As a fellow Christian I find it outlandish that many Christians pronounce miracles occurring without providing any concrete evidence. So I came up with this quasi truth table to discuss this further.
Cases:
1. Person claims miracle happened. Truth: Miracle happened.
2. Person claims miracle did not happen. Truth: Miracle happened.
3. Person claims miracle happened. Truth: Miracle did not happen.
4. Person claims miracle did not happen. Truth: Miracle did not happen.
Let's focus on #2 and #3 above.
2. Person claims a miracle did not happen OR simply ignored a happening because it was too mundane to consider the association with "miracle", and yet a miracle did in fact occur. The person would be wrong in making a conclusion that a miracle did not happen, though we would never know for sure without actually being God, or God or someone on behalf of God told us unequivocally.
3. Person claims a miracle happened but a miracle did not truly happen. This would be a false-positive. Again the person would be wrong and just like in #2 above, we would never know with certainty.
So to cover ourselves with appropriate language, when we think a miracle occurred, we could modify the wording to be such as:
"I really think a miracle happened"
"I see no other way that could happen unless it was a miracle"
"There's no doubt in my mind that a miracle happened' [not stating it as a universal fact]
And if we doubt if a miracle happened we could use similar wording.
I will never be one who will say a miracle did not happen. I just don't know the absolute truth. And thus, it would be prudent to use language that is appropriate to our notion of what may have occurred without making the leap and stating something as a fact when we do not know it as a fact.
Some people pose to know the absolute truth, and so if they are omnipotent in being able to conclude something without any objective evidence, they have to be God.
