Quote:Sort of missing the point here. I'm not saying that no amount of evidence for a supernatural being would ever suffice. I'm saying that depending upon the nature of supernatural and the degree to which it contravenes the known laws of reality, what we call sufficient evidence would be be different. So when someone starts talking a supernatural being, the most obvious thing to do is ask what they mean by it and what evidence they are ready to provide. Its not my fault that they start by positing something that would negate the concept of evidence itself.
Ok, what sufficient evidence would be required to prove the existence of, say, God as defined by Christianity?
