RE: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1)
November 25, 2014 at 2:45 pm
(This post was last modified: November 25, 2014 at 2:45 pm by Cyberman.)
(November 25, 2014 at 2:04 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Here is just a thought, too. The vast majority of historians, some who aren't friendly to Christianity at all, is willing to accept the sources that I provided as historical evidence that Jesus the man existed...the vast majority, and there are many out there.
The fact that this small group on this forum thinks otherwise is no problem...the fact that Jesus existed is an issue that most historical skeptics regarding Christianity and Christians can actually agree on...if you are not on board...that is your issue.
Here's the thing, though. We are not dealing with "the vast majority of historians", we're dealing with you and your assertions of a "vast majority". The two or three names you've cited have been examined and found sorely wanting, for reasons that have been explained to you at length. These people are not unknown to many of us and their 'work' dissected many times over the years - peer review, if you like.
It's rather like 1 Corinthians 15:6. One single reference to "five hundred brethren" and apologists such as Josh McDowell turn that into "an amazing 50 hours of firsthand testimony".
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
