RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
August 2, 2017 at 7:14 pm
(This post was last modified: August 2, 2017 at 7:16 pm by Simon Moon.)
(August 2, 2017 at 6:11 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Do we really need to get into a conversation about the quality of witnesses? The difference between those with a martyr to mythologize and those that are merely unbiased 3rd parties?
The gospel accounts aren't a police report... there's a very clear intent behind them that's not just a simple reporting of the facts. If you're unable or unwilling to accept that, well, that's not our problem.
And, to add, how many police reports are taken seriously, that contain any supernatural 'evidence'?
Having a police report that includes miracle claims, would detract, not enhance the credibility of the report. And SteveII knows it.
But just move the report back 2000 years, and magically it supposed to become even more credible?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
