• Sam26
    3.1k
    Post 6: Number

    “Number” matters in testimony, but only when it means independent lines, not just a large headcount or a story repeated many times.

    In ordinary life, testimony gets stronger when multiple witnesses report the same event independently, through different channels, with the possibility of cross checking. But when many reports trace back to the same source, the “number” can look large while the evidential base stays narrow.

    So here’s the question for the resurrection: How many independent lines of testimony do we actually have, once we separate sources from repetition?

    A few quick ways to keep this honest:

    Lists aren’t automatically independent. A later summary that reports “many people saw” doesn’t give us many independent reports, it gives us one report about many.

    Multiple documents don’t automatically mean multiple lines. If documents share a tradition, depend on one another, or arise from the same inner circle, the apparent number can outpace the real independence.

    Sincerity doesn’t add independence. A community can sincerely repeat what it inherited without adding new evidential weight.
  • Sam26
    3.1k
    The importance of testimony isn't just how it relates to the resurrection argument, but it's important across a wide range of domains even in science
  • Tom Storm
    10.8k
    There are no rational grounds for believing this to be true. Religion, in general, deals with this successfully and easily overcomes iAstorre

    I think many belief systems cheerfully overcome facts: that’s a function of belief systems, whether religious or not. I think this applies to football teams and schools of literary criticism just as much as it does to Christianity.
  • Esse Quam Videri
    246
    I often wonder, in such cases, why Christianity rather than Hinduism, Islam or Buddhism. When read deeply, they too offer cast contemplative opportunities.Tom Storm

    Indeed they do, and it's a good question. I'm guessing that Allison would concede that his affinity for Christianity is rooted in his cultural background. I know that he has engaged honestly with other traditions and I don't think he would try to say that Christianity is demonstrably superior to them according to any neutral, public criteria. That said, he also seems to think that the Christian tradition captures something unique that helps him to make sense of the world in a way not replicated by other traditions, and that the resurrection plays a role in that. I'm not sure if he'd be willing to say anything stronger than that.
  • Esse Quam Videri
    246
    Cheers. I saw your farewell in another thread and won't tether you to the forum with another reply. I wish you the best of luck with your novel. Hopefully we'll get the chance to converse again sometime in the future. It's been a pleasure. Take care.
12Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.