Resurrecting the historical Jesus

[John Helpher]

Hi all. When it comes to belief in God, people always seem to want evidence. I don't say this is a bad thing, though I think sometimes the demand for evidence can, itself, become a distraction, much like when the people asked for "a sign" from Jesus instead of just listening to his teachings. However, I think there are times when a search for evidence can be productive, and I think that is the case with the Bible.

A lot of confusion happens regarding the Bible, even among professing Christians, where they start to view it as a kind of Holy relic worthy of worship in itself rather than a collection of documents, testimonies, and letters all combined into a single volume. This idea that the Bible is an unquestionable holy book, complete, perfect, and infallible, as opposed to a historical accounting of events regarding the creators interaction with humanity, causes both sides (believers and non-believes) to either exaggerate or dismiss the information contained in the book. Neither extreme is productive so I'd like to share a video which helped me get a better handle on finding a balance between the two, and I'd like to hear what others think. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

 

[Tolworth John]

Dialog: Experiences of the Risen Jesus

If you want evidence for Jesus then one he o see what historians believe.
The link above is to probably the best historical review of what historians believe.