You are showing ignorant prejudice here. Do a little reading about Simon Greenleaf. He wrote the rules for evidence that are still being used in courts.
Greenleaf wrote a treatise [on the Law of Evidence] , but his evidence based argument for the resurrection was not tested in a court of law.
ie: Greenleaf applied the evidentiary rules of his day to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, and concluded himself, that the admissible evidence emitted thereby was sufficient to prove in any fair court of law that the resurrection of Jesus Christ was indeed fact—not hoax, myth or fiction.
Should we all take the word of one lawyer and and consider nothing else?
How many other lawyers and/or judges have peer reviewed his case for the resurrection offering their independent assessment?
.
-Bulletproof and Waterproof don't mean Idiotproof.
