Episode 1- Understanding Burdens of Proof

In this pilot podcast episode of The Defense Rests, lawyer and RZIM itinerant Abdu Murray looks at the claims for and objections against the Christian faith from a legal perspective, considering the rules of evidence and procedures to see which worldviews can withstand the scrutiny of a legal trial.

In this episode, Abdu examines the concept of burdens of proof, to see who has it, how to meet it, and whether the burden ever shifts.

How could you shift the burden of proof in your tough conversations?

4 Likes

I appreciated Abdu Murray’s point that the one making the claim bears the burden of proof. The first thing I need to do to shift the burden of proof is to talk less and listen more. Too often I think I have something intelligent to say, and I can’t wait to say it. If I ask better questions and truly listen to the answers, I’ll understand my friends better, and I can ask them for evidence because they will have made claims that need proof.

4 Likes

So true, Jennifer! Another benefit is interesting conversation because we hear where another person is coming from. I learn so much more about a person’s history and their particular convictions when I listen.
And at times there may be a difficult past that has come into play in their beliefs.

3 Likes

As a fellow attorney (and once Michigander), I can’t tell you guys how much I am looking forward to this podcast. @Abdu_Murray, while I get the need to be accessible, please don’t be afraid to get into the weeds a bit legally! Your audience can handle it!
(As long as we don’t delve into the rule against perpetuities, at least…)

3 Likes

Here I am listening to episode 1, and I find that our honored host is actually a wolverine. To say I am shocked and appalled would be a great understatement… OH!

1 Like

So glad you’re here to listen! You join many who are excited about The Defense Rests!

1 Like

:rofl:

I came in late but so appreciated Abdu’s podcast.

Jennifer, I liked your point. So often I have felt that it was unfair to make an absolute claim and for someone to dismiss it without saying why or what their worldview is. Because I believe something, I am put on the defense to prove what I believe whereas often the skeptic gets off the hook. They criticize what they don’t believe but don’t offer what they do believe so I can scrutinize what they believe.

The differentiation between a skeptic and a cynic was a very, very good point.

I thoroughly enjoyed the Burden of Proof presentation.

3 Likes