(September 12, 2017 at 9:22 am)SteveII Wrote:(September 12, 2017 at 8:59 am)TheBeardedDude Wrote: I never did get an answer from SteveII on this post, so I'll ask it again:
Christians, are you serious? Do you think there is evidence to consider outside Saul of Tarsus' head?
Get it yet?
My question was in regard to what actually counts as evidence that claims are true, as opposed to evidence of what people believe. If Joseph Smith's "evidence" doesn't convince you of Mormonism, why in the world does Saul of Tarsus' "evidence" convince you of the validity of Christian claims?
You really don't have a firm grasp on the facts of which you seem so confident.
Regarding the general interpreting of evidence as to who Jesus might really be (the crux of Christianity)? There is all kinds of evidence to weigh.
- Documentary (both actual and inferred--by careful textual examination). There has been no other set of writings so thoroughly investigated in the history of the world.
- The presence of churches, the growth, the persecution, and the occasional mention in surviving secular works.
- The characters, their actions, character, stated goals, meaning of their words, and eventual circumstances
- Jesus' own claims (explicit, implicit, connections to the OT--some of which the disciples may have never known).
- The actual message: how it seems to fit the human condition, resonate with people, and somehow it does not contradict the OT--which would have required a very sophisticated mind to have navigated that. I read recently that over a period of 50 years, at least nine authors wrote 27 books containing more than 55 major doctrines and 180 doctrinal concepts centered on one figure – Jesus Christ.
- Paul and his writings on application and affirmation of the major claims--done before the Gospels were independently written.
- This one can't be stressed enough: the unlikelihood of alternate theories to explain the facts. I think it is obvious people believed from day one when Jesus was still walking around. I have never heard an alternate theory which could account for most or all of the concrete and circumstantial evidence we have. If you think that having an alternate theory on one or two will make your case, it will not--these are a package deal. Address them all or or your objections are meaningless.
You could write books on any one of the points above (and people do). The point is, it is not as simple as saying "there is no evidence" There are layers upon layers of evidence that one person or another will find somewhere between uninteresting to compelling.
Once again (but I doubt it will get through), your evidence supports the belief of christianity, but not the reality of the claims in the bible. No evidence of miracles, the supernatural, etc. except rewritten and edited claims. And a nice "out" you left yourself: "Address them all or your objections are meaningless". The evidence you list is meaningless, whether addressed to your liking or not.meaningless
"The last superstition of the human mind is the superstition that religion in itself is a good thing." - Samuel Porter Putnam
