Joshua’s long day has a long history of debate but is often forgotten today. The book of Joshua 10:13 says:
So the sun stood still,
And the moon stopped,
Till the people had revenge
Upon their enemies.
It is often said that this contradicts heliocentric astronomy. Actually, it contradicts geocentric astronomy, too: the sun and moon are supposed to keep moving.
Joshua 10:13 is a piece of data, an observation; it is not a model or theory. Those who construct models or theories would certainly consider it an extreme outlier and no doubt delete it from consideration. But is this justified?
Science values larger extensions and Joshua’s long day would limit the scope of a theory if it were accepted. So scientists have an incentive to remove it and claim a theory with large extension. Furthermore, Hume and others argue that the more unusual the claim, the greater the evidence needed to justify it.
But this betrays an extensional bias. What if the extreme outlier is highly meaningful, highly intensive? To delete it would be a great loss of intension. A more balanced science would be reluctant to delete it without due consideration. The fact that this is preserved in the book with the greatest intension, the Bible, should lead us to be reluctant to delete it.
Meaningful miracles do happen. We have sufficient testimony to them and sufficient incentive to preserve them for their intensionality, even if it means losing some extensionality in our theories.