RE: Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?
September 11, 2017 at 4:03 pm
(This post was last modified: September 11, 2017 at 4:09 pm by SteveII.)
(September 11, 2017 at 3:21 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:What evidence would you expect to see from events that happened in the first century? Writings. The more the better. The more names we know the better. The more immediate effects these writings had the better. The more people that believed the events even before the writings the better (for example, Paul addresses the already existing churches throughout the Roman empire in the very first surviving writings).(September 11, 2017 at 1:41 pm)SteveII Wrote: [edit]
Is there any debate that no major religion that has a fraction of the amount of evidence of Christianity to even examine in support of its main claims? If other religions do not have a body of evidence or there only exists one piece of evidence, then how could there be any special pleading in favor of Christianity?
If you are tempted to just answer there is no evidence for Christianity, they we are just arguing definitions of words. Whatever you call the material under consideration, there is more of it under Christianity and therefore no special pleading.
bold mine
Um...........what? How do you even measure this? By word count? By number of supposed authors? By amount of publication?
An argument for belief based on quantity alone? Really?
This might be one of the worst propositions you've put forward for your delusion.
So yes. Quantity of the only evidence we should expect to survive (writings) is an important factor.