The answer is straightforward: Miracles make theological arguments useless.
There are two sides to this coin. On the one side, we see that there are no continued miracles in this world, and this is probably the most substantive strike against accepting theism that exists. On the other side, we realize that if there were continued miracles, we wouldn't have theological arguments for theism at all because theism would be obvious.
So the quandary I find myself in regarding
I should be able to stop here, but I guess I should address my "unjustified" claim that there are no miracles going on. To clear this up, by "miracles," here's what I don't mean. I don't mean hucksterish things and parlor tricks passed off as miracles to the gullible. I don't mean the lies about circumstances and people perpetrated by the Catholic Church, usually in the canonization process. I don't mean fortunate coincidences, including the kinds we've worked to achieve like someone's bone cancer coinciding with a time and place in which we've painstakingly learned to treat bone cancer. I don't mean important events that are really mundane from a more global perspective, like the birth of a child.
In case that doesn't clear it up, here's what I do mean by miracles: honest to God miracles, literally. I should note that contrary to many skeptics, whom I'm not sure are being honest about this, I would definitely believe in God if miracles were really going on, but please don't bore me by trying to convince me that they are. If they were, it would be inescapably obvious.
So, absent miracles, theism is made of arguments, not substance. If there were miracles, though, there would be no need for arguments for theism. The philosophical arguments for theism are a waste of everybody's time and a continued stain besmirching the otherwise mostly respectable family of fields called philosophy.