(November 24, 2014 at 7:01 pm)dyresand Wrote:(November 24, 2014 at 6:51 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Ok well how about this..you do your own research to figure out why...but the fact of the matter is, they do.
Obviously..."evidences" are subjective...but again, the record is credible enough for even non-Christians to believe it. Now whether or not this includes you, I don't really give a damn...because one could play the role of a "super skeptic" about any event or person in history...but if we are all honest with ourselves and willing to put our biases aside for just a second, then this wouldn't happen.
i don't know why your trying to pull historical evidence for jesus when history does not play well with religious and religion as fact.
http://www.bandoli.no/whyjesus.htm
http://www.salon.com/2014/09/01/5_reason...r_existed/
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/america...82671.html
Right, Richard Carrier doesn't believe in the historical Jesus, but he is also included in the minority of historians that DON'T...but the vast majority of them DO...now sure, you can't please everyone, but at the same time, the evidence has most historians convinced.
Plus, Richard Carrier already got his ass handed to him in a debate by a more polished William Lane Craig on the same subject that this thread is titled as...so his objections didn't stand up to scrutiny by the very best that Christians have in apologetics.
