« Advice on Online Discussions (Video) | Main | An Addition to STR's Faculty »

January 08, 2013

Comments

What our friend J. states is true. There are two different standards to consider when it comes to testimony regarding particular historical events. If those events are part of a current court case, one standard applies. When it is a matter of just historical accuracy, another applies. But there will be folks out there who will justifiably argue that the reason for the standard in a court case being higher is because a human life is at stake. That is what J. admitted is the reason for the higher standard of rather seeing some guilty go free rather than some innocents being convicted of a crime they did not commit. When we look at it from that perspective, the Christian claims, which are allegedly based on historical events, also have high stakes in view and thus should have a higher standard to which they must adhere. Since one's eternity is at stake, it could be argued that it should actually be a higher standard than the one in court, even if this entails a usually lower standard required for historical acceptance. I would liked to have J. address this issue, which would have, no doubt, come up in the conversations that are bound to ensue here...even if I did not bring it to light to start with.

The comments to this entry are closed.