| DaRev said: Sorry I did miss that post, too many to respond to really, I'm a busy man On this top, as you can see
Anyways: 1) 1) First off the source or writer is God – but to discern that you’re going to have to use a bit more than your brain. Now, many people contributed to the bible yes, but that is a good thing, because Jesus got more than one person to back up his claims and say yes, we saw him perform miracles. If Jesus himself ‘wrote’ about himself, how believable would that be? You can trust the Bible, just like you might trust any account that there was a man called Alexander the Great – or you don’t believe he lived either? 2) 2) Harry Potter as famous as he is, would never do what Jesus did, i.e. start a mass revolution of believers in one God, which has lasted generations - he even got you here debating him. That my friend IS a miracle if you ever need one. Tell Harry Potter do that (or do you believe HP is real). See one thing is true, that if Jesus wasn’t real, he would have already been disproven many generations ago. But he is real, so you’re stuck with him. 3) 3) Good, but he did more than just preach a good message. Never heard of Russel's teapot, but I disagree with his statement as you posted it. Anyways, don’t try to disprove Christianity, you’ll go mad, cause it’s impossible to disprove Christinity. Christianity doesn’t necessarily want to get into an argument of proof with anyone. It simply presents the existance of God and you either accept it or not. The problem comes sometimes when people claim, like many are doing in here, that Christianity as it presents itself, is a fairytale. Well, if it is, then prove it. |
Well, I can't blame you for the underlined 
1) Still, the people writing it could be lying, just like how there are people messing with wikipedia articles. History can be re-written and/or fabricated, but present can't. Thus, when it comes to the miracles that Jesus supposedly performed, there scientifically is no reason to believe that he actually did perform these miracles. No one can perform miracles nowadays, so why would anyone have been able to do it thousands of years ago? It is physically impossible now, and physics were most likely the very same back then as they are now. For that reason, the Bible, as a source, cannot be trusted. The logic in this source is missing. And claims of a supernatural being cannot be compared to claims of a ruler (Alexander the great). Several discoveries indicates that he indeed did exist and conquered several countries, just like how several discoveries indicates that Jesus indeed did exist. No discoveries other than a book made by unknown authors indicate that Jesus could perform miracles though.
2. "See one thing is true, that if Jesus wasn’t real, he would have already been disproven many generations ago. But he is real, so you’re stuck with him."
See one thing is true, that if Santa Claus wasn't real, he would have already been disproven many generations ago. But he is real, so you're stuck with him.
^(I used that sentence in order to empathize the obvious flaw in your reasoning.)
3. You can't disprove ghosts either. Nor can you disprove that in a parallell universe there is a being who created God. This is not about the lack of evidence against Jesus as a miracle-performing man, but the lack of evidence supporting those miracles.
