|
|
Post by Archelaus on Nov 30, 2020 0:55:02 GMT
What made Jesus believable was that he astounded the crowds with his wisdom and knowledge of the scripture and displayed signs and wonders through miracles. It's not impossible that God could use a homeless man for his glory, but if he believes himself to be divine, then, yes, he is mentally ill. It can be pointed out that it is precisely such claims that have made Jesus less believable to some. A miracle is, according to the philosopher Hume, a violation of natural law. According to Hume, the evidence in favour of a miracle, even when that is provided by the strongest possible testimony, will always be outweighed by the evidence for the law of nature which is supposed to have been violated. Oddly enough the miracles of JC were not reported by contemporaries, even Jewish writers at the time, and there is even a tradition of doubting them among some Christian thinkers and writers down the years. And David Hume is absolutely right. A miracle is intended to transcend the rules of reality. Now, when you run into the matter of circumstantial evidence, then, it doesn't hold up. The Synoptic Gospels, at best, is a collection of testimonies written decades after the fact. Now, Christian thinking is very broad, but I'm not too dismayed that some past and present would dismiss the miracles as unreliable. They are missing what is an essential aspect of God's character. God creates reality and he can transcend reality whenever he wants.
|
|
