Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[Amarok]

You mean like other documents? Then you're going to tell me those other documents are claims too that require more documents to support their claims and so on into infinity. That's why the meme is bullshit. We have 4 gospels writing about the same people, places and events. We have several letters discussing those people, places and events. We have historian writing about the central figure mentioned in the 4 gospels and the several letters. We have archaeological evidence for some of those people, like Pilate, and places, like the pool of Bethesda. etc. etc.

You know what's nice?  Reading the rest of my post.  Maybe then you'll see that I make the distinction between a historical Jesus and a magical one, implicitly accepting the former.

I mean, that's weak sauce even for you.

I'm still waiting for a cogent explanation of how "a litany of mundane evidence ergo the supernatural" is logical.

You expected better from someone who thinks Darwins black box makes good arguments against evolution .And buys the third way .And that the 5 ways is good evidence for god .