Is Accepting Christian Evidence Special Pleading?

[RoadRunner79]

This is a big difference, that I find when looking at other religious accounts.  Quite often (and I think out of necessity) the events happen isolated in a cave or out in the woods somewhere to only one person, or they occurred a long long time ago, in a far away land.  And when they are not, I am able to take the information into consideration to form an intelligent conclusion.  No need to deny the evidence and call the people liars or delusional.  But to look at all the evidence, and form an intelligent conclusion.

I do think the argument of anonymity is interesting.  Often, because the same people who make this case, will quite often contradict themselves shortly after.

---

What is the question that you had or the comment, that you think is being ignored.

"What is the question that you had or the comment, that you think is being ignored."


Probably something along the lines of the one I have asked multiple times now (for instance in this post: https://atheistforums.org/thread-51117-p...pid1618334)

Here is the question

Christians, are you serious? Do you think there is evidence to consider outside Saul of Tarsus' head?

The answer is yes... there are a number of other people who wrote and others corroborated what Paul taught (both from Peter, and the early Church)

This is the point that was being made.  The core of the Gospel doesn't rely on the single testimony about something that happened hidden away in a cave for it's source.    Would you agree, that it is different in this respect from most other religious accounts?