James Randi on The argument from scripture
Randi treated scriptural miracle claims with the same scepticism he applied to modern miracle claims — extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
James Randi approached the argument from Scripture the same way he approached any other claim of the supernatural: with a demand for testable evidence. Ancient texts, no matter how revered, do not constitute evidence for miracles any more than a magician's promotional materials constitute evidence for actual magic. Randi was fond of pointing out that every culture has sacred texts making extraordinary claims, and they cannot all be right.
Randi's particular expertise — exposing fraudulent faith healers, phony psychics, and bogus miracle workers — gave him a distinctive angle on scriptural claims. He argued that the miracle accounts in ancient texts were produced in environments with no controlled testing, no scientific methodology, and powerful social incentives to believe. The fact that people sincerely believed they witnessed miracles proves nothing about whether miracles actually occurred — Randi had demonstrated countless times that sincere eyewitnesses can be completely wrong.
He was especially critical of the way scriptural authority is used to shut down inquiry. The demand to accept a text on faith, without subjecting its claims to scrutiny, was anathema to everything Randi stood for. His life's work was the demonstration that inquiry, testing, and honest scepticism are always preferable to credulity.
“A book is not evidence. A claim in a book is still just a claim. It has to be tested like anything else.”