Convergence of evidence

[Confused]

In another thread by Achilles, he asks if atheist require more strict standards of examinating evidence of scripture. I am going to ask any theist/or atheist to apply the "Convergence of Evidence" to any event in the OT or the NT that can lead from a hypothesis (bedtime story) to a theory (accepted event). In science, such as with the theory of evolution we draw this evidence from multiple disciplines such as archaeology, palenontology, historical writings/artifacts, geology, biology, chemisty, physics, genetics, etc...... to come to the conclusion of evololution not being simply a hypothesis, but a theory. One continue to learn more about everyday from these disciplines.

So up for grabs here:
1) Pick any extraordinary event that occurred in the NT or OT and prove it with the accepted method of convergence of evidence. In other words, literature alone won't work. You need multiple disciplines to validate your evidence and multiple sources from each discipline to ensure your evidence is reliable.

[Goat]

In another thread by Achilles, he asks if atheist require more strict standards of examinating evidence of scripture. I am going to ask any theist/or atheist to apply the "Convergence of Evidence" to any event in the OT or the NT that can lead from a hypothesis (bedtime story) to a theory (accepted event). In science, such as with the theory of evolution we draw this evidence from multiple disciplines such as archaeology, palenontology, historical writings/artifacts, geology, biology, chemisty, physics, genetics, etc...... to come to the conclusion of evololution not being simply a hypothesis, but a theory. One continue to learn more about everyday from these disciplines.

So up for grabs here:
1) Pick any extraordinary event that occurred in the NT or OT and prove it with the accepted method of convergence of evidence. In other words, literature alone won't work. You need multiple disciplines to validate your evidence and multiple sources from each discipline to ensure your evidence is reliable.

Could you be a little more precise about the term 'extrodinary event'. I think Hezeikel's tunnel mentioned in 2 Kings is 'extrodinary' in many respects, and
we have archelogical evidence of it (we found it, including inscriptions dating to the proper time frame, that are mentioned in the Tanakh. However, it is not an event that I would consider 'supernatural'.

[Easyrider]

Confused wrote: 1) Pick any extraordinary event that occurred in the NT or OT and prove it with the accepted method of convergence of evidence. In other words, literature alone won't work. You need multiple disciplines to validate your evidence and multiple sources from each discipline to ensure your evidence is reliable.

Which disciplines are these that you are talking about? Archaeology? How can you have archaeological evidence for a supernatural event, such as the blind being healed, Jesus resurrected, etc.?

[WelshBoy]

Easyrider,

I think that may be Confused's point. I'll allow her to disagree with me of course...

[Confused]

Easyrider,

I think that may be Confused's point. I'll allow her to disagree with me of course...

You are partially correct. Read my response to Easyrider. If so many millions of people are so sure that events such as the crucifixion of Christ, the ressurection, the miracles God performed such as flooding the world, parting the great sea, 10 plagues of Egypt, etc.... Then through the convergence of evidence one should be able to prove it.

[Confused]

Confused wrote: 1) Pick any extraordinary event that occurred in the NT or OT and prove it with the accepted method of convergence of evidence. In other words, literature alone won't work. You need multiple disciplines to validate your evidence and multiple sources from each discipline to ensure your evidence is reliable.

Which disciplines are these that you are talking about? Archaeology? How can you have archaeological evidence for a supernatural event, such as the blind being healed, Jesus resurrected, etc.?

No, any of the following or similar:
1) Great flood
2) 10 plagues of egypt
3) crucifixion and/or resurrection of Christ
4) The Ark
5) destruction of various cities by other than natural disasters (ie volcanos, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados.


The convergence of evidence is nothing more that a collection of evidence from multiple disciplines to validate the event and ensure its validity. It can come from any field of study, but there must be several. Evolution relies on cosmology, physics, biology, paleontology, geology, archaeology, sociology, chemistry, etc.... I would accept a certain amout of written history, but it must be shown to be true with other disciplines. There is the kicker. It can't just be literature. I will post a reply I gave to Achilles in a minute to explain why eye witness accounts aren't always reliable.

[Confused]

Perhaps this might clarify what I am searching for.

Achilles writes:
Quote:
This is why I (or we) try to focus on the VERY FIRST sources we have. A suggestion? Na - a CHALLENGE!!! Research google about other ancient writings. Alexander is a perfect example. Find out how the sources for Christianity compare to others of the same genre. I did this and found that Christianity is WAY out in front when compared fairly to contemporary writings.

Confused writes:
Try it with convergence of evidence. In other words, apply standards we apply to the physical world. We come to conclusions of hypotheses by convergence of evidence from many sources: literature, paleontology, archaeology, biology, chemistry, geology, physics, etc. If we only had a few sources from each of these categories, the probability of the hypothesis being valid and reliable are high, they become theories. Not laws mind you. But enough credible evidence from multiple academics can lead to fairly accurate theories.

I have gone to two websites of archives of ancient writings. But testimony isn't good enough for proof. We both know that reality is relative. I remember in my psych 101 class, they showed a tape of some ecology students being led on an expedition in the area around "area 51" in Nevada. The professor had staged a site that was quarantined by tape with two unarmed soldier guarding something covered with a tarp with a small slice of silver showing out of the corner. The leader of the group said something had happened there and the military was handling it but they were to walk past quickly, no taking pictures, etc.... They videotaped the entire process. 3 months later all the students were brought in to account the events of that day. Of the 16 participants, 8 swore that the soldiers where armed with both machine guns and pistols, 4 swore one of them pulled his gun out and aimed it at one boy who was trying to sneak a picture in, there were various other accounts. Only one person reported the events in exact sequence. The other 15 swore they would swear on a stack of bibles and curse their firstborn if they were wrong. Then they were shown the video tapes of the actual events. Needless to say, perceptions are not always what they appear and memories can exaggerate without even meaning to. So for credible evidence I would require something greater than eyewitness accounts. The Gospels themselves of the NT have their own inaccuracies as well. So my challenge, find me something that you can prove through the convergence of evidence that happened in the bible, for example, the ressurection, the virgin birth, the 10 plagues of egypt, etc.

[Easyrider]

Confused wrote: 1) Pick any extraordinary event that occurred in the NT or OT and prove it with the accepted method of convergence of evidence. In other words, literature alone won't work. You need multiple disciplines to validate your evidence and multiple sources from each discipline to ensure your evidence is reliable.

Which disciplines are these that you are talking about? Archaeology? How can you have archaeological evidence for a supernatural event, such as the blind being healed, Jesus resurrected, etc.?

No, any of the following or similar:
1) Great flood
2) 10 plagues of egypt
3) crucifixion and/or resurrection of Christ
4) The Ark
5) destruction of various cities by other than natural disasters (ie volcanos, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornados.


The convergence of evidence is nothing more that a collection of evidence from multiple disciplines to validate the event and ensure its validity. It can come from any field of study, but there must be several. Evolution relies on cosmology, physics, biology, paleontology, geology, archaeology, sociology, chemistry, etc.... I would accept a certain amout of written history, but it must be shown to be true with other disciplines. There is the kicker. It can't just be literature. I will post a reply I gave to Achilles in a minute to explain why eye witness accounts aren't always reliable.

OK, let's take # 3 for starters: 3) crucifixion and/or resurrection of Christ. Tell us specifically what you have to have. For instance, what evidence can cosmology, physics, biology, paleontology, geology, archaeology, sociology, chemistry, etc., possibly provide for a resurrected man?

[Easyrider]

Confused wrote: I will post a reply I gave to Achilles in a minute to explain why eye witness accounts aren't always reliable.

I'm tempted to say that people who always abide by that take a DNA sample of their spouses before they let them in the front door or sleep with them.

I'll also say that the disciples spent about 3 1/2 years with Jesus. They saw the wounds in his hands and feet. They ate dinner with him, and had conversations with him. It would take some special evidence to convince me they didn't know who he was.

[Confused]

Confused wrote: I will post a reply I gave to Achilles in a minute to explain why eye witness accounts aren't always reliable.

I'm tempted to say that people who always abide by that take a DNA sample of their spouses before they let them in the front door or sleep with them.

I'll also say that the disciples spent about 3 1/2 years with Jesus. They saw the wounds in his hands and feet. They ate dinner with him, and had conversations with him. It would take some special evidence to convince me they didn't know who he was.

You have the right to be as tempted as you want. Avoidance is a wonderful tool.