Yet no actual verifiable evidence is offered The reader is expected to accept what the bible says on the basis of faith...which contradicts the edict to 'make sure of all things' To make sure of something requires a body of evidence that can be examined by anyone who cares to.
----------
DBT9, the Bible teaches that faith comes as result of examining "a body of evidence" that is readily available. For example you may have heard of the attempt made to deny the holocaust. It fell flat because of there being too many survivors remaining alive that could testify to it having happened. What if it was to be challenged again hundreds of years from now? To establish it as a fact would require reliance on historical records, perhaps even including the attempt to deny it being revisited. If this is the case only the unreasonable would persist in denying it while others would be justified in putting faith in it as a fact, don't you think?
To put faith in Jesus being the promised Messiah is supported by abundant evidence. Those that lived in Thessalonica would know that when the apostle Paul visited, he was not able to interfere with the scrolls in their synagogue. So when they saw that these spoke of the death & resurrection of the promised Messiah, they would see that as "a body of evidence" that needed their attention. Paul reasoned with them for 3 sabbaths we are told. - Acts 17:2. Likely Paul would inform any that had doubts the same things that he wrote to the nearby congregation in Corinth, namely that there were up to 500 eye witnesses that could testify to having seen the resurrected Jesus with their own eyes. - 1 Corinthians 15:6.
That's a pretty convincing body of evidence isn't it?
Hebrews 11:1 Faith is the assured expectation of what is hoped for, the evident demonstration* of realities that are not seen.
* Or "convincing evidence"
I'm convinced the holocaust really happened. What about you? Do you put faith in the available evidence?
