There probably isn’t a sceptic, atheist, or religious deconvert that hasn’t at one time been asked the question:
”What kind of evidence would convince you (of) ….. ?”
Of course we all know to what our religious friends are referring, yes?
One can pick one’s own poison in this regard but popular examples usually include, God and the resurrection of the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth.
I’ve recently been in dialogue over on Joel Anderson’s blog – a place where I have been banned for some time, but for some odd reason he decided to (temporarily) rescind the Red Card. Maybe his ego got the better of him as this reply to someone’s comment about why I was ”unbanned” might suggest?
firstname.lastname@example.org Haha…his comments still automatically go in the trash. I just felt like responding this time.
The humility just oozes like warm treacle …. laced with arsenic.
Anyway, after replying to one chap that it would be best if we clarified the definition of evidence, I suggested we start with the dictionary definition, and he should pick the wording of the one he favoured most.
This was greeted with a degree of unexpected enthusiasm and not one but three definitions were offered, to be rounded off with this comment:
ALL OF WHICH fits everything Dr. Anderson and I have been saying here. Everything we’ve posted to you counts as evidence, unless you wish to argue with three reputable dictionaries of the English language.
Now how about you put your money where your mouth is and tell US what kind of evidence would convince YOU?
So, I opted for this definition from the Oxford:
“The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.”
Now, I intended to post my reply last night but was distracted by the football – bloody Manchester United – and so had a mind to post it this morning. However …. it turns out that my Red Card had been reinstated and Anderson left a comment to the effect he is refusing to release anything else I post.
*Sigh* It was ever thus.
So …. for the benefit of my faithful disciples …. or blog-apostles (all twelve of you, or thereabouts) here is the reply I intended to post with regard what kind of evidence would convince YOU?
While most discussions about evidence for Christianity focus on God and /or the Resurrection of Jesus, I prefer the resurrection tale of Lazarus, as I find it more interesting and the detail more specific and comprehensive.
Therefore, by applying the Oxford English Dictionary definition of evidence I might well accept the tale of the resurrection of Lazarus as likely to be historically accurate if it can be shown to meet the criteria set out by the Oxford.
Namely: (Does the)“The available body of facts or information indicate (ing) whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.”