The God of Convenience

[Lek]

If all these supposed miracle workers either keep their miracles isolated from the scientific testing or objective verification that would prove them, or actively resist that same testing and verification, then what other choice do I have, but to dismiss them? Assertions made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, and when it comes to miracle claims, they are always asserted without evidence. That's more than a little suspicious.

Here's a very short article about the catholic church's process for verifying miracles. As you will read, objective testing is done[/quote] by scientists and medical experts.

http://sciencenordic.com/pope%E2%80%99s-...y-miracles

But what you can't do, Lek, is accuse us of just instant dismissal of these miracles when the first thing that comes to my mind, personally, when you present those claims is "what objective evidence or testing has been done?" It's not my problem that the answer is "none," and that I won't accept the simple claim of a miracle as proof of it, but you surely cannot lob these accusations of instant dismissals when what I immediately ask for is an interrogation and testing of the claim beyond what you yourself want.

No objective testing of Jesus' miracles was accomplished at the time. Nor were Jesus or his followers concerned about that. There were so called miracle workers all over the place in the area at the time. Jesus was just a lower class wandering preacher as far as the Roman and Jewish officials were concerned. Just as the government today doesn't go out and investigate miracles, even though the Vatican does, I'm sure that the Roman and Jewish officials didn't either. I contend that most unbelievers would just dismiss them in their minds, the same as they do today.

---

Well, there was the school he founded, the Academy, which was a prominent center for education for 800 years, that has been excavated.

This is the same kind of archaeological evidence we have for Jesus. We have the remains of the temple where Jesus is said to have taught, but that doesn't prove his existence or even that he taught there, but him[/quote] puts it in a real setting.

Perhaps I spoke in haste. Apart from Plato's own writings and his student Aristotle, I could not find any sources that could be considered from Plato's time. Information about what Plato's contemporaries thought about him come to us through later writers.

The same type of evidence that we have for Jesus.

So, because the earliest copies of his works are much later, you think that casts doubt on... What exactly? It wouldn't matter if we had Paul's letters written in his own hand... that is evidence of nothing.

If we had the original manuscripts of Paul's letters, and could date them to the time of Paul's life, then we would be more likely to assume that they were actually written by the apostle Paul, rather than someone claiming to be him. The same for the gospels. The more the originals are copied and the further in time they are from the originals, the more chance there is of mistakes in copying or intentional changes. You've got a period of about 1,300 years from from the original writings of any manuscripts from Plato and less than 100 years for the oldest manuscript from the new testament.