Pericles..... I refer you to scripture because it has persuaded the likes of Simon Greenleaf (former atheist) who founded the Harvard law school.. as 'evidence'....CS Lewis... Malcolm Muggeridge and other luminaries of literature.

Now.. I'm not sure how high in your own estimation you are :) but the above is not just 'gibberish' and Greenleaf was no dill when it comes to law and the assessment of evidence.

In regard to documents, there is such a thing as 'external' evidence and 'internal'... the 'we' passages of Acts..when looked at objectively form weighty 'internal evidence' along with many other aspects which I don't have space to list. You might do well to consult even higher critical publications then have a look at more conservative and see which rings more true.

When it comes to evidentiary matters.. and even scientific.. we are always.. ALWAYS left with 'balance of probabilities'.. Judges ascribe weight to every aspect of a case..

I totally agree that there is the element of 'faith'.... but that faith simply connects us to (as West and others might say) our 'Imaginary Friend'... and the issue of the scriptures as evidence of factual happenings remains open.

BELLY.. other gods ? The central point of the Christian faith is that God has revealed himself in Christ... hence.. no other 'god' is admissable or real.

K. JIM.... That issue of 'those who have not heard..and who die never hearing' is a sensitive one.. and one which brings me humbly to the throne of grace. There is a concept of the elect.. who God foreknows... and rather than try to develop that.. I'll just say my confidence is that the God of all the earth will do rightly and justly. Read Romans chapter 1 and 2 for information.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=52&chapter=1&version=31

My own focus, is on the calling to proclaim Christ..and repentance and faith in Him..as the Messiah..the rest..is up to the Almighty.

BOAZ David do you understand the results of your statement? no
other God?
What is the end result if we say that is it Christ is the only God no other can exist?
Right now those living today who follow another God must go very close to out numbering Christians is that not true?
Tell me please why did Christ not make him self known to Buddhists? or in fact followers of every God ?
No offense but following your way we are just blindly following not thinking.

Perpetuating a few more myths, Boaz? You certainly are full of "received wisdom". Unfortunately, none of which you seem to check.

>>Pericles..... I refer you to scripture because it has persuaded the likes of Simon Greenleaf (former atheist) who founded the Harvard law school.. as 'evidence'.<<

Simon Greenleaf was an evangelical episcopalian his entire life. There was no "persuasion", because before he was at Harvard, he was already writing tracts for the American Tract Society, and heavily involved in the Massachusetts Bible Society. The story that he was challenged by his students to disprove the truth of the resurrection, is just that: a story. Just for good measure, the Harvard Law School was chartered in 1817, and hired its first professor, Joseph Storey, in 1829. Greenleaf himself was hired four years later, in 1833.

So, apart from the fact that i) he wasn't an atheist, ii) he didn't found the Harvard Law School and iii) he didn't suddenly become "persuaded" by the evidence of the Gospel, you have the story roughly right.

>>In regard to documents, there is such a thing as 'external' evidence and 'internal'... the 'we' passages of Acts..when looked at objectively form weighty 'internal evidence' along with many other aspects which I don't have space to list.<<

If I may paraphrase, this says "there is no actual evidence that can be objectively examined that is separate from the document itself, so we have to persuade ourselves by counting the number of occasions where one part of the text agrees with another part of the text."

Which is exactly what I was pointing out before: the arguments are always, and inevitably, self referential.

Perhaps you can come up with a more convincing explanation of the difference between "external" and "internal" evidence? If you can, I for one would love to hear it.

When discussing "internal evidence" Boazy, you are of course meaning "internal consistency" are you not? Because internal inconsistencies are often used to discount an articles or stories validity. It unfortunate (for Christianity) that it doesn't work in the other direction, ie confirming or endorsing an articles validity.

Boaz , your lack of knowledge of whether God chooses to take in unbelievers or those who haven't heard the word , is not surprising.

Who would really know ?

Even as a humble Agnostic, I agree with you that decisions on whom we assume will get a ticket, is best left to to the Gatekeeper.

However,if you need a Heaven, my guess is that a heathen who gives all those around him due respect and kindness , probably stands a better chance of getting to the front of the que than a lot of others about here today .

Allll of you,
Give it a break and lets talk about something else like fat content in fast food or Britney Spears
Geeeez!