Ok. Would you agree they can be fabricated evidence?That has absolutely nothing to do with the fact yhst witnesses' testimonies are evidence.
Ok, does that mean you see them as equally absurd?I never said a shapeshifting cat is less absurd than "many people being resurrected from the dead" and so on.
I think what a person claims to have witnessed can have a valid effect on how one views the reliablity of their testimony. That is, whether it is a factual testimony, or most probably a fabricated testimony"you were indoctrinated"
Ah-ha, now I see. It's not the value of eye-witness testimony that bothers you, but what they claim to have witnessed. You seem to be trolling me for my Christian beliefs. Joke's on you. I am not "Christian".
Ok, miracle claims and supernatural claims are a type of testimony. If you agree that courts should not accept them as valid evidence (as opposed to being say - fabricated evidence for example) then we are in agreement here according to my understanding.You seem to have missed a lot of what I have posted. I have never said courts should accept "miracle claims" as evidence. I have said that the testimony of a witness is evidence in a court of law.
In my opinion.