(August 3, 2017 at 2:30 pm)Cyberman Wrote:

(August 3, 2017 at 2:16 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: See, if you had given evidence of me lying (not mistaken or you thinking I'm lying based on your false assuptions) I would have made a correction

Eyewitness testimony not good enough?

I wouldn't consider a vague claim, as witness testimony.  Witness testimony is about sharing what was seen, heard, or otherwise experienced (smells, touch... etc)  The judgement of that information is still up to the one who it is transmitted to. He didn't give any information, other than he thinks I'm a liar. The basis for that conclusion is yet un-evidenced. 

Of course, I was assuming that it was something in recent context and immediately pertinent as well.

So, "vague claims" and written documents don't even cross the bar for you to consider a normal human being a run of the mill liar....but, for stories of resurrections and demon drivings...and murder....they're legit?

Testimony and time is also a factor.

An immediate report that I had lunch with my wife today can be investigated. The truth may never be revealed.
Older reports are even more troublesome, especially if only evidenced by the word or hearsay.

Why is this so difficult?

(August 3, 2017 at 3:11 pm)Astreja Wrote:

(August 3, 2017 at 11:42 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Are you saying, that if I have "my people " make the body disappear, that the numerous witnesses who had seen the body (police, doctors, and others), would have no evidence that there was even a crime?  I'll instruct them to burn down the hospital to make sure there is no physical evidence left behind.  People can even see them do it.  They can even tell them exactly why it is being done, and by whom.    If there is no physical evidence which ties back to them then they cannot convict me of either crime.  And best of all anybody who says that I did it, is irrational basing their opinion on the claims of alleged witnesses and hearsay?

Your scenario just gets more and more ludicrous, RR.  (Oh, and a burned-down hospital is physical evidence, you know.)

The critical difference between witnesses to your hypothetical crime and the alleged witnesses to scriptural events is that we can cross-examine living witnesses to see if there are consistencies and overall plausibility in their testimony.

Your scenario, as idiotic as it is becoming, still has not crossed into the realm of an extraordinary event.  Hospitals can burn.  Bodies can disappear.  Unlikely as it all is, it is at least physically possible.  This is why you're barking up the wrong tree with this whole thread -- You're trying to compare a possible real-life event with something that's vastly more likely to be mythology.

No I'm not trying to compare anything, and I'm not discussing extraordinary events. Just what was stated.   Perhaps you missed this, but I have mentioned this multiple times. 

And yes, witnesses to historical events, or sometimes events not that long ago, are not always available for cross examination.  Which doesn't apply to this hypothetical anyway. 

By the way, I was having a similar discussion with one of my guys who burnt down the hospital.  Who also doesn't believe that witness testimony is evidence.   To prove his point, he let a number of the witnesses know who he was, and even made some of them inspect his drivers license to ensure his identity.  The police questioned him, and he told them everything, including how it was done.  They where able to confirm the how, but couldn't link any forensic evidence back to us.  Do you think that we are still OK for the conviction?  They don't have any conclusive physical evidence, just very good witness testimony.

It;s back and forth with you, isn;t it, a moment ago "vague claims" weren't enough, but now you make vague claims about not trying to compare something to anything..despite this thread having been an offshoot of precisely that, and of your having done exactly that in previous threads with these exact same shit for brains comments.

So, in this case, w're supposed to believe -your- vague protestations of honesty and innocence against all evidence to the contrary?  

I'm starting to see why you believe in fairy tales. "Something" broke your brains, bro.

(August 3, 2017 at 4:21 pm)Khemikal Wrote: It;s back and forth with you, isn;t it, a moment ago "vague claims" weren't enough, but now you make vague claims about not trying to compare something to anything..despite this thread having been an offshoot of precisely that, and of your having done exactly that in previous threads with these exact same shit for brains comments.

So, in this case, w're supposed to believe -your- vague protestations of honesty and innocence against all evidence to the contrary?  

Yes, it was something a different topic, that made me want to inquire to a more basic premise.  To get an idea of how people think.    So I started a new thread so we could focus on that and not disrupt the previous conversation (similar to what I have asked people to do here, when they want to discuss something apart from my intentions with this thread).   This has nothing to do with extraordinary claims, or trying to prove a particular event; that is not my goal here.  I'm at least attempting to (although I may have slipped) to not make any arguments or debate the issue.  I'm trying to not even disagree too much, mostly ask questions or answer them with a few comments when I find something interesting.  I don't see where I've been vague about any of this.  And I don't believe that there is any evidence (I am aware of), that I have tried to bring anything else up here.

You may consider that any correlation in comments, is due to testimony being discussed in both.   Not the other way around.  One has to do with the principle, and the other with the application.  If flows from the general to the specific.
I also have the feeling, that no matter what I say or do, it is going to change your faulty assumptions.

The term assumption only applies when you have no previous history, where I must -assume- that jesus and the gospels are rattling around in your head.  I don;t have to do any such thing here, because you've already had this discussion with us on multiple occassions and it split off of a discussion of precisely that. Just fucking stop, man, lol? We know whats on your mind, we know why you ask now, why you asked then, we always know. We still have a conversation with you...so I can;t even see the practical upside to being disingenuous. You gain nothing and lose..well, I would say your credibility, everything..but?

So, this brings us round to another wonderful question regarding personal testimony.  When one bit of personal testimony contradicts many other bits of personal testimony allegedly written by or about a single person....what is the value of that testimony then? How are we to determine, on the basis of that testimony alone, what is true and what is false?

(August 3, 2017 at 6:41 pm)Khemikal Wrote: The term assumption only applies when you have no previous history, where I must -assume- that jesus and the gospels are rattling around in your head.  I don;t have to do any such thing here, because you've already had this discussion with us on multiple occassions and it split off of a discussion of precisely that.  Just fucking stop, man, lol?  We know whats on your mind, we know why you ask now, why you asked then, we always know.  We still have a conversation with you...so I can;t even see the practical upside to being disingenuous.  You gain nothing and lose..well, I would say your credibility, everything..but?  

So, this brings us round to another wonderful question regarding personal testimony.  When one bit of personal testimony contradicts many other bits of personal testimony allegedly written by or about a single person....what is the value of that testimony then?  How are we to determine, on the basis of that testimony alone, what is true and what is false?

I don't remember any other threads I was involved in, where the topic was only about testimony other than ones I started (although I could be wrong).  And I think that the history will show, that I do normally try to keep the thread on topic in most cases (sometimes I may join in as the thread has already veered off topic, or . 

Anyway, here is the first thread I started which was debating witness testimony.  https://atheistforums.org/thread-38852.html

And here is a related thread about anecdotal evidence which I started, which is somewhat related  https://atheistforums.org/thread-45573.html

You may look through them, for something more specific for you evidence if you like.   I think in the last one, I might have been ignoring you, and I'm beginning to remember why.

If you want to discuss the topic, or if you come up with something more specific to accuse me of... I'll be here  Otherwise I think that we are done.

The topic seems to have turned to how you've been victimized, somehow.  Meanwhile, questions that apply to yourself, the gospels, and all personal testimony go unanswered.