Did they really? Why would his followers of that time need faith if he did such fantastic things?
As he always told them....
"Your faith healed you."
Pretty self explanatory.
And a horse is a horse of course.
So you are willing to give them a pass? I see.
An example that was a strawman argument.
A strawman in that you dodged my question? :lol: OK.
What are the first four commandments about? Are they about morals? Ok 6 morals vs 4 non-morals so I was wrong to say most. But it is interesting that those 4 are first before the actual morals.
Now you try to move the goal posts? It does not change my reply or justify your argument either way.
I Are you claiming that you have proof of gods existence? All I claimed is that the is no evidence and that is why Christians need faith.
No. You claimed God does not exist as a matter of fact. In reality a lack of evidence is not proof of anything. In the end yes it is about faith.
I have the same facts that you have on the existence of a god.
No you don't. The difference is I will not put forth anecdotal evidence as proof of anything.
The biblical Jesus defied Roman law by being thought of as the messiah. While there is scant evidence that Jesus claimed to be the messiah his followers did believe him to be the messiah.
Not scant, none. What his followers choose to call him is irreverent to his motivations which he defines clearly.
The fact that Jesus had followers was in itself against Roman law. But Pilate made a mockery of Jesus the "King of the Jews," the crown of thorns and placing him between two villains on the cross all points to a sedition charge.
Were do you get your made up history?
#1 The Jewish authorities had falsely accused Jesus of proclaiming himself an earthly king, not Jesus.
#2 When brought before pilot the pharisees said " He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ, a king." none of which was true as Jesus had done none of this.
#3 Pilate responded "I find no basis for a charge against this man." What does this tell you?
Their accusation against Jesus consists of two lies:
He is teaching others to resist the payment of taxes to Rome.
He is forming a rebellion to Rome’s authority by declaring himself king.
All of which were not true. Where does this leave your account?
Have you not read the bible? The biblical Jesus was portrayed as the messiah. Jesus said that there is only one true king and that king was god. In doing so his followers were no longer answering to Caesar but to Jesus and his god.
Yes I have. Your statement proves you have no real understanding of what Jesus taught at all, none.
He was preaching about the spiritual kingdom, not the kingdoms on earth who he himself said God put into place and you are to submit to. He also said render unto Cesar what is Cesar's and God unto God. Funny how you ignore the truth of what he preached and are trying to warp it into something it was not.
Which in Rome was not allowed.
Rome had many God's whom the rulers worshiped as well. So that is not true.
The kingdom of god whether claimed to be spiritual or not could not be accepted by Roman law and obviously was not during the era in which the biblical Jesus would have lived.
Again it was not Rome that convicted him, it was the Jewish pharisees. The charges were false as I have shown, and Pilate new this and proclaimed openly as much.
Lol you claim to not read yet claim a failure haha.
You obviously missed it, just like most of your inaccurate and made up history.