- May 10, 2018
- 5,165
- 733
- 64
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Skeptic
- Marital Status
- Private
I'm beginning to suspect that the problem here is lack of familiarity with historicity concerns in general. When I use the term, I'm referring broadly to the question of how much in the New Testament is grounded in history, not merely about whether Jesus existed and if specific events occurred.
And like I said, many times now, what difference does this make?
The OT, NT, Qur'an, other, being corroborated, in regards to the claims of the existence of historical figures, places, and physical events in history, lend no further credibility to the claims of the 'divine', 'supernatural', other.
Again, sure, if the NT historicity is [low], in regards to objective findings, or we come to find out Jesus never existed, then of course, case closed....
But somehow, I doubt this is your position. Call it a hunch.... Thus, I'm granting every conceivable 'given', right off the top... (i.e.) A singular god exists. All that's left is to provide evidence/reason for the one which demonstrates justification in belief. Are you ever planning on doing this?
I'm getting increasingly frustrated
Quite frankly, so am I. We are almost 400 posts deep, and no one is attempting to offer reason why their god is THE god. Instead, we are addressing 'side issues', left and right. If you are going to make a case for Jesus, as the one true and correct God, please start making it. If not, these 'side issues' are of little relevance to this thread... And are growing tiresome....
Whether you like it or not, Paul (the author), asserts that Christ has risen. You, yourself, state that you cannot prove this. I'm going to also go out on a limb, and assume you cannot prove the incarnation either.
Well, did you wish to throw your hat in the ring, and demonstrate to the non-believers, that YHWH is THE God? If not, then, with all due respect, we can be done here, in this thread.
Upvote
0