If theists understood "evidence"

[RoadRunner79]

Well, you have the witness testimony, as well as philosophical arguments such as the ontological argument, the moral argument (the argument from good), also, inductive arguments from the observation of nature, such as the fine tuning arguments.   There are also more which I'm sure you have heard of.    Which is why I think that atheists are some mix of dishonest and delusional, if they are saying that Christians don't give evidence and reason for their belief.  Sometimes they may be evident of different things or aspectdifferent things).  They become hyper skeptical and irrational when it comes to God, employing double standards and sophism.  Most don't deal with the subject with much intellectual honesty.

---

So you don't have any physical evidence of the drugs?  Just a story?  Did you personally witness this, or are you just furthering hear say?

Do you understand cooberation?


Mr Cosby cooberated testimony against him.

That makes that testimony more likely than a " he said/ she said"situation.

....

I'd agree...  Testimony which is embarrassing or condemning is stronger, and one is less likely to make up those details.  I also agree with corroborating evidence.  But testimony is evidence it seems

---

---

Here we go again.....
Perhaps, his testimony is a part of the evidence to consider.

Are you saying that testimony is never evidence?    It would seem the the courts, scholars, and most people do not agree with you.

Or we can skip this nonsense, where you have to believe everything that everyone has said, or nothing at all.  I think that you look at the evidence, what it says, what evidence can corroborate or contradict it.  You know.... apply some of that critical thinking I'm always hearing about here.  And not where it just means personal incredulity.

---

In many - if not most cases - two sides of testimony are not the only choices.

Far too frequently eyewitness testimony contradicts each other. Simply look at Jesus' s last words on dying on the cross --- 3 different versions. Easy in real life - and of course almost mandatory in fiction......

I agree... easy in real life. People may recount different things, that may include or exclude things others do not. Accounts often vary some, when taken in isolation they may seem to have a contradiction, if you treat them like video documentation. However when treated like normal testimony they do not.