[duffyd]

”Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It’s like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can’t trust my own thinking, of course I can’t trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.”
—C.S. Lewis

That is why He warned people to "count the cost" before becoming Christians. "Make no mistake," He says, "if you let me, I will make you perfect. The moment you put yourself in My hands, that is what you are in for. Nothing less, or other, than that. You have free will, and if you choose, you can push Me away. cs lewis

No one can say so much with so few words. He led many to Christ. More since he's been dead.

[duffyd]

"But if you do not push Me away, understand that I am going to see this job through. Whatever suffering it may cost you in your earthly life, whatever inconceivable purification it may cost you after death, whatever it costs Me, I will never rest, nor let you rest, until you are literally perfect—until my Father can say without reservation that He is well pleased with you, as He said He was well pleased with me. This I can do and will do. But I will not do anything less." cs lewis

Christians think, "I didn't bargain for this. I want the perks. Forget this suffering crap." And it's always a choice. We can jump out of the Refiner's Fire any time we choose. But, if we follow HIM, He will inevitably bring us back to the same place in our walk with Him. We must complete the ordeal or we will not grow. No shortcuts to spirituality.

[Bored chemist]

But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true?

One can't.
And you have proved it repeatedly.

For example, you thought that an argument by authority had some value.
It hasn't.

. But if I can’t trust my own thinking, of course I can’t trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else.

Wrong.
The fallacy there is the "excluded middle" or false dilemma.
A lack of trustworthy thought does no rule out an agnostic viewpoint.

That's it.
He's wrong.

Now it may be true that you can't use science to prove that God does not exist, but it is possible to prove that He is not necessary.
Why invent Him?

[duffyd]

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them"
Who talked like that?

[Bored chemist]

"But if you do not push Me away, understand that I am going to see this job through. Whatever suffering it may cost you in your earthly life, whatever inconceivable purification it may cost you after death, whatever it costs Me, I will never rest, nor let you rest, until you are literally perfect—until my Father can say without reservation that He is well pleased with you, as He said He was well pleased with me. This I can do and will do. But I will not do anything less."

blah blah blah..
As I pointed out; he's wrong.

That's one  reason why you should stop relying on logical fallacy to support your views.

[duffyd]

When questioned about his teachings or his unique moral authority, Jesus responded humbly and confidently to his accusers: “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (John 8:46). Deafening silence followed.
 “I always do the things that are pleasing to him” (John 8:29). An amazing statement for a man to make.
No other sinless life recorded throughout history

[Bored chemist]

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them"
Who talked like that?

Well, according to what's attributed to Matthew, Jesus said it.
But He obviously didn't. English didn't even exist at that time.
And any translation will have done it's utmost to enhance the beauty of the writing.

So , since there have been a few major re-writes, , by now you would expect them to have got some nce poetic language.
It's probably got little to do with what words (if any) were actually spoken.

But the interesting thing is teh message in those words.
It's where Jesus (allegedly) said "I have not come to change the Old Testament laws about slavery, homosexuality or witchburning".

It's where he told clearly Christians to carry on with doing those things.

[Bored chemist]

When questioned about his teachings or his unique moral authority, Jesus responded humbly and confidently to his accusers: “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (John 8:46).

I do.
Proverbs Kings 16:18

[duffyd]

In his life of the Roman emperor Claudius, Suetonius mentions that Claudius expelled Jews from Rome, an event that most scholars date to the year 49 and that Luke mentioned in passing in his account about Paul in Corinth (Acts 18:2). “Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [impulsore Chresto], he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome.”

The documentation for Christ from before HIS birth throughout HIS life and death and as the risen Savior of the world is beyond compare. No rationale person denies that HE was GOD's Son. 

[duffyd]

Tacitus
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome,"

[Bored chemist]

In his life of the Roman emperor Claudius, Suetonius mentions that Claudius expelled Jews from Rome, an event that most scholars date to the year 49 and that Luke mentioned in passing in his account about Paul in Corinth (Acts 18:2). “Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [impulsore Chresto], he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome.”

The documentation for Christ from before HIS birth throughout HIS life and death and as the risen Savior of the world is beyond compare. No rationale person denies that HE was GOD's Son. 

Nice try.
In that translation " Chrestus" isn't a name.
It means someone anointed.

The oppressed Jews of the time, understandably, produced lots of "messiahs". So did the other faith groups around the place.
But it's not meaningful to say that, because one (or more- do you think the Romans really cared?) of the groups of followers got kicked out of Rome, that he was the son of God.

In his life of the Roman emperor Claudius, Suetonius mentions that Claudius expelled Jews from Rome, an event that most scholars date to the year 49

Roughly 20 years after "the" Jesus was dead.

[duffyd]

Princeton’s New Testament scholar Bruce M. Metzger makes this point: “If the evangelists had fabricated the resurrection narratives, they would not have left obvious difficulties—such as those involving the number of angels at the tomb, the order of Jesus’ appearances, and similar details. That the accounts have been left unreconciled without any attempt to produce a single stereotyped narrative inspires confidence in the fundamental honesty of those who transmitted the evidence.” Every good detective, trial attorney and judge knows this.

Thanks belatedly Bruce. You are absolutely correct. They observed the Son of God risen from the grave.

[duffyd]

Get this: Many claim we don't have eyewitness testimony.

 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4 We write this to make our[a] joy complete. 1 Jn 1, 1-4

[Bored chemist]

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace

Even the Romans noticed that the Christians weren't a nice bunch.

and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome,"

Nobody is disputing that "Christianity" was largely founded in Rome.

The questions are
whether there really was one "Jesus" or, was he (like Arthur) a concatenation of different individuals?
Whether that Jesus (if he existed) was really the Son of God, or just as charismatic speaker with some sensible ideas about social reform..

Princeton’s New Testament scholar Bruce M. Metzger makes this point: “If the evangelists had fabricated the resurrection narratives, they would not have left obvious difficulties—such as those involving the number of angels at the tomb, the order of Jesus’ appearances, and similar details. That the accounts have been left unreconciled without any attempt to produce a single stereotyped narrative inspires confidence in the fundamental honesty of those who transmitted the evidence.” Every good detective, trial attorney and judge knows this.

Thanks belatedly Bruce. You are absolutely correct. They observed the Son of God risen from the grave.

So, he claims it's right because it has errors.
It's right because it is wrong.


Now that's the sort of doublethink that allows priests to get away with abusing children because it stops people using their brains.

[Bored chemist]

Many claim we don't have eyewitness testimony.

You have the alleged testimony of one man, whoc can't possibly be considered "independent".
Could he read and write? If so, why? Most couldn't.
Thus it's unlikely that his words were written down by him, nor could he have checked that any written record was true.
And also, no record was made until well after the facts.
None of those would stand in court.
It's not even good enough to be hearsay.

[alancalverd]

No other sinless life recorded throughout history

Mine isn't over yet, but it will be recorded as sinless, if anyone cares to do so. Get real, Duffy.

[alancalverd]

The questions are whether there really was one "Jesus"

I think one has caused enough trouble. Imagine what the world would be like if there were more. You'd have religious wars breaking out all over the place, with Christians killing each other....Thank goodness all that stuff about the Huguenots, the Pilgrim Fathers, the Reformation, and organised crime in Northern Ireland, is a myth.

[alancalverd]

I'm always impressed with the disdain so many people have for HIM,

Not him. You and your ilk.

[duffyd]

I'm always impressed with the disdain so many people have for HIM,

Not him. You and your ilk.

You are a bigot.

[duffyd]

They won't experiment. "Christ, please, if You exist, show me. I want to know with all my heart. I will do anything, anything You ask of me. I am sincere LORD. I have to know if You are real! Please show me."

These scientists are incapable of praying that prayer, sincerely. Can't do it. That tells us everything about them they will never admit. "What's that?" you say. "They already know HE IS and they despise HIM." Just like alan despises me. He hates because he is hateful and he will not let GOD remove his hate. He loves his hatred. "Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. And this is the verdict: The Light has come into the world, but men loved the darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come into the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed."
Even though they believe, just as devils believe and tremble, they know HE IS and they hate HIS guts. Look at the vomit they spew, these scientists on a respectable website are thoroughly depraved and vile and they are proud of it, yet they have no scientific justification for such feelings and attitudes. (Shows how important science is in guiding our lives.) They spew viruses of hatred because they know HE IS.