When it comes to religious belief, few topics spark as much debate or show our biases as clearly as miracles do. Take these two well-known examples:
1. The Resurrection of Jesus — According to 1 Corinthians 15:6, Jesus appeared to over 500 people after his resurrection.
2. The Miracle of the Sun at Fatima (1917) — Over 50,000 people, including skeptics and journalists, reportedly witnessed the sun dancing, changing colors, and seeming to fall from the sky.
Both are extraordinary claims. Yet many who accept the first dismiss the second. Why?
Pungwenism provides a steady and honest approach to examining these claims, no matter what faith tradition they come from. By using its seven core principles, Pungwenism encourages us to question not only what we believe but also why we believe it. It asks if our reasons for belief are fair, balanced, and based on evidence.
Comparing Belief: A Dialogue Snapshot
Christian (Protestant perspective):
“I believe Jesus rose from the dead because the Bible says over 500 people saw Him.”
“After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time…” — 1 Corinthians 15:6
Catholic:
“In 1917, the Virgin Mary appeared to three shepherd children in Fatima, Portugal. She shared three prophecies about world events and the Church. The last prophecy was confirmed with a public event on October 13, 1917, called the Miracle of the Sun. More than 50,000 people witnessed this, including atheists, skeptics, and journalists. They saw the sun dance, change colors, and seem to move closer to the earth. This event is one of the most well-documented public religious experiences in modern times. The Church views it as proof of Mary’s role as an intercessor and messenger.”
Analytical Perspective:
“Let’s be intellectually honest. If someone accepts a miracle claim based on old and limited testimonies, like an event reported by 500 people without outside proof, then it doesn’t make sense to reject a more recent and well-documented event like Fatima, which was witnessed by tens of thousands. We should apply the same standards to all beliefs, no matter what tradition they come from.”
Applying the Seven Principles of Pungwenism
1. Epistemic Responsibility
“Proportion belief to the quality and quantity of evidence.”
- Resurrection: Based on ancient texts with no corroborating witnesses named.
- Fatima: Documented in real time, witnessed publicly, with photos (albeit inconclusive) and media reports.
Beliefs should scale with evidence. A claim accepted on weak testimony should not outweigh one supported by public documentation.
2. Intellectual Honesty
“Belief must not outrun evidence.”
If someone relies on faith to accept the resurrection but requires reason to reject Fatima, that shows a tribal double standard instead of a fair, rational judgment. Pungwenism demands that all miracle claims, no matter their origin, be examined with the same level of scrutiny.
3. Primacy of Rational Inquiry
“Reason is not the enemy of faith. Faith without reason becomes delusion.”
Both events are extraordinary and deserve analysis, not automatic belief.
- Resurrection: May have been mythologized over time.
- Fatima: Possibly natural phenomenon misinterpreted by a mass audience.
Neither claim is exempt from rational inquiry.
4. Dialogue Over Dogma
“Listen without filters shaped by denominational loyalties.”
This refers to the deep loyalty people feel toward their own religious tradition or denomination. It often causes them to accept beliefs from their group without question, while quickly dismissing or rejecting ideas from outside groups without giving the evidence a fair look. This way of thinking influences what people believe more than actual facts or logical proof.
For example, Marian apparitions like Fatima hold great importance in Catholicism but are often dismissed by many Protestants. This isn’t always based on evidence, but rather because those events don’t align with their theological beliefs.
Pungwenism challenges all believers to ask themselves:
“If a miracle like Fatima’s occurred and was reported within your own religious tradition, would you accept it as genuine based on the evidence? Or do you tend to accept or reject miraculous claims mainly depending on whether they come from your own faith community?”
This encourages moving beyond inherited group loyalties toward honest and open inquiry.
5. Ethical Groundedness
“Challenge ideas, not people.”
Mockery doesn’t move understanding forward. Pungwenism advocates respectful, evidence-based critique of ideas, not ridicule of believers.
6. Evolving Understanding
“Admit when the truth is unclear.”
It’s okay to say, “I don’t know.” Whether about Jesus’ resurrection or Fatima’s sun miracle, the intellectually honest position may be:
“The evidence isn’t strong enough to confirm belief.”
7. Interconnected Learning
“No tradition owns the miraculous.”
Miracle claims exist in every tradition:
- Hinduism: Ganesha statues drinking milk
- Islam: Muhammad’s night journey on a winged steed
- Buddhism: Glowing pearl-like relics from cremated monks
Pungwenism treats these as cultural facts, not threats or proof. They deserve careful analysis instead of blind acceptance or complete rejection.
The Fatima Catch-22: When Miracles Undermine Doctrine
Claim A (Christian claim):
“The Bible is the ultimate truth. Jesus is the only way to God.” John 14:6: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
Claim B (Fatima claim):
“In 1917, Mary appeared to three shepherd children, gave prophecies, and performed a miracle witnessed by 50,000 people. This is a sign from God.”
The Dilemma:
Accept Fatima? Then Mary becomes a continuing divine messenger after Jesus, contradicting the doctrine that Jesus is the final revelation. This challenges the theological foundation of both Protestant and some Catholic interpretations.
Reject Fatima? Then you are dismissing a miracle that is far better documented than the resurrection. This reveals a double standard based on doctrine, not on evidence.
Crtical Insight:
“This is a credibility crisis. Accepting Fatima undercuts biblical finality. Rejecting it exposes bias. Neither position is stable unless you acknowledge your own filters.”
“The Devil Did It”: A Convenient Escape from Evidence?
Some Christians, when cornered by the evidential strength of Fatima, claim:
“Fatima was the work of the devil.”
While this may offer theological cover, it often serves as a convenient evasion rather than a serious argument.
1. Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence — Even for Demons
You can’t dismiss one miracle by asserting an even more extraordinary supernatural claim (Satanic deception) without evidence. That violates epistemic responsibility.
“You’re just swapping one mystery for another without actually solving anything.”
2. It’s Unfalsifiable and Therefore Useless
A claim that can never be proven wrong is not a rational argument. It’s a doctrinal escape hatch.
“If you can explain away anything as ‘from Satan,’ then nothing can challenge your belief.”
3. It’s Special Pleading
Would you accept it if a Muslim said Jesus’ miracles were from Satan? If not, then applying that to Fatima is intellectually dishonest.
4. It Undermines All Miracles
If Satan can mimic miracles, how can we trust any miracle is divine? You’ve collapsed the very foundation of your theological certainty.
5. It’s Fear-Based, Not Evidence-Based
This tactic often comes from fear of having to rethink one’s faith. But fear is not a valid tool of inquiry.
Critical Insight:
“When inconvenient data is blamed on demons, we’ve left reason behind. Beliefs must be testable, consistent, and not protected by unfalsifiable excuses. Otherwise, you’re not doing theology. You’re doing mental gymnastics.”
Final Thought: The Honest Position
“If the evidence for a claim, like Jesus’ resurrection or the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, is weak, inconsistent, or missing, then the only honest answer is:
‘I don’t know if it’s true, and it probably isn’t.’
Belief should never go beyond what the evidence supports. Faith that ignores its shaky foundation isn’t admirable, it’s avoiding the truth.
Pungwenism teaches: when the truth is unclear, admit it. When the evidence is missing, withhold belief. That’s not weakness. That’s integrity.”
Conclusion
Pungwenism doesn’t say one tradition is right and another is wrong. Instead, it encourages a fair and honest way to evaluate all truth claims, whether they are religious, historical, or scientific. Only by using the same standards for everyone can we shift from rigid belief to thoughtful understanding, and from tribal loyalty to open inquiry.
Final Thought
“If the evidence for a miracle is weak or missing, the only honest response is, I don’t know if it’s true, and it probably isn’t.”
Pungwenism teaches us to hold back belief when the evidence isn’t there. That’s not a sign of weakness. It’s a sign of intellectual honesty.
Case Study Summary
- Use consistent standards for all miracle claims.
- Recognize bias in how we protect beliefs tied to identity.
- Understand that faith and evidence-based belief are both valid, but they are not the same.
- Engage respectfully. Seeking truth should never involve acting superior or showing scorn.
Final Takeaway
“The goal is not to believe more. The goal is to believe better.”
Pungwenism doesn’t demand rejection of all miracles. Instead, it calls for integrity. When evidence is weak or unclear, withholding belief is not weakness. It’s wisdom.
Want More?
Explore other miracle claims and worldviews through the lens of Pungwenism on our Case Studies page.