Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Courtroom fallacy (It goes both ways)
Message-ID: <3476@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Sep-86 00:43:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.3476
Posted: Wed Sep 17 00:43:58 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 19-Sep-86 07:24:21 EDT
References: <1145@cybvax0.UUCP>
Organization: University of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Sci.
Lines: 31

Mike Huybensz writes:

>Why would a moment's thought reveal the claim of this anecdote to be
>ridiculous?  Because anyone with the slightest knowledge of how courts
>work would realize that producing a text in court (such as the bible) is
>merely hearsay.  All the "facts" about the resurrection are merely hearsay
>in the bible.  And no lawyer would allow them to stand.

This is of course true of all historical accounts (not that I would assert
that the intent of the bible is to be taken as history).  Assuming that the
story is not entirely apocryphal, I have to assume that the learned
professor's endorsement extends only to the assessment that the scripture
*taken as a true historical account* forces one conclusion.  This after all
is the only sort of legal opinion one can have of such accounts-- and the
very careful wording should be noted: "evidence presented", carrying the
implication that it was presented as first-person evidential accounts,
rather than as hearsay.

>What is written in the Bible is merely a set of claims.  And not even a
>particularly remarkable set of claims, as religions go.  Some of the
>historical claims are probably true, and many of the theological claims
>are probably bullshit.  Once you rid yourself of the premise that the
>bible is infallible (a premise that could never stand in an "unbiased
>courtroom"), the bible is suddenly very unconvincing.

Of course, the counterarguments are even poorer as far as evidence is
concerned,  since they are unquestionably speculatory.  It doesn't seem to
me that this is a particularly useful way to examine scripture or to decide
religious questions.

C. Wingate