(November 30, 2012 at 8:53 pm)The truth Wrote: My argument is on the bases of Jesus Christ being a true historical figure. If Jesus Christ existed than it is most likely that history is correct of it's assumptions. This is no illusion, the Association Of British Humanist reports that "almost all scholars believe that Jesus existed in the first century CE in Palestine" ( http://www.humanism.org.uk/jesus.asp ). Jesus is the bed rock of Christianity. As i have stated before If there is historical evidence of his existence then the rest could also be true.
Even if we agree that a historical Jesus did exist, so what?
You can't smuggle supernatural claims on the back of some historical accuracies.
If so, that leads you down the road of accepting that Greek gods existed because the Iliad contains historical accuracies.
The existence of a historical Jesus offers ZERO evidence that any of his supernatural claims are true.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
