Check out this resurrection claim (http://web.archive.org/web/20091116203706/http://windowsvj.com/jaisai.htm)
At some point in my past I would have probably and ignorantly asked you to provide evidence that Shirdi Sai Baba in fact, self-resurrected himself. Such a request might have required evidence such as the testimony of multiple eyewitnesses, the current location of Shirdi Sai Baba so that we could authenticate that he is the historical Shirdi Sai Baba presented in this account that you have provided, and finally a rational argument for how a mere mortal could perform a self-resurrection.
If the same evidence were requested for the resurrection of Christ, one could of course provide recorded eyewitness testimony from those that witnessed the occurrence. One could also examine Christ’s empty tomb as another indication that the account is credible. Finally, the fact that Christ promises to come back to judge the world would provide the ultimate “evidence” that Christ did resurrect Himself from the grave although at that point the evidence does no good in assisting someone to make a saving profession of faith in Christ since Christ’s return is for the purpose of exacting deserved vengeance on all those who have disobeyed the gospel and failed to acknowledge their Creator. Examining the evidence a couple minutes before being eradicated is hardly the way to go assuming that one is able to survive the prior worldwide plagues of the Great Tribulation. The bible says that “every eye will see Him” so there will eventually be a confrontation between the Creator and His unbelieving creatures.
Having said all of this, I think that it is more important to understand that evidence does not speak for itself but must ultimately be interpreted from within a worldview. For this reason, it is impossible to provide evidence of any claim to someone who does not share the same worldview. Within the realm of the Christian worldview, Christ self-resurrection is certainly evidence of His claim to deity and His resurrection confirms the biblical prophecies that suggest this would occur; however, outside of the Christian worldview the unbeliever can always present what we might call a “rescuing device” for why he/she does not see a particular piece of evidence in the same light. This is why it is important, not to talk about what evidence exist for a particular worldview or claim, but rather, what is the nature of all evidence and what preconditions are necessary in order for any evidence to be meaningful in the human realm.
In order for humans to make sense of any piece of evidence presented, certain things would have to be true, whether we consciously recognize it or not. For one, if the human mind is not capable of subjecting itself to the laws of rational thought then it is impossible for evidence to make sense; evidence becomes useless. Also, the world has to exhibit order and must be understandable for evidence to have meaning, especially evidence of a scientific nature. Our senses themselves must exhibit basic reliability in order for any evidence to make sense. The Hindu faith cannot account for any of these preconditions and in fact violates each one of them:
As one example: in Hinduism, which is generally a monistic (i.e the idea that all reality consists of a single basic substance or element) worldview, how can one account for the laws of logic (and hence the idea of distinctions) which are a requirement for all rational thought? Furthermore, Hinduism is pluralistic; it accommodates all faiths so as to reinforce it’s monism. Therefore, if everything is really part of a greater singular entity then it follows that all things (including all faiths) are illusory. The problem with this stance however is very obvious; by espousing pluralism one must also embrace contradiction since opposing faiths are equally embraced in the realm of Hinduism. Unfortunately, embracing contradiction is the exact opposite of rational thought which we earlier conceded was a precondition for evidence to be meaningful. Moreover, in order for Hinduism to be true, the idea of Hinduism itself must be a real idea as opposed to a fake one, yet, in Hinduism every thing is illusory and thus fake since there are not any real distinctions (and thus ideas) in the all-encompassing single entity that we comprise, according to Hinduism. Therefore, Hinduism is self-refuting. Plainly speaking, it is a belief that necessarily becomes false upon taking it to be true.
Furthermore, Hinduism cannot make sense of science. For example, according to Hinduism, the universe is Maya (an illusion). But science would be impossible if the universe were merely an illusion. How could we study something that does not actually exist? Again, in Hinduism there are no distinctions, all things are one. But science requires distinctions. If there is no difference between the sun, moon, stars, and people, then life would be meaningless. One can therefore safely conclude that since Hinduism cannot account for the preconditions necessary to make evidence intelligible, Hinduism is therefore at least an insufficient worldview, if not an impossible one.
One the other hand, the Christian worldview can make sense of all these preconditions of evidence and intelligibility. Due to the words of Scripture, the Christian understands that God, Who by definition is rational, fashioned the human mind after His Own mind so that we could have the ability (and responsibility) to think rationally. By Scripture we understand that God is not man, and that humans, though made in God’s likeness are entirely distinct from God. We also understand that God made the universe and is upholding it in a consistent and logical fashion so that the laws of nature (i.e. the laws of physics) will not suddenly change tomorrow or within the next second. A worldview without the biblical God does not have this assurance and would consequently undermine all reasoning that is based upon induction (the primary engine behind the prevailing epistemology of empiricism). Through the bible we understand that God created our senses so that we could accurately probe and subdue the world around us. Many people just blindly take for granted that our senses are reliable, that the mind has a propensity to think rationally, and that the world is orderly and understandable. Once you start to wonder why this is or has to be the case then you will really start to think twice before asking others to produce evidence for a particular claim.
References and Related Articles: