In this post, I’m recounting a bit of an exchange I had on Twitter with Counter Apologist followed by my reply:
Oh I've got my background beliefs but my point is that miracles claims made by multiple living eye witnesses of Sathya Sai Baba are rejected by Xtians yet 2nd and Nth number hand claims in the gospels are held up as clearly plausible. It's not so in India https://t.co/6k6QiUFX6Y
— Counter Apologist (@CounterApologis) April 6, 2020
I offered the following multi-tweet response which I’ve recorded below:
It never fails: an atheist skeptic of miracles will reason if you accept Christian miracles, you have no principled reason to reject “Sathya Sai Baba” talking point. I’m sorry, but this is not serious. It’s just an atheist talking point.
Let me give you an analogy. Most people believe that you can gain rational belief and knowledge directly through human testimony. But others are skeptics of human testimony. They don’t believe that is possible. Now imagine a skeptic of human testimony saying this:
“If you’re going to accept Smith’s testimony that another motorist dented your car, why don’t you accept Jones’ testimony that an alien landed on your house?”
I mean, what a silly bit of reasoning that would be. People have many ways to distinguish credible testimonies.
And people have many ways to judge credible miracle claims. Wright, Licona, and Habermas all do a fine job making the case for the resurrection of Jesus. I’ll wait for Counter Apologist to make the case for Sathya Sai Baba.