Airola
Member
And yet, all your previous post is just "god knows better" and "it's his plan" but with much more words.
I gave you possible explanations that go beyond those simple lines and you didn't even try to counter them.
I take it that you have made up your mind and aren't really here for a more in depth discussion.
And yet the only source we have of the Jesus Tale is an ancient book made of pieces of texts written by ancient men and put together by a bunch of other men centuries after in the way that they decided it was the most convenient for them and a big bunch of people believes in it just because they can't scape the circular argumentation.
Ancient this and ancient that. They were the same people then than we are now.
Just because the books were put together in a compilation later doesn't mean the books on their own hadn't any value. The books were separate works of literature. Stories, poems, historical accounts. They are still their own separate books even if they have been put next to each other between one set of covers. The Bible is a collection of 66 different books and letters. Depending on the version it's even more books. There were several biographies written about Jesus. Four of them are in the Bible we all know. Then there are a lot of other texts that talk about this person those biographies talked about. Just because they are part of the same collection, it doesn't mean they aren't separate accounts of the life of Jesus.
You wouldn't say some other historical figure would lose his credibility of existence just because separate accounts of him were later put into a larger collection either. To me it feels like you are claiming credibility problems for both having put writings in a collection and having writings left out from that collection. That the ones that are in the collection can't be taken seriously because they are in a religious collection of books, and then they can't be taken seriously either because some other books weren't included in the same collection. For me, if anything, looking at different texts that have really complex philosophical and metaphysical ideas and carefully comparing them with each other and looking which of these texts fit together and which do not means they really took it very seriously and were good at what they did. It was a massive undertaking of analysing historical texts.
If he wanted he could appear now and cause all the firestorms, divide seas, fire tornados, etc and people would believe in that...but guess that all that scenography was left only for thousand of years ago when men couldn't record or take photos of it. What a shame.
I think there are two options what would happen. 1) You wouldn't believe it's God. Mass hallucination, illusion by magicians and VFX people, terrorism, digital video effects and even aliens would probably be the first explanations before God. 2) If you did believe it was God, you would still hate him.
You can demand signs and showcases all you want but it wouldn't make a difference in what you'd believe or think of God. It's also odd how you would first ask for all kinds of destructive things to show his existence and power. It's not as if dividing a sea would be a thing to just show off your existence whenever and wherever. Essentially you are asking for more death and destruction to allow yourself to even consider believing in his existence.