It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

OLAADEGBU:
It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

Go and critic prophet Muhammad just like that on the Islamic section. Don't be a coward who only lashes out at Christians because they are generally nonviolent.

Please mind your Language!!!
Bible Words are specially coded around Jesus Christ to present Him as The Righteous, The Faith, The Hope, God of Peace and God In Love.
As The Faith, you can only FORGET to believe Him. You can never to hate The Faith. They don't sync.
The Action words you use for your 6 points are just DENY AND REJECT. They mean FORGET AND ABADON The Faith which is Believe and The Hope which is Trust.
Deny & Reject meaning Forget & Abandon are parallel to Faith & Hope meaning Believe & Trust. They can never meet.

menstrualpad:

Go and critic prophet Muhammad just like that on the Islamic section. Don't be a coward who only lashes out at Christians because they are generally nonviolent.

Relax Sister of God
I assure you He is one of us also

@op,don't you know that it also take faith for some people to deny quranic claims to go for confusing and contradictory claims of Jesus identity in the bible?it also takes faith for some people to deny corroborating evidences,their experience and doubt for seemingly untrue dogma?
ceteris paribus.

tundexweb:
@op,don't you know that it also take faith for some people to deny quranic claims to go for confusing and contradictory claims of Jesus identity in the bible?it also takes faith for some people to deny corroborating evidences,their experience and doubt for seemingly untrue dogma?
ceteris paribus.

so true

Ok I do not find the historical accounts of all religions equally compelling. I don't know how anyone could unless they really never explored them.
Ah, Christianity is true because the historical account of it is so compelling. This is utter nonsense. [But I think nonsense that oladegbu will never see--because he doesn't want to see it.]
As but one example (among many): the historical account of Islam is much, MUCH MORE compelling. In this regard, history only requires one guy, alone in a cave, talking to God. And, boom, we have this amazing book, the Koran, to prove that it actually happened. No historical problems there.
Unlike Christianity
Christianity requires you to believe that Jesus Christ was actually God on Earth (huh? Oh, he kept the God part mostly hidden--WTF?), that Jesus was bodily resurrected on Earth, that this resurrected man actually walked around (huh? what did he eat? where did he sleep? sometimes he was recognized, sometimes he wasn't--WTF?), that a bunch of other people were also resurrected (the "zombies" ) --and yet no resurrection (either Jesus or the Zombies) was recorded by any historians at the time or subsequently.
If Jesus (and a whole bunch of other people) were actually, literally, resurrected don't you think the Roman authorities/Jewish authorities would have LOST THEIR SH-T? Holy cow. Talk about a way to convert a lot of people.
Instead, we get these weird accounts of Jesus only appearing in hiding, or only to the disciples, or appearing as a vision. Frankly, the whole thing reads like something that did not really happen. Sure I suppose it is theoretically possible Jesus wanted to keep his resurrection quiet--but that makes no sense if you think about it for half a minute. Rather, the most logical conclusion is that it didn't really happen. It sounds like an urban legend (and a lot of people believe urban legends, too).

ergo, it takes no faith at all to deny the divinity of Jesus, that is if he existed at all

@hopefulLandlord,i concur with ur points.i don't know why some people see only what they want to see,and only read what give credence to their beliefs but neglect reading what put their beliefs under scrutiny and question,maybe i should say they don't want their beliefs shaking and i will call this insecurity because,if really want to know or affirm that your religion or belief is true,try reading conflicting,and sincere views against it.For christians,u can start from reading bart ehrman books.

menstrualpad:

Go and critic prophet Muhammad just like that on the Islamic section. Don't be a coward who only lashes out at Christians because they are generally nonviolent.

Why bringing Muhammad into this? or is it the only religion you know apart from christianity? or its just hatre you have to them? you people are just blind

tundexweb:
@hopefulLandlord,i concur with ur points.i don't know why some people see only what they want to see,and only read what give credence to their beliefs but neglect reading what put their beliefs under scrutiny and question,maybe i should say they don't want their beliefs shaking and i will call this insecurity because,if really want to know or affirm that your religion or belief is true,try reading conflicting,and sincere views against it.For christians,u can start from reading bart ehrman books.

There are people TO THIS DAY that believe Elvis is still alive and working at various odd jobs around the US. I have met people that are sure he was pumping gas, serving burgers, or driving cab. Now THAT is immortality.

While there are apologists and some Christians who may have looked into things, the vast majority of Christians I ever knew, met, or engaged with have had almost no interest in whether their beliefs are true, and whether any claims against Christianity are legitimate. I really can't see it being much different in the ancient world. Would 1st century Christians in Rome or Antioch have really cared if there was a story that there was a Roman solider or Jewish farmer in Jerusalem who had proof Jesus was still in a tomb, or that 5 disciples had denied the resurrection? I doubt it.
Most Mormons dont know or care about its troubled past, and it's all right there, easily accessible via newspapers, internet, and still existing govt records. Or, they may know, but uncritically accept the elder's pablum answers

Lmao.who is Elvis really?

tundexweb:
Lmao.who is Elvis really?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley

hopefulLandlord:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley

The link is not opening on my browser,i will try using google.

6 Reasons Why It Takes Faith To Deny Jesus
By James Bishop | To deny Jesus is to deny the best explanation for many facts surrounding his ministry and his resurrection. It requires faith in unlikely and weaker explanations in order to avoid the conclusion that Jesus really was the Son of God and rose from the dead.
Here are 6 main reasons why it takes an active faith to deny Jesus Christ.
1. We would need to reject that Jesus was a miracle worker, which is well attested in ancient sources.
This needs to be rejected even though the evidence is quite solid. It’s attested to in all levels of strata from pre-New Testament sources Q, L, M, pre-Mark, Pre-John Signs gospel, in our New Testament sources Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, and the Pauline epistles, as well as in our extra-biblical author Josephus Flavius.
A creed found in the Pauline epistle 1 Corinthians 15 houses a tradition that goes back to within five years of Jesus’ death of which itself contains the miracle of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. This creed records implies the empty tomb, and Jesus’ resurrection appearances to the disciples, James and also Paul.
Jesus’ miracle status is what best explains the crowds that were attracted to him, as Marcus Borg explains: “crowds flocked to him because of his reputation as a healer”
In fact, if we were to reject the miracle workings of Jesus then we may as well reject everything else we know about him. That is how deeply embedded his miracle status is in the evidence. One could argue that the only reason this is rejected is because of an a priori antisupernatural bias, and mostly not on historical, evidential grounds.
“The earliest traditions about Jesus include accounts of his miracle working. They are intertwined with the earliest sayings traditions. Additionally, the attestations of Jesus’ miracles are uniquely diverse and numerous.” -Christopher Price
“Most historical Jesus scholars today, regardless of their personal theological orientation, do accept that Jesus drew crowds who believed that he performed cures and exorcisms.” -Craig Keener
“It is no longer seriously contested that miracles played a role in Jesus’ ministry.” -Craig Evans
Here is an article containing 58 scholar quotes on the miracle working of Jesus. Virtually all scholars agree Jesus performed what people believed to be miracles. To deny the deity of Jesus, we must believe thousands of people were hallucinating, that people were putting on an act and were part of the illusions, and that Jesus was a liar.
2. We would need to reject the fact that Jesus’ resurrection is by far the best explanation
…of the minimal facts, namely his empty tomb, post-mortem appearances to skeptics and followers, and 500 others alike, and their willingness to die and suffer for his sake. These are referred to as “minimal facts” because they are accepted by the vast majority of experts in the fields of expertise.
The resurrection theory thoroughly explains all the minimal facts listed above, whereas other naturalistic theories such as the wrong tomb theory, swoon theory, hallucination theory, stolen body theory all fail to explain two or more of the four facts. This would make Jesus’ resurrection one of the best, if not the most, well attested miracle of history.
Here is an article going through all the evidence for the empty tomb, the conversion of Paul and James, and the post-mortem appearances of Jesus to the disciples and unbelievers. We need an explanation that can account all of these facts sufficiently, and the resurrection hypothesis (adopted by the eyewitnesses themselves) is the best explanation for these historical facts.
3. We would need to deny that the truthfulness of the anti-Christian persecutor Paul
who murdered many early Christians, including Stephen as detailed in Acts, who converted to Christianity after he witnessed the risen Christ. We would have to believe that he was mistaken. But what could produce such as drastic change in this man who was a staunch anti-Christian Pharisee who wanted nothing more to destroy the early Christian movement?
At minimum we must posit that he really did
believe he witnessed the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus where he was going to squelch any presence of Christians there. This was not some isolated experience for Paul but was witnessed by others on the road with him who also heard the voice but could not see what Paul saw (Acts 9:4). This very same Paul suffered for the cause of Jesus, and was later killed for it.
“Most striking perhaps is that fact that Jesus appeared to Paul. Paul hated Christians and was hell-bent on destroying the church. What transformed him from a persecutor of Christians to a pastor, who was willing to endure extraordinary hardship to proclaim the Gospel? Paul claimed it was the resurrection.” -Christ Price
4. We would need to reject the testimony of Jesus’ own brother James
James and Jesus’ family seemingly rejected him as a mad man because of his teachings. In Mark 3:21 they tell us that “He has lost His senses.” However, after the death of Jesus he appears to James (1 Corinthians 15:7) of who then ends up leading the early church. This leads to James’ death via stoning.
At minimum we must conclude that he really
believed Jesus appeared to him of which he willingly suffered, and then died for. This fact needs to be accounted for, and the resurrection would account for it best. Here is an article going through the radical conversion of James.
5. We would need to reject the truthfulness of the dramatic change in Jesus’ disciples who were Jews themselves.
It is quite extraordinary that an entire group of staunch Jews, as the earliest followers of Jesus were (as well as Paul and James), would make up such a shameful thing as a crucified and risen Messiah if it never actually occurred and convinced them. Jews had an entirely different concept of who the Messiah would be.
This Messiah would be triumphant, would overthrow the shackles of Roman rule and oppression, and would rule with authority. However, this Messiah came in the form of Jesus, a backwater peasant of little education, and nothing more than a poor carpenter. This Jesus would eventually die on a cross – according to Judaism this was the ultimate form of disapproval from God (hence why Paul, prior to his conversion, persecuted the Christians that were claiming this since it was entirely blasphemous to Jewish ears).
The apostle Paul tells us that “ cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree,” (Gal 3:13) and that “we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.” (1 Cor.1:21-22) One would need to apply much faith to posit that such a thought of a crucified Messiah would manifest from 1st century Judaism.
“That the centre and climax of the story of Jesus would be based on his shameful execution and death makes no sense if it evolved out of Jewish expectations about the Messiah, since they contained nothing about any such idea.” –Tim O’Niell
Thus at minimum we must conclude that the
post-mortem appearances of Jesus to his disciples, and to the skeptics Paul and James really convinced them. These appearances happened on multiple occasions, were physical in nature (Thomas touching Jesus, Jesus eating with the disciples etc.), and experienced in groups. This needs an explanation.
“They believed this, they lived it, and they died for it.” -E.P Sanders
6. We would need to believe that Jesus was a madman
The truth is that Jesus never left any other options open for us, as the former atheist turned Christian C.S. Lewis once succinctly remarked:
“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say.
A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice.
Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to” .
What we do have to accept if we reject Jesus’ deity is that he was some lunatic. Could that same lunatic so influence pious Jews around him to follow him, and some of them to embrace Christianity in place of their Judaism?
Could all the miraculous and inspiring things Jesus did be done in just three years if he was a mad? Would such a lunatic cause such a raucous among the Jewish religious establishment that would inevitably end up with Jesus being pinned to a cross? To accept this as an explanation would stretch credulity.
Conclusion
I think we have sketched out a picture of what inevitably needs to happen if we would reject Jesus’ self claims and divinity. This list is not exhaustive, but suffices for our purposes. We would need to reject his miracle worker status and this would probably result from an antisupernatural bias.
We would need to reject the resurrection hypothesis a priori even though it best explains the minimal facts. We’d need to reject the obvious truthfulness of the testimonies of Paul and James even though they were both against Jesus as the start. Paul would even murder Christians before becoming one himself after Jesus had appeared to him.
Both Paul and James were martyred for their faith in Jesus. We’d need to reject the testimonies of the disciples, and then posit that such an unlikely notion as a crucified messiah would spring forth out of 1 century Jewish thought.
We’d also need to reject their willingness to suffer for the cause of Jesus as for a lie, or a delusion. Lastly, we’d need to deduce that Jesus was a liar and a lunatic.

Wilgrea7:
6 Reasons Why It Takes Faith To Deny Jesus
By James Bishop | To deny Jesus is to deny the best explanation for many facts surrounding his ministry and his resurrection. It requires faith in unlikely and weaker explanations in order to avoid the conclusion that Jesus really was the Son of God and rose from the dead.
Here are 6 main reasons why it takes an active faith to deny Jesus Christ.
1. We would need to reject that Jesus was a miracle worker, which is well attested in ancient sources.
This needs to be rejected even though the evidence is quite solid. It’s attested to in all levels of strata from pre-New Testament sources Q, L, M, pre-Mark, Pre-John Signs gospel, in our New Testament sources Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, and the Pauline epistles, as well as in our extra-biblical author Josephus Flavius.
A creed found in the Pauline epistle 1 Corinthians 15 houses a tradition that goes back to within five years of Jesus’ death of which itself contains the miracle of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. This creed records implies the empty tomb, and Jesus’ resurrection appearances to the disciples, James and also Paul.
Jesus’ miracle status is what best explains the crowds that were attracted to him, as Marcus Borg explains: “crowds flocked to him because of his reputation as a healer”
In fact, if we were to reject the miracle workings of Jesus then we may as well reject everything else we know about him. That is how deeply embedded his miracle status is in the evidence. One could argue that the only reason this is rejected is because of an a priori antisupernatural bias, and mostly not on historical, evidential grounds.
“The earliest traditions about Jesus include accounts of his miracle working. They are intertwined with the earliest sayings traditions. Additionally, the attestations of Jesus’ miracles are uniquely diverse and numerous.” -Christopher Price
“Most historical Jesus scholars today, regardless of their personal theological orientation, do accept that Jesus drew crowds who believed that he performed cures and exorcisms.” -Craig Keener
“It is no longer seriously contested that miracles played a role in Jesus’ ministry.” -Craig Evans
Here is an article containing 58 scholar quotes on the miracle working of Jesus. Virtually all scholars agree Jesus performed what people believed to be miracles. To deny the deity of Jesus, we must believe thousands of people were hallucinating, that people were putting on an act and were part of the illusions, and that Jesus was a liar.

its pretty nice how you jump steps to arrive at a conclusion.. firstly.. the source of your “proof" are the biblical narratives.. did you know there were hundreds of narratives? hundreds that described the life of Jesus.. the ones that were kept are the ones that portray miracles etc.. i don't deny the existence of Jesus... nor some miracles he performed.. but how did you jump from “miracle worker" to saviour of the world and co-equal with God? throughout the history of Judaism, their prophets were able to perform miracles too.. moses and the red sea.. Elijah and baal.. etc.. so it takes more than the claim of a miracle to say that someone who came to a village about 2000 years ago and died died for the world and is God in the flesh etc etc.. that's too wide a leap

2. We would need to reject the fact that Jesus’ resurrection is by far the best explanation
…of the minimal facts, namely his empty tomb, post-mortem appearances to skeptics and followers, and 500 others alike, and their willingness to die and suffer for his sake. These are referred to as “minimal facts” because they are accepted by the vast majority of experts in the fields of expertise.
The resurrection theory thoroughly explains all the minimal facts listed above, whereas other naturalistic theories such as the wrong tomb theory, swoon theory, hallucination theory, stolen body theory all fail to explain two or more of the four facts. This would make Jesus’ resurrection one of the best, if not the most, well attested miracle of history.
Here is an article going through all the evidence for the empty tomb, the conversion of Paul and James, and the post-mortem appearances of Jesus to the disciples and unbelievers. We need an explanation that can account all of these facts sufficiently, and the resurrection hypothesis (adopted by the eyewitnesses themselves) is the best explanation for these historical facts.

sorry.. but the tomb can't be used here.. why? because there are about 3 tombs that people claim Jesus was buried.. except you're saying he relocated from day to day.. the only evidence for a resurrection is from the biblical narratives.. there are also other contrary narratives.. also, even accepting the view(for the sake of the argument) that he resurrected.. how does that prove the big leap of son of God coequal saviour etc.. other religious figures have been believed to resurrect.. you are at liberty to check their historical accuracy and compare them with yours

3. We would need to deny that the truthfulness of the anti-Christian persecutor Paul
who murdered many early Christians, including Stephen as detailed in Acts, who converted to Christianity after he witnessed the risen Christ. We would have to believe that he was mistaken. But what could produce such as drastic change in this man who was a staunch anti-Christian Pharisee who wanted nothing more to destroy the early Christian movement?
At minimum we must posit that he really did
believe he witnessed the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus where he was going to squelch any presence of Christians there. This was not some isolated experience for Paul but was witnessed by others on the road with him who also heard the voice but could not see what Paul saw (Acts 9:4). This very same Paul suffered for the cause of Jesus, and was later killed for it.
“Most striking perhaps is that fact that Jesus appeared to Paul. Paul hated Christians and was hell-bent on destroying the church. What transformed him from a persecutor of Christians to a pastor, who was willing to endure extraordinary hardship to proclaim the Gospel? Paul claimed it was the resurrection.” -Christ Price

this is funny.. Paul?? paul that is believed to be a deceiver by some sects of Christians.. paul.. of all things.. you're taking acts and Paul's own letters as the evidence of a kind hearted Paul.. I'm sorry.. you're far from it.. also.. there were many beliefs surrounding the life of Christ.. paul just held one of them

4. We would need to reject the testimony of Jesus’ own brother James
James and Jesus’ family seemingly rejected him as a mad man because of his teachings. In Mark 3:21 they tell us that “He has lost His senses.” However, after the death of Jesus he appears to James (1 Corinthians 15:7) of who then ends up leading the early church. This leads to James’ death via stoning.
At minimum we must conclude that he really
believed Jesus appeared to him of which he willingly suffered, and then died for. This fact needs to be accounted for, and the resurrection would account for it best. Here is an article going through the radical conversion of James.

its better to use historical narratives than biblical ones.. because there are other narratives opposing biblical ones which can be used to discredit what you just wrote

I'll drop others soon

cc: OLAADEGBU

Greetings .....
We have Christian WhatsApp group for single brothers n singles...where will come together to pray study the word of God, co unsel one another on wat God wants in a Godly relationship and those who want to find their spouse can find a Godly spouse...if u are interested pls send a WhatsApp message to Daniel 08038261313 to book an interview

I say this wholemouthedly and wholeheartedly

There is not
There can't
There will never be a reasonable Christian

Samething goes for the Muslims and the Jews
Once you begin to use your brain judiciously, you will realize a whole lot of things.

Among the biggest misrepresentation the masses believe is the supposed separation between the religions and the state

Let me also state this
There has never been any religious movement without a political backing
And also has there never been any political movement without any religious affiliation attached.

All religions have one end
"To control"

In the part of Africans, it was imposed upon then by invaders.
If you would just look into your history, you wouldn't be talking about religions in the first place.
Nothing that ever came into Africa did the African any good.

When are we as a people gonna realize this?
Africa should find indigenous means of solving its own unique problems.

Food for thought:
In the 15th century the Europeans, specifically the Portuguese and Spaniards were trading with the Benin Empire.
Why didn't they bring Christianity then?
Why did it take another 300-400 years before they decided to bring christianity?
Why did the first slave ship had to be named Jesus?
Did you know it was the catholic church that backed the first slaves taken from Spain which was previously known as Iberia to the virgin islands?

Why did Christianity and the missionaries come before the Colonialists and slave masters?
It was simply because the missionaries were sent to prepare the minds of the Africans for what was to come that it was the will of god plan for the Europeans to colonize the Africans.
Even if its a prophecy of some sort let's look at the killings attached with the emergence of the Europeans in Africa and the world.

Monomotapa known today as south Africa
20 million Africans died under Cecil rhodes
Congo under King Leopold of Belgium
40 million Africans died
The island of Tasmania in Australia was wiped out of every single inhabitant
Millions of people died.
The New world supposedly discovered by Christopher Columbus was inhabited by Africans and other coloured people.
95% of the total population was totally wiped out
With guns,diseases and starvation.

Think of these people and wonder what story they would have to tell wherever they are
And you a descendant,
WHAT SAY YOU?





The bible is a collection of various historical mythological documents, rephrased, re formated, rewritten to suit the manipulators purpose.

Do people even wonder at all?

menstrualpad:


Go and critic prophet Muhammad just like that on the Islamic section. Don't be a coward who only lashes out at Christians because they are generally nonviolent.

Who is lashing out against Christians and what is wrong with constructive criticisms?

OLAADEGBU:


Who is lashing out against Christians and what is wrong with constructive criticisms?

Bash prophet Muhammad too. Don't be a weakling too

menstrualpad:


Bash prophet Muhammad too. Don't be a weakling too

Are you new in this section?

Below are few of the threads you will like to peruse:

https://www.nairaland.com/2342685/prophet-how-islam-created#34179821

https://www.nairaland.com/3718094/how-witness-muslim#55181646

https://www.nairaland.com/4029079/satan-delivered-islam-muhammad-following#60071266

https://www.nairaland.com/4008987/relationship-between-muhammad-satan#59775791

https://www.nairaland.com/2419874/comparison-between-jesus-muhammad#35373742

https://www.nairaland.com/4013715/chronology-religion-peace#59841496

https://www.nairaland.com/4016468/islamic-dilemma#59887926

https://www.nairaland.com/4047486/september-11-day-infamy-throughout#60352458

https://www.nairaland.com/1876086/arab-secular-woman-speaking-truth

https://www.nairaland.com/3251257/dramatic-construction-muslims-response-reading#47919171

https://www.nairaland.com/3649672/allah-what-origin-belief-allah#54041395

https://www.nairaland.com/2587564/10-things-muslims-dont-want#37836660

https://www.nairaland.com/3863695/richard-dawkins-reveals-why-islam#57552144

https://www.nairaland.com/3775716/6-big-reasons-why-islam#56141886

https://www.nairaland.com/3965454/quran-affirms-gospels-then-it#59123948

orisa37:


Please mind your Language!!!
Bible Words are specially coded around Jesus Christ to present Him as The Righteous, The Faith, The Hope, God of Peace and God In Love.
As The Faith, you can only FORGET to believe Him. You can never to hate The Faith. They don't sync.
The Action words you use for your 6 points are just DENY AND REJECT. They mean FORGET AND ABADON The Faith which is Believe and The Hope which is Trust.
Deny & Reject meaning Forget & Abandon are parallel to Faith & Hope meaning Believe & Trust. They can never meet.

Can you break down your grammar up there as it is too complicated for dummies like us?

Neither U nor I is a Dummy to The Lord.
Bible words are not ordinary English Grammar Words.
Most if not all of them are Sprits.
The Good and The Bad Words are parallel in The Eyes of The Lord and can not be unequally yoked together.
So please use The Bible Word relevantly to command appropriate Responses.

menstrualpad:

Go and critic prophet Muhammad just like that on the Islamic section. Don't be a coward who only lashes out at Christians because they are generally nonviolent.

Your moniker eh. He is not critiquing Christians. Follow him and you'd understand him.

orisa37:


Neither U nor I is a Dummy to The Lord.
Bible words are not ordinary English Grammar Words.
Most if not all of them are Sprits.
The Good and The Bad Words are parallel in The Eyes of The Lord and can not be unequally yoked together.
So please use The Bible Word relevantly to command appropriate Responses.

Have you read the link in the OP?

I shall be back please.

OLAADEGBU:


It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

1. We would need to reject that Jesus was a miracle worker, which is well attested in ancient sources.

This needs to be rejected even though the evidence is quite solid. It's attested to in all levels of strata from pre-New Testament sources Q, L, M, pre-Mark, Pre-John Signs gospel, in our New Testament sources Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, and the Pauline epistles, as well as in our extra-biblical author Josephus Flavius.

A creed found in the Pauline epistle 1 Corinthians 15 houses a tradition that goes back to within five years of Jesus' death of which itself contains the miracle of Jesus' resurrection from the dead. This creed records implies the empty tomb, and Jesus' resurrection appearances to the disciples, James and also Paul.

Jesus' miracle status is what best explains the crowds that were attracted to him, as Marcus Borg explains: "crowds flocked to him because of his reputation as a healer" (1)

In fact, if we were to reject the miracle workings of Jesus then we may as well reject everything else we know about him. That is how deeply embedded his miracle status is in the evidence. One could argue that the only reason this is rejected is because of an a priori antisupernatural bias, and mostly not on historical, evidential grounds.

"ON HISTORICAL GROUNDS IT IS VIRTUALLY INDISPUTABLE THAT JESUS WAS A HEALER AND EXORCIST." -MARCUS BORG (2).

"The earliest traditions about Jesus include accounts of his miracle working. They are intertwined with the earliest sayings traditions.

Additionally, the attestations of Jesus’ miracles are uniquely diverse and numerous.” -Christopher Price (3)

"Most historical Jesus scholars today, regardless of their personal theological orientation, do accept that Jesus drew crowds who believed that he performed cures and exorcisms." -Craig Keener (4)

"It is no longer seriously contested that miracles played a role in Jesus' ministry." -Craig Evans (5)

Here is an article containing 58 scholar quotes on the miracle working of Jesus. Virtually all scholars agree Jesus performed what people believed to be miracles. To deny the deity of Jesus, we must believe thousands of people were hallucinating, that people were putting on an act and were part of the illusions, and that Jesus was a liar.

OLAADEGBU:


It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have to say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

2. We would need to reject the fact that Jesus' resurrection is by far the best explanation

…of the minimal facts, namely his empty tomb, post-mortem appearances to skeptics and followers, and 500 others alike, and their willingness to die and suffer for his sake. These are referred to as "minimal facts"

The resurrection theory thoroughly explains all the minimal facts listed above, whereas other naturalistic theories such as the wrong tomb theory, swoon theory, hallucination theory, stolen body theory all fail to explain two or more of the four facts. This would make Jesus' resurrection one of the best, if not the most, well-attested miracle of history.

Here is an article going through all the evidence for the empty tomb, the conversion of Paul and James, and the post-mortem appearances of Jesus to the disciples and unbelievers. We need an explanation that can account all of these facts sufficiently, and the resurrection hypothesis (adopted by the eyewitnesses themselves) is the best explanation for these historical facts.

"MOREOVER, THERE IS NO NATURALISTIC THEORY PROPOSED AS AN EXPLANATION OF THESE THREE FACTS WHICH HAS GARNERED THE ALLEGIANCE OF A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF SCHOLARS." -WILLIAM CRAIG ⁽⁶⁾

OLAADEGBU:


It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

3. We would need to deny that the truthfulness of the anti-Christian persecutor Paul

who murdered many early Christians, including Stephen as detailed in Acts, who converted to Christianity after he witnessed the risen Christ. We would have to believe that he was mistaken. But what could produce such as drastic change in this man who was a staunch anti-Christian Pharisee who wanted nothing more to destroy the early Christian movement?

At minimum we must posit that he really did believe he witnessed the risen Jesus on the road to Damascus where he was going to squelch any presence of Christians there. This was not some isolated experience for Paul but was witnessed by others on the road with him who also heard the voice but could not see what Paul saw (Acts 9:4). This very same Paul suffered for the cause of Jesus and was later killed for it.

"Most striking perhaps is that fact that Jesus appeared to Paul. Paul hated Christians and was hell-bent on destroying the church. What transformed him from a persecutor of Christians to a pastor, who was willing to endure extraordinary hardship to proclaim the Gospel? Paul claimed it was the resurrection." -Christ Price ⁽⁷⁾

OLAADEGBU:


It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

4. We would need to reject the testimony of Jesus' own brother James

James and Jesus' family seemingly rejected him as a mad man because of his teachings. In Mark 3:21 they tell us that "He has lost His senses." However, after the death of Jesus he appears to James (1 Corinthians 15:7) of who then ends up leading the early church. This leads to James' death via stoning.

At minimum we must conclude that he really believed Jesus appeared to him of which he willingly suffered, and then died for. This fact needs to be accounted for, and the resurrection would account for it best. Here is an article going through the radical conversion of James.

"IT MAY BE TAKEN AS HISTORICALLY CERTAIN THAT PETER AND THE DISCIPLES HAD EXPERIENCES AFTER JESUS’S DEATH IN WHICH JESUS APPEARED TO THEM AS THE RISEN CHRIST." -GERD LUDEMANN ^{( 8 )}

OLAADEGBU:


It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

5. We would need to reject the truthfulness of the dramatic change in Jesus' disciples who were Jews themselves.
It is quite extraordinary that an entire group of staunch Jews, as the earliest followers of Jesus were (as well as Paul and James), would make up such a shameful thing as a crucified and risen Messiah if it never actually occurred and convinced them. Jews had an entirely different concept of who the Messiah would be.

This Messiah would be triumphant, would overthrow the shackles of Roman rule and oppression, and would rule with authority. However, this Messiah came in the form of Jesus, a backwater peasant of little education, and nothing more than a poor carpenter. This Jesus would eventually die on a cross – according to Judaism this was the ultimate form of disapproval from God (hence why Paul, prior to his conversion, persecuted the Christians that were claiming this since it was entirely blasphemous to Jewish ears).

The apostle Paul tells us that "cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree," (Gal 3:13) and that "we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles." (1 Cor.1:21-22) One would need to apply much faith to posit that such a thought of a crucified Messiah would manifest from 1st century Judaism.

"THE SOCIAL STIGMA AND DISGRACE ASSOCIATED WITH CRUCIFIXION IN THE ROMAN WORLD CAN HARDLY BE OVERSTATED." –MARTIN HENGEL ⁽⁹⁾

"That the centre and climax of the story of Jesus would be based on his shameful execution and death makes no sense if it evolved out of Jewish expectations about the Messiah, since they contained nothing about any such idea." –Tim O'Niell ⁽¹⁰⁾
Thus at minimum we must conclude that the post-mortem appearances of Jesus to his disciples, and to the skeptics Paul and James really convinced them. These appearances happened on multiple occasions, were physical in nature (Thomas touching Jesus, Jesus eating with the disciples etc.), and experienced in groups. This needs an explanation.

"They believed this, they lived it, and they died for it." -E.P Sanders ⁽¹¹⁾
"THAT IS WHY, AS AN HISTORIAN, I CANNOT EXPLAIN THE RISE OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY UNLESS JESUS ROSE AGAIN, LEAVING AN EMPTY TOMB BEHIND HIM."-NT WRIGHT ⁽¹²⁾

OLAADEGBU:


It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

6. We would need to believe that Jesus was a madman

The truth is that Jesus never left any other options open for us, as the former atheist turned Christian C.S. Lewis once succinctly remarked:

"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say.

A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice.

Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to” (13).

What we do have to accept if we reject Jesus' deity is that he was some lunatic. Could that same lunatic so influence pious Jews around him to follow him, and some of them to embrace Christianity in place of their Judaism?

Could all the miraculous and inspiring things Jesus did be done in just three years if he was mad? Would such a lunatic cause such a raucous among the Jewish religious establishment that would inevitably end up with Jesus being pinned to a cross? To accept this as an explanation would stretch credulity.

6 reasons why it takes faith to deny Jesus.

OLAADEGBU:
It takes faith to deny what the best historical documents we have say about Jesus. Here are 6 reasons why it takes faith to not be a Christian:

http://reasonsforjesus.com/6-reasons-takes-faith-to-deny-jesus/

6 Reasons.