Running back to the prior 2: Vagueness, laziness, and antisupernaturalism

Skeptics tend to be far too quick to make two assumptions: 1) That it is easy to find a naturalistic alternative to any claimed miracle that does just as good a job as the miracle itself at explaining the evidence for it and 2) That the conjunction of "no miracle" with the evidence in question will always have a higher probability than the miracle itself. For a well-attested miracle like Jesus' resurrection, maintaining these two assumptions, (whether or not one uses probabilistic terminology) depends on two types of lazines: Not bothering to consider in detail how hard it would be to explain the evidence if the miracle didn't happen, and letting anti-supernaturalism do the heavy lifting.This is the book in which the essay by Arif Ahmed appears that I am discussing in these videos:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781119103899