A circular argument is one “when the premises presume the very conclusion that is to be demonstrated.”
First, evolution theory uses a circular argument in relative dating when rock layers are used to assign ages (with years) to fossils in them and fossils are used to assign ages (with years) to the rock layers they are in.
Second, in order to know which fossils species are “older” and which fossil species are “younger” and assign ages (with years) to the rock layers by those fossils, you have to presume that species evolved from more primitive to more complex. However, when the arrangement of fossils and rock layers is complete, it is asserted as proof of evolution.
Third, absolute dating is only performed on an item when a relative age (indicating years) is already provided for that item. Yet, relative dating methods provide no actual age (in years or amounts of time) but can only obtain an age after absolute dating is performed. However, although each method depends upon the other, both methods are said to confirm or prove the other to be valid.
So it is with disbelief in the miracles of Jesus Christ as recorded in the New Testament of The Holy Bible.
Why is it that miracles do not happen? It is because they cannot happen. How do you know that they cannot happen? It is because they do not happen!
David Hume, the Scottish philosopher, put it this way: "A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, . . . is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined."
Some critics believe simply that there is no power higher than nature and thus no power that could supersede the laws of nature. This is naturalism, a philosophical belief that can't itself be proved by what is seen in nature. This is a philosophical assumption, and we shouldn't be put off by it. We believe that God exists, and being the creator of the natural laws, He is above them Himself and able to alter them. They don't. To undermine the possibility of miracles, naturalists must prove there is no God to perform them. On the other hand, if we can show that non-natural events did or have occurred, the naturalist will have to find some explanation in his world view for them.
We do not have ALL knowledge of ALL things. We do not have understanding of how ANY thing is affected by what we don’t know. Our most advanced sciences are often revising, and sometimes refuting, its former conclusions! In fact, we are learning that the laws of physics appear altered in the super cold and super small environments.
We cannot rule out the existence of God or of anything He does! Miracles recorded in the Bible can only be ruled out on PHILOSOPHICAL (presupposition, presumed, prejudiced, biased) grounds, not on evidential grounds!
What evidence can be offered in support of miracles? We cannot repeat a miracle. We cannot go back in time and become witnesses of the miracle. All we have are the testimonies of the witnesses, which are recorded in the Bible. We cannot “prove” miraculous events by any scientific method. We must “investigate” miraculous events from testimony, determining the reliability of the witnesses.
The witnesses to the miraculous raising of Lazarus from the dead include Lazarus himself, his sisters, and a large number of mourners. Interestingly, those who hated Jesus did not refute the miracle, but often denied that He did it by God’s power. They accused Him of doing these things by Satan’s power! Nevertheless, the miracles themselves were undeniable!
The historical fact that the Sanhedrin sought to kill Jesus is a testimony that Jesus did something they could not counter by any other means! Their disclaimers, accusations, and legal entrapments failed. They were not fighting against nothing!