The Inconvenient Truth About Evidence
In "The Inconvenient Truth About Evidence" Stephen Campana argues that compelling evidence does not necessarily produce certainty since evidence can point in opposite directions. Using the JonBenét Ramsey murder case to illustrate, he shows how the same body of evidence can support seemingly contradictory conclusions. Applying this lesson to the resurrection of Jesus, Campana aims to show that persuasive evidence on either side does not, by itself, determine what actually happened historically. Furthermore, because interpretations of evidence are shaped by prior beliefs, experiences, desires, and expectations, different assumptions about what is possible can generate radically different conclusions even when starting from the same evidence. Thus when the evidence remains genuinely ambiguous, humility is appropriate. From a Christian perspective that distinguishes a gift of faith from an objective weighing of evidence, Campana concludes that in place of assuming that one's own interpretation is correct, we ought to accept the understanding that makes the most sense to us while simultaneously recognizing that we could be wrong.