It seems that some skeptics who complain about the lack of independent attestation for the resurrection have set up the rules this way. (I originally wrote this as a comment and have promoted it now to a blog post for wider discussion.)
These seem to be the criteria:
The source must be an early document, contemporary with the alleged events, from someone who had reason to know whether the alleged events actually happened.
It must affirm that the alleged events really happened, for otherwise it would not be attestation.
It must be written by someone who is known not to be a believer, for otherwise it wouldn’t be independent; obviously Christians had an axe to grind, and their witness is tainted by their motivations.
Therefore (from 2 and 3) it must be a document that says the events happened, written by someone who says the events did not happen.
Further, and in contrast, let us take the case of a document that affirms the events happened, written by someone who actually agrees with what he wrote in that document. From 3, we conclude that this testimony is tainted and cannot be trusted. Therefore regardless of the quality, date, authorship, or even the actual truth value of that document, it is inadmissible. No document that affirms that Jesus rose from the dead can be admitted into the discussion, because the one who wrote it obviously believes it happened. To rely on early believers’ testimony regarding the resurrection is circular reasoning, because, after all, they were believers!
Thus only the only acceptable testimony affirming the resurrection is that which comes from someone who denies the resurrection.
Are these the rules under which we are supposed to operate?
By commenting here you agree to abide by this site's discussion policy. Comments support Markdown language for your convenience. Each new commenter's first comment goes into moderation temporarily before appearing on the site. Comments close automatically after 120 days.
Copyright, Permissions, Marketing
Some books reviewed on this blog are attached to my account with Amazon’s affiliate marketing program, and I receive a small percentage of revenue from those sales.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.