Stump the Christian?

[Jenny A]

Asked and answered:

Well, so much for that proof. You've already inserted all the wiggle room you would need to avoid admission of God's existence.

I did mention the idea that Jesus might demonstrate resurrection repeatedly for the disbelieving.  Why not?  If he's god, he gave us the brains to demand that level of proof.  No need for the pain of crucifixion.  Just a living man demonstrably dead getting up and going about living over and over until the scientists are satisfied would do just fine.

That runs into theological problems...and ironically, one that Catholics get from misguided Protestants all the time. The mass is a sacrifice, but it is a re-presentation of the one sacrifice of Jesus and not a re-sacrificing of Him at every mass.

Your proposal sounds like Jesus would die again and again and again...which defeats the purpose of the one sacrifice of Christ which put an end to the sacrifices offered in the Temple day after day, year after year.

Anything less is much to small for the enormity of the claim.

Anything this big strikes me as being coercive.

Coercive?  How?  I'm merely pointing out the reality of the situation.  You claim a god that defies everything we know about the way the world works.  You claim he's very interested in the world, but provide no proof of his having any affect on the world.  It is an extraordinary claim.  You claim the being is extraordinary, so much so that there's only one and that one is all powerful. 

Yet the proof offered is essentially nothing. 

You yourself don't consider Allah in the same light or Vishnu.  But they are extraordiary claims offering similar evidence.  Why not?  Because you too, except in this one case, demand proof.   I see no reason to make an exception for this one case.