The book cited in post 1 (page 322) responds to your point:Although why Peter deserved to get actual physical evidence to quell his doubts and we do not is beyond me.
The book cited in post 1 (page 322) responds to your point:
"Does Jesus have to appear to every person in the world to make his claims credible? Why would he? We don't have to witness every event firsthand in order to believe the event actually occurred. In fact, it would be practically impossible to do so. We believe the testimony of others if they are trustworthy individuals {for example Luke, called one of the world's greatest historians}, and especially if their testimony is corroborated by other data. This is exactly the case with the testimony of the New Testament writers.
...if God were too overt because of frequent miraculous displays, then he might, in some cases infringe on our free will. If the purpose of this life is for all of us to freely make choices that will prepare us for eternity, then God will give us convincing evidence but not compelling evidence of his existence and purposes.
Therefore, those who want to follow God can do so with confidence, and those who do not can suppress or ignore the evidence and live as if he didn't exist."
You said most, that implies some do.Most world events do not violate the laws of physics. Extraordinary claims, etc.
You said most, that implies some do.
There's a Super Bowl ATLTUAE?You didn't see Tyree's catch of Manning's pass in Super Bowl XLII?

Oh good at long last we are going to get 3rd party corroboration with the New testament writers of the miracles in the bible. I just wish you had provided it in one of your previous 1225 posts in this thread.The book cited in post 1 (page 322) responds to your point:
"Does Jesus have to appear to every person in the world to make his claims credible? Why would he? We don't have to witness every event firsthand in order to believe the event actually occurred. In fact, it would be practically impossible to do so. We believe the testimony of others if they are trustworthy individuals {for example Luke, called one of the world's greatest historians}, and especially if their testimony is corroborated by other data. This is exactly the case with the testimony of the New Testament writers.
Too overt, you are kidding. Name one mircale from God that has convincing evidence that it was him....if God were too overt because of frequent miraculous displays, then he might, in some cases infringe on our free will. If the purpose of this life is for all of us to freely make choices that will prepare us for eternity, then God will give us convincing evidence but not compelling evidence of his existence and purposes. Therefore, those who want to follow God can do so with confidence, and those who do not can suppress or ignore the evidence and live as if he didn't exist."
I'm convinced by all the evidence I've presented in my 1200 posts in this thread as well as other evidence I've presented in other threads. For example my thread "The 25 fulfilled prophecies of Isaiah 53". If your truly not convinced, then so be it. But there is plenty of evidence there for Christians to believe, and nothing any skeptic has said in this or any other thread has changed my mind.Too overt, you are kidding. Name one mircale from God that has convincing evidence that it was him.
I have just skipped the last 200-or-so of the 7,059 posts...
Have I missed any evidence (as promised in the OP)?
I'm convinced by all the evidence I've presented in my 1200 posts in this thread as well as other evidence I've presented in other threads. For example my thread "The 25 fulfilled prophecies of Isaiah 43". If your truly not convinced, then so be it. But there is plenty of evidence there for Christians to believe, and nothing any skeptic has said in this or any other thread has changed my mind.
Excuse me that was Isaiah 53, not Isaiah 43.I'm convinced by all the evidence I've presented in my 1200 posts in this thread as well as other evidence I've presented in other threads. For example my thread "The 25 fulfilled prophecies of Isaiah 43".
I agree that for anyone to beleive jesus fits isaiah would need a miracle given the obvious discrepancies. I was hoping however that when you talked about God's mircales we would have something a bit more real.I'm convinced by all the evidence I've presented in my 1200 posts in this thread as well as other evidence I've presented in other threads. For example my thread "The 25 fulfilled prophecies of Isaiah 43". If your truly not convinced, then so be it. But there is plenty of evidence there for Christians to believe, and nothing any skeptic has said in this or any other thread has changed my mind.
I agree that for anyone to beleive jesus fits isaiah would need a miracle given the obvious discrepancies.
Yes, some have that opinion (that wasn't developed until the Middle Ages by a Jewish Rabbi) -- many others don't. Jews have converted to Christianity because of Isaiah 53.The thread where Ichneumonwasp showed that the interpretation of the suffering servant can only apply to Israel?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've always had the impression Jesus was sought precisely for that; the story of the centurion comes to mind as an example.Jesus was around for three years, you could touch him, they did not come to him looking for the etherial, but it seems they found it in him.
As for the reserection, if you did not witness it then you require faith, and as I said faith is the suspension of disbelief.
Ofcourse, they were men of their times
They certainly told their version of the truth, as do the various denominations today. We can only rely on the texts of the few non interested observers of the times who's mention of Christ and his demise fit the chronology and geography. Given that he was mentioned within a lifetime of his being by these authors we can surmise the early Christians did have a Christ. If you accept there was a christ could all the biography be fiction.
All kinds of religions have resurrection stories.
<snip to the kewl heretical bits>
The much older Egyptian sun-worship had many such beliefs.
-----------------
The god Horus was the son of the gods Osiris and Isis. The three of them formed a unit, a trinity.
The Christian trinity is of Egyptian origin. The Jews had no trinity, only the Lord, who made it clear he would stand for no rivals.
Osiris died and was resurrected before he fathered Horus.
"Out of Egypt have I called my son." (Matt. 2:15)
Each pharaoh was considered to be a re-incarnation of Horus.
The story of Horus can be found in "The Egyptian Book of the Dead” (also known as the "Papyrus of Ani") written over 3,000 years before the birth of Jesus.
The adoration of the Virgin and Child is connected with the adoration of Isis and the infant Horus. Their portraits are remarkably alike.
----------------------
So just as temple priests 'faked' miracles and swore they were the actions of the gods, so the followers of Jesus swore that he had raised the dead, walked on water, fed the mob, etc.