Hmmm, interesting question, and sensible answers. I always felt John 20:29 was enough for me personally – “blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed”
By Tom Gilson at Thinking Christian
A few days ago Bill LaBarre was wondering why there isn’t more compelling evidence for God:
God could have left the resurrected Jesus on the Earth to continue to perform miracles or simply be a unique UN-aging individual that lives throughout time. Or he could have Jesus reappear to people every hundred years or so where he would perform a series of miracles.
You are probably thinking this is unrealistic or expecting too much. But I would have to ask if this kind of evidence was fine for Biblical times, why not now? Why the inconsistency? Why the desire to have people believe for not very convincing reasons when giving such reasons would be child’s play? If eternal damnation is on the line, any God that did not give sufficient evidence to convince reasonable people would be a moral monster.
My answer here…
View original post 108 more words