Proving The Resurrection By the Minimal Facts Approach

[Jenny A]

In U.S. courts and other courts from the British tradition,  the jury really has two options and they aren't guilty and not guilty.  They are guilty and not proven.  Legally, juries don't find people innocent, at best they find that the government has failed to prove them guilty.

On the strength of eyewitness testimony alone, with no corroborating physical evidence, I'd find "not proven."  Your knowledge of your wife and the fact that the prosecution hadn't been able to find any physical evidence would add to my comfort in that verdict.   But, add the physical evidence I listed, and it's guilty, guilty, guilty no matter what you think you know about your wife.

So, based upon all the evidence that Stimbo listed, you would have no choice but to convict my wife of the 13 murders.

Fair enough.  I would too, if the evidence was strong enough.

But that's just it, Jenny, God is not in the business of FORCING anyone to make a decision based on evidence. That would be coercive.

He provides just enough clues for each soul to find and follow IF you are so inclined, but He does not force Himself upon you.

You'll find my somewhat lengthy answer here: http://atheistforums.org/thread-34856.html