This is the second article in a series of two that discusses whether historians are within their professional
rights to investigate miracle claims. In the fi rst, I made a positive case that they are and
then proceeded to examine two major arguments in support of a negative verdict to the issue: the
principle of analogy and antecedent probability. I argued that neither should deter historians from
issuing a positive verdict on miracle claims when certain criteria are met and the event is the best
explanation of the relevant historical bedrock. In this second article, I examine three additional objections
commonly appealed to by biblical scholars: the theological objection, lack of consensus and
miracle claims in multiple religions. The resurrection of Jesus is occasionally cited as an example.