I'm happy to accept that there is more evidence for Jesus' resurrection than there is for (an example I've had used in anger) the existence of Julius Ceaser.
Thing is, accepting that Julius Ceaser existed required me to believe some melodramatic but basically plausible things about the Romans, but not otherwise change my life.
Believing in Jesus, with all the trimmings, means a great deal of change to my life, and would also contradict a lot more apparently observed evidence.
Therefore, I hold it to a higher standard of evidence. Rather a lot higher. More than the gap in standards ofhistorical evidence generally presented.
no subject
I'm happy to accept that there is more evidence for Jesus' resurrection than there is for (an example I've had used in anger) the existence of Julius Ceaser.
Thing is, accepting that Julius Ceaser existed required me to believe some melodramatic but basically plausible things about the Romans, but not otherwise change my life.
Believing in Jesus, with all the trimmings, means a great deal of change to my life, and would also contradict a lot more apparently observed evidence.
Therefore, I hold it to a higher standard of evidence. Rather a lot higher. More than the gap in standards ofhistorical evidence generally presented.