A last post on miracles: Some christians scorn reliance on miracles. To them, faith based on evidence (in particular based on sensationalist special effects) is not in line with the bible.
I agree that faith that can do without miracles might actually be something more noble than a need for witnessing supernatural events. But: saying that this is more noble doesn’t imply that it is illegitimate to look out or miracles.
In the context of wanting to base my faith on evidence (including miraculous evidence), a saying of Jesus that has become important to me is the following:
Happy are those who have not seen and yet believe.
In this word, Jesus does not proclaim it wrong to look for evidence and miracles. He simply says that people who don’t need evidence&miracles are happy (or, in other translations: blessed). I can completely go along with that. It’s just that I do not belong to those happy people.
Jesus granted Thomas’ request (to whom these words were adressed) and he pitied him for the need to see & touch but he didn’t reproach him for it.
Postscript: There is something weird, though. How many of those craving for a miracle (such as “Hey look man. If you can get some priest, abbot, layman, whatever from Orthodoxy to provide me with just one clear miracle, visitation, revelation, etc, I will go to confession immediately.”) will actually believe when faced with a miracle? Puzzingly few, I think.
At least for me, the miracle with the cross I described below had much less power to bolster my belief in the existence of God than I would have thought in advance (even though it did have some power). I think it’s a paradox that has happened to many doubters: Even though they think that one single clear miracle would be the rock-solid thing they needed, if that miracle actually does come, it doesn’t magically dispel all doubt (as they presumed). Doubt is somehow miracle-resistent.