Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[Harry Nevis]

That's not true at all.  I am not making any claims.  I am simply rejecting ancient hearsay as evidence for the theist claim that god exists.  

Two things about that:

1. Most of the NT is not hearsay. John, Peter and James were eyewitnesses. Paul never related the events of Jesus' life. It is not necessarily true that 
2. Hearsay is evidence. So what you are saying is "I am simply rejecting ancient hearsay [evidence] as evidence..." 

So, you are making claims regarding the evidence that is not hearsay and you reject the hearsay evidence without reason (so you say)--in spite of accepting it in every other ancient historical account ever. 

1. You claim they were eyewitnesses.  Prove it.
2. It may be evidence, but it advances your claim not one bit.