Chili

Except Steve that these miracles are 'iconic' and therefore are believable, but can only be defended as iconic to take place inside the human mind from where also they were written, and we, as believers can relate to them by way of intuit perception via the words used to present the miracle.

Then if you, as doubter, in your demanding evidence want to see some proof of this you will just have to walk away from it at no cost to the believer. It is not a problem either way, but, on the other hand, if Pure Reason comes around to explain the vision of the miracle, that is or will be when you, as doubter, will stand convicted as clod-hopper yourself. This is not to tell you that you should belief, since belief is a gift of God and is not, and never is ours by demand. And so then: blessed are they who believe and have not seen.

Atheos

This is what happens to bad little boys who compose rejoinders, then go back, edit, redact, etc., and then forget to re-read the entire post for consistency before hitting submit. I apologize for flogging the very horse I had already pronounced dead.

Meanwhile, the rational study of history continues to focus on ascertaining the most likely sequence of events that took place based on the evidence.

At the risk of brinking the mandate of the OP ("not a critique of what we do have"), I feel it incumbent to point out that there is tremendous historical evidence of myth-making. Myths exist that predate the earliest verifiable biblical writings. For nearly every detail included in the Judaeo-Christian bible there are similar myths from other traditions that predate them. From talking snakes and magical fruits to apocalyptic depictions of war between the titans with mortals often casualties of the crossfire, the fertile imagination of human beings have been prolific in generating copious amounts of fantastic tales.

Along comes the legend of Jesus the Magic Jew. Like Perseus he was born of a mortal woman impregnated by a god. Like Hercules he was menaced by a jealous ruler when he was a baby and narrowly escaped being killed. Like Apollo he could heal the sick. For nearly every extraordinary power or feat attributed to him there was an extant mythical god with a similarity.

Rational and intelligent people once worshiped the gods whose stories were similar to those told about Jesus. The similarities were so striking that Justin Martyr, an early apologist, wrote:
Justin Martyr, writing circa 150-160 C.E., suggests that devils were responsible for these similarities between the stories of Jesus and the earlier myths of the Romans and Greeks.

Now, as a rational student of history, which makes better sense?

Scenario 1: Wicked devils read the prophecies, figured out everything Jesus was going to do and inspired people to make up stories about other gods doing the same things in an attempt to undermine the efficacy of Jesus's miraculous capabilities before they were ever demonstrated

Scenario 2: People wishing to embellish the stories of their favorite hero-god didn't want him to take a back seat to any other god so they included stories of him exhibiting powers equal to or greater than those included in other myths

I welcome other alternatives, but producing something that's more plausible than scenario 2 seems unlikely to me.

TedM

#2 seems more plausible than #1 to me. But, the very fact that people make up such myths attests to the strong emotional attachment that they generate. If a special being were to come to earth who wanted to make a strong emotional attachment, what better way than to do some of the same things that clearly elicit such a reaction in people?

spin

Reheats, TedM, not retreats, though I'm interested in what re-treats might be. Reheats because these are old apologetic dishes.

You know that ignorance breeds ignorance. Why are you talking about "crazy math" when the frontiers of science require a Ph.D. to understand the issues? Common sense deals with common issues and ever so frequently we see people trying to use common sense to understand uncommon issues. It's no wonder they fail. Either learn something substantial about it or accept your limitations.

The anthropocentric fallacy is pure observer bias error. There is no perspective from which to make a meaningful anthropocentric evaluation, being a hair on a pimple on a bunion on an elbow of a phlegm-splattering amoeba. It's just the same egocentric nonsense that put the earth at the center of the universe and man at the top of creation. You need to widen your perspective.

Arguments against Genesis 10? Why? It's an ancient catalog of peoples. Antiquarian interest. Why besides racism is Canaan under Ham? Why is Assyria and Babylon? Why are the Hittites under Canaan? Why are the Philistines under Mizraim (Egypt)? There is a multitude of factual errors and one can expect a lot of ancient tradition as well. The mention of Tabal ("Tubal"), Mushki ("Meshech"), Arpad ("Riphath") and Til-Garimmu/Tegarama ("Togarmah") help date the list at its earliest to the 8th century BCE, all being post-Hittite statelets in northern Syria. Ashkenaz = (Assyr.) Ashkuz = (Pers.) Saka = Scythians appeared in history for the first time about the 8th century. Two of the sons of Cush ("Sabtah" & "Sabteca", ie Shabaka & Shebitku) are actually the names of two pharaohs from the Kushite 25th dynasty c. 700 BCE. The Medians ("Madai") came along toward the end of the 2nd millennium BCE, but didn't make any impact until the tail of the Assyrian era and you'll note no mention of the Persians who shared the same cultural background andmovements. One thing seems certain from the list: it is from the 1st millennium BCE. How late is anyone's guess. It may be old traditions regurgitated ad nauseam.

I know that there is so much christian rubbish on the internet, it's hard to get access at relatively scholarly information, with so many nutters repeating so much stupidity. The christian cadres on Wiki have ruined a lot of articles with this spew.

I recommend a scholarly library, TedM.

TedM

I thought you were saying I was retreating from moving toward enlightenment backwards towards apologetics

I'll send you a pm on the anthropocentric fallacy, as well as my 'crazy math' comment, if I decide to pursue an answer to you.

Thanks for the info on Genesis 10.

spin

You're always apologetic, TedM, just more attenuated.

No. Please don't. Anything you have to say about them, please do so publicly.

Good library.... Most people don't know and don't care. It's just when bullshitmongers come and say, "holy shit!!!" about their own schlock.

Grog

We wouldn't expect coins in the sense that their absence indicates non-existence. However, coins dated and authenticated to, say 40 CE would be somewhat convincing. An early inscription, even a graffito, that indicated an early belief in a crucifixion at the hands of Pilate.

Even then, that would be suspect. For example:

Sheshbazzar

Yep. Glycon must have been a real god and a real living historical .....er whatever or we wouldn't have a statue of him or coins with his likeness.
People never made any of these gods up.

rizdek

I thought about this. As far as reasonably expected and convincing documentations, I think no documentation would convince me. The reason is I would have to be convinced in my everyday life that these kinds of miracles occur to be convinced that "reported" miracles occurred then.

I think not even thousands of perfectly preserved documents would convince me if I didn't think these kinds of miracles occurred now. Call me unreasonable, but that is as it is. I'm rather skeptical of lots of things, and peoples reports of outlandish things top my list of things I doubt. People are too easily confused, dishonest, swayed, deluded, and "reports" of lots of people "seeing" thing happen are too easily fabricated to make it sound like there were tons of witnesses when it was just one person who hallucinated/dreamed/confused.

Sheshbazzar

Screw documentation. Even if any being named 'Jesus Christ' were to fly down out of heaven with ten-thousand angels,
I would still not bow down to nor worship that abomination. I would choose torture and death over living under that thing.

Sheshbazzar The Hebrew