Did Jesus Care About Leaving Evidence?

[POI]

As the title suggests, did Jesus even care if he left behind sufficient evidence for his risen self?

Seems as though we have a potential 'dichotomy' going here.... (either/or)?

For Debate:

A) Was Jesus pleased with the evidence he left behind, as suitable for belief in him?
B) Or, did he maybe instead want to leave the evidence lacking, sketchy, and/or easily dismissible/debatable, in favor of faith?
c) Third, fourth, fifth options are welcome?

Please explain your rationale. Thank you!

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

Jesus is God, so he did exactly what he intended to do, which was die for men and set up the kingdom of heaven on earth, his living church. God doesn't intend to prove himself to the world. He wants our faith. He left enough evidence that one can start to study, to look at the minimal facts argument.

That will be enough to get someone to think more about it and hopefully to pray for God to help them believe if it is the truth.

Well, I would start with the evidence, not the Faith, which is intended to have people start with 'minimal facts' and hopefully (with regular top - ups of Faith through Prayer) convince themselves with selection and interpretation of the evidence to convince themselves of one of the many dogmatic beliefs we have, and I would point out reasons not to accept the Biblical story we are being fed and instead see what is in implied, which is that a book of mythologized history intended to show that the Jews were God's people, got turned around by Paul to make the gentiles as much God's people as the Jews, through a re -invention of a messianic failure, and was further adapted by Paul's converts to argue that the Gentiles were God's people and the Jews weren't, and we have been dealing with the fallout from that ever since.

I know you will say that it is my opinion, and an overlong sentence, too and yours is your opinion. I will just ask people to look at the evidence with objectivity, rather than with Faith.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

Jesus is God, so he did exactly what he intended to do, which was die for men and set up the kingdom of heaven on earth, his living church. God doesn't intend to prove himself to the world. He wants our faith. He left enough evidence that one can start to study, to look at the minimal facts argument.

That will be enough to get someone to think more about it and hopefully to pray for God to help them believe if it is the truth.

Your response is confusing. Are you still a Christian by faith, or are you now convinced by the evidence? And which one does Jesus prefer?

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

Jesus is God, so he did exactly what he intended to do, which was die for men and set up the kingdom of heaven on earth, his living church. God doesn't intend to prove himself to the world. He wants our faith. He left enough evidence that one can start to study, to look at the minimal facts argument.

That will be enough to get someone to think more about it and hopefully to pray for God to help them believe if it is the truth.

Your response is confusing. Are you still a Christian by faith, or are you now convinced by the evidence? And which one does Jesus prefer?

What his post is,is a faith claim, pouncing on the deceptive and invalid 'minimal claims' apologetic to prop up the faith.

[JoeyKnothead]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

Jesus is God, so he did exactly what he intended to do, which was die for men and set up the kingdom of heaven on earth, his living church. God doesn't intend to prove himself to the world. He wants our faith. He left enough evidence that one can start to study, to look at the minimal facts argument.

That will be enough to get someone to think more about it and hopefully to pray for God to help them believe if it is the truth.

The problem here is where "minimal facts" is used instead of "no facts".

Anyone can claim they're god, it's putting facts to the claim where it gets bothersome.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to POI in post #1]

Jesus is God, so he did exactly what he intended to do, which was die for men and set up the kingdom of heaven on earth, his living church. God doesn't intend to prove himself to the world. He wants our faith. He left enough evidence that one can start to study, to look at the minimal facts argument.

That will be enough to get someone to think more about it and hopefully to pray for God to help them believe if it is the truth.

The problem here is where "minimal facts" is used instead of "no facts".

Anyone can claim they're god, it's putting facts to the claim where it gets bothersome.

"Minimal Facts" is Theist for "Cherry picked material that can be fitted into the Faith".