re gospel dating in article mimsy umd edu mangoe cs umd edu charley wingate writes deletion i cannot see any evidence for the v b which the cynics in this group would ever accept as for the second it is the foundation of the religion anyone who claims to have seen the risen jesus back in the day period is a believer and therefore is discounted by those in this group since these are all ancients anyway one again to choose to dismiss the whole thing the third is as much a metaphysical relationship as anything else even those who agree to it have argued at length over what it means so again i don t see how evidence is possible no cookies charlie the claims that jesus have been seen are discredited as extraordinary claims that don t match their evidence in this case it is for one that the gospels cannot even agree if it was jesus who has been seen further there are zillions of other spook stories and one would hardly consider others even in a religious context to be some evidence of a resurrection there have been more elaborate arguments made but it looks as if they have not passed your post filtering i thus interpret the extraordinary claims claim as a statement that the speaker will not accept any evidence on the matter it is no evidence in the strict meaning if there was actual evidence it would probably be part of it but the says nothing about the claims charlie i have seen invisible pink unicorns by your standards we have evidence for ipus now benedikt
