(September 18, 2017 at 7:48 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(September 18, 2017 at 4:56 pm)SteveII Wrote: I don't know if it happened. I doubt because of 1) the lack of context of every other miracle ever performed (they had a specific purpose), 2) there are some rebuttal witnesses that said no, it did not happen, and 3) there was nothing on the line when people said "I saw it"--it did necessitate a call to action or any required change of belief.
Because of course, 1000's of people that can be interviewed moments after an event, are no where near as reliable as, 500 anonymous people, whose stories are not recorded for decades or more after the alleged events.
Move those stories 1800 years in the past, and somehow they become even more reliable.
That is a textbook example of special pleading. What is the title of this thread again?
Intellectual honesty is not quite your thing, is it Steve?
Except you didn't address my second and third justification for treating the testimony different. Why is it that everyone misses that part of the definition of special pleading. I'll highlight it for you.
Special Pleading
Applying standards, principles, and/or rules to other people or circumstances, while making oneself or certain circumstances exempt from the same critical criteria, without providing adequate justification. Special pleading is often a result of strong emotional beliefs that interfere with reason. Link
