have a natural habit of reading too much into coincidences and rationalizing the explanation they want.
If there is a chance of one in a billion that a certain event happens to someone today, it will happen to a bunch of people every day. Rare events happen to people all the time. Every time you pass a different car on the road, that is an extremely rare event. What was the chance that you would be there and see that exact car at that exact time? Normally you ignore that your life is filled with extremely rare events, but occasionally you might pick out some rare events and pretend they mean something.
As I mentioned, the medical community is not trained or required to identify and label outcomes as miracles. Impossible miracles never happen.
Claimed miracles are always events which can happen naturally. No training is needed to identify the impossible.
How do you go about determining whether you should have any confidence in what you believe? Surely, there must be some standard that you employ to reach a position on the matter. Same for dark matter, climate change, and Amun-Re. How do you know that you have gathered “enough evidence” to declare that your belief is rational?...or do you just know everything and dismiss belief as an enormously faulty construct of our minds.
How? Simple. Evidence. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Belief is not an efficient way to gain knowledge. Belief is a faulty construct as you have shown above with your misunderstanding of the meaning of extraordinary evidence and your excuses to yourself for ignoring the need for extraordinary evidence.