Yes, I would believe in a miracle if I saw one.

When you say "valid argument from history," that's where you fail because ALL religions claim to have valid historical arguments

Abraham Lincoln existed fewer years ago, and believing he existed doesn't require an extreme level of faith because it's a more recent and proven historical event. BUT, above all, because you don't have to believe he performed miracles and was resurrected... it's not even slightly comparable

Indeed, if you had grown up in ancient Greece, you would believe in Zeus with total devotion, but again, you fail because you would be claiming the same thing you do now: you would say you have proof, witnesses, and historical facts that demonstrate clear evidence that Zeus exists (if you don't know, temples were built to Zeus, there were priests, people who claimed to have spoken with Zeus, people who claimed to have received miracles from Zeus... what you call historical evidence)

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

You said you believe in God and even in Christianity. Why is that, if you have a hard time believing in miracles attested to in history (what else would one expect)?

Your own version of Christianity sounds like the pagan Greek and Roman religions of gods far, far away that don't act visibly in human history.

You prefer a safer fairytale god rather than one who acts and lives among us.

Let me ask you this: When do you suppose Christianity began? And by whom?

My friend… EVERY single religion has attested miracles, which one is lying and which one is right?

This feels like an Abbot & Costello routine.