The trinity

[Undeceived]

That's not true at all. Christianity didn't gain momentum at all until around 400 B.C.

http://www2.div.ed.ac.uk/courses/Animate...index.html

More than one thousand, which is reasonable if you place 100 in each of twenty cities. That’s not many in comparison to the whole Roman Empire, but still significant considering people in the first fifty years could check primary sources and validate claims simply by talking to witnesses. According to Acts, Paul spoke to many cities and received converts in each. There is no reason to assume the book is lying about the cities, because archeology and early documents confirm Christian presence. In 1 Corinthians Paul writes of his conversion, which is placed around AD35 ( http://www.bibarch.com/chronology/index.htm ). In the same book, he includes early Christian creeds (ch.15). All this and the greetings in chapter 16 indicate the church is well underway. When people fabricate stories they don’t usually make the details as subtle as Paul does, and they do not address several people as in a personal letter. The Quran has one voice aimed at one audience—followers. Christianity has letters that were never intended to go beyond the churches. Either the letters were written to existing churches in the 1st century or these nuances were manufactured hundreds of years later, inexplicably and not to be accepted by conservatives. If you think the evidence is on your side, don’t appeal to gaps. Excuses like “they must have made it up” are unscientific.

Jesus had to die, but how was his resurrection faked? And who would care if he 'resurrected' unless he was also an influential man? Why would they name him the Messiah unless the title came from his own lips?

All stupid questions unless you can prove that he ever existed in the first place. Can you? Didn't think so.

These are all legitimate questions because their inability to be answered makes a good case for Christianity.

How did Jesus (or his writers) manage to fulfill 300+ old testament prophecies, proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls to have been written prior?

Prove it.

http://www.accordingtothescriptures.org/...ecies.html

How does one add to the Bible without the express consent of every church in the area, and have it copied by hundreds of dedicated scribes?

Oh, I dunno... Someone said to do it or off with their heads?

These include the monks in the Dark Ages who lived alone and without military influence. Christianity does not condone violence. The word "love" appears in the NIV Bible 697 times. Anyone who did what was done to Hypatia were not true Christians, or ought to ask for forgiveness. Christians are no more perfect than anyone else, they just recognize it and accept God's gift of salvation.

Why does the Bible include imperfect people? Why are historically "unreliable" women used as witnesses to the self-proclaimed greatest event in the Bible? How did the idea of salvation by grace originate, when it does not exist in any other religion or philosophy?

Why don't you make up some answers to those inane questions? That would be acceptable amongst your kind, obviously.

The point is that writing these things makes no sense if your goal is to win people over. You should make the religion attractive in every way, and verify what happened with reliable sources. A nonpartisan scholar would look at this and say, "Some of this has to be historical."

Why is there no evidence for the legitimacy of the bible. The content itself is the evidence against it.

Enlighten me.

---

Your rebuttal is textbook apologetics-and has no sense.

God doesn't make sense. If we could understand His nature He would be simpler than us and therefore could not have created us. Ask a watch to explain its watchmaker.