Biblical critics have the Bible down as guilty until proven innocent. Then set up near impossible standards to validate their skepticism. They seem to think they are not subject to anywhere near the skepticism they place on the Bible. What is their agenda? What are their qualifications? An honest evaluation would assume innocent until proven guilty with the burden of proof being on the skeptic. They have not met that standard. Christianity is falsified by disproving the bodily resurrection of Jesus. That is the standard Paul has set down. That burden has not been met. Naturalistic assumptions which exclude God from the get go does not cut it, in part because most in all of human history has believed in God. That adds weight. In othe words it is natural for humans to assume God is there. Atheism is the minority report and always has been. They can laugh and claim they are smarter than others but at the end of the day they are either right or they are wrong.<quoted text>
The references Gillette has made to Tim Callahan aren't related to beliefs, they're related to arguments.
Gillette is asking you to respond to Tim Callahan's argument about prophecy, not believe some stories that Callahan is telling.
Why can't any of you do that?
From Justin. 12.
We are in fact of all men your best helpers and allies in securing good order, convinced as we are that no wicked man, no covetous man or conspirator, or virtuous man either, can be hidden from God, and that everyone goes to eternal punishment or salvation in accordance with the character of his actions. If all men knew this, nobody would choose vice even for a little time, knowing that he was on his way to eternal punishment by fire;...there are some who merely try to conceal their wrongdoing because of the laws and punishments which you decree, knowing that, since you are only men it is possible for wrongdoers to escape you; if they learned and were convinced that our thoughts as well as our actions cannot be hidden from God they would certainly lead orderly lives, if only because of the consequences, as you must agree. But it seems as if you are afraid of having all men well behaved and nobody left for you to punish; this would be the conduct of public executioners, not of good rulers...but if like thoughtless men who prefer custom to truth then go ahead and do what you can. Rulers who respect reputation rather than truth have as much power as brigands in a desert.