inno you want proof that Christ walked on water? do you think that faith would hold any meaning if people believe because someone walks on water?My original position is in my opinion the historical Jesus did exist, but the biblical Jesus is a farce. In terms of authors, there's question marks on Pauline letters, some of which are certainly pseudepigrapha. Another author was Peter, we know his authorship is unauthentic and can be dismissed entirely. And don't get me started on the remaining authors.
Your own quotation from wikipedia:
Most scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus.:181 The only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and that, between one and three years later, he was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate. Elements whose historical authenticity are disputed include the two accounts of the nativity of Jesus, the miraculous events including turning water into wine, walking on water and the resurrection, and certain details about the crucifixion.
The challenge you continue to struggle with is separating history from mythology. Extraordinary claims still require extraordinary evidence. If you are privy to such evidence please be so kind to share it with us, otherwise stick to blind faith. Lesson from today is it's safer for you to stick to your catholic encyclopedia. Clearly when you quote from wikipedia, you're opening a can of worms for yourself.
but first let's begin by saying that after 500 pages in this thread, you should have at least realized that the size of your font does not matter.
second, rest assured you did not invent anything new here, and it is not as if you have uncovered a unique and a recent perspective that will overturn all the tables upside down. we are all very aware about the leap of faith that takes one from Jesus the man to Jesus as God. Paul himself was a very rigid disbeliever, not only did he disbelieve in the divinity of Jesus, but he also acted on this disbelief and sent many Christians to their end. and yet look where he ended up himself, the great philosopher that he was. he made the transition from Christ the man to Christ the Lord.
third, Paul is not alone in this process, people have been making this transition for the last 2000 years, and in both directions, and yet you bring up the subject as if humanity has just realized it today. different people unlock their faith differently, some through miracles, some through understanding, others through human interaction, etc.. so if you have issues with the miraculous, the miraculous occurs around us every day, you simply do not see it. you think that turning water to wine is quite an unnatural phenomena? is wine and grapes and man storing them to be fermented natural? is the existence of man grapes and wine natural? is the existence itself with everything else it entails anything short of a miracle? is the adherence of all mater to the mathematical laws of physics ordinarily natural?
fourth, it follows that it does not take all that much to witness a miracle, everything around us is nothing short of miraculous, pending that you are able to think it through, something that you have not been able to do so far in this or in other thread. just out of curiosity, can you point out any constructed or elaborate arguments you have made so far in this thread? i am more than anxious to see that.
fifth, it then becomes obvious that the misfortune is that you (well, i am giving you too much credit here for parroting sagan, but let's stick to "you") take the word natural for granted, and seek the miraculous only in your tight perception of mythology, because you are unable to absorb how extraordinary everything is, and this inability to perceive the miraculous depth of all that there is, is in fact why anyone would formulate that statement as such "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", or in your case, it is why anyone would parrot carl sagan as blindly as such. labeling existence as ordinary does not make it any bit less than miraculously extraordinary.
and finally , all of what you are attempting, has been summarized by the following:
"Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." people do not need a miracle to believe, adherence to truth will inescapably lead to faith. atheism as such is not the norm, but rather the exception and the aversion against the signs that are present all over and everywhere.