one thing to say a man was crucified; it's another to credit him as being
certainly is. Accept for the moment that a guy named Jesus walked the earth,
was crucified, and various ancient historians accurately recorded people
worshipping him as though he were God (here).
Just because all that happened, was he really? Was/is he really God? How
do we possibly come to a reasonably accurate conclusion?
it begins with accepting that it's possible
a Creator might exist. To positively deny such, here at the start, would
foreordain a negative conclusion even before considering the evidence. Then
I'd say we listen to the claimant itself - the Bible. For ultimately no
one (you) should listen to second hand testimony (me) because that is technically
hearsay - possibly mistaken, and definitely not required since the Bible
is of equal or greater availability.
is an overall analysis of the testimony. Veracity chapter
3 is a great presentation of a strategy that English barrister John
Warwick Montgomery lays out for determining truth within the realm of law,
testimony, witnesses, etc. It applies to the Bible quite well. (Among recommending
readings, his work 'Evidence for Faith' is near the top. But if you're like
me, you already have about 300 years of books on the some-day list.)
that would be a confirmation of that testimony; i.e. does the Bible accurately
reflect what we know to be true from history, science, archaeology. etc?
That is the essence of the site's entire Veracity
section. Similarly is the section Divinity
a focus on the prophecies concerning Jesus, his resurrection, closest associates,
non-believers contemporary to Jesus' day, and more. After all that has been
said & done, then it's up to you - like a jury - to respond.
Jesus according to non-biblical
Jesus: where do we begin