Plausible Deniability

Do you think the secular mind would forward a testimonial account of the supernatural?

I don't suppose they would unless they actually believed the testimonial they heard / read about, or unless it was their personal testimonial / experience they were accounting for.

Considering this, one shouldn't be surprised to not find any public record of what transpired 2,000 years ago in what is today called Palestine.

The destruction of the city of Jerusalem, the leveling of the temple, the slaughter and the defeat of the Jewish revolt was evident to anyone with eyes to see, and this is historically detailed and went on public record.

Yet, for any political entity to acknowledge anything that would challenge their authority and legitimacy would be problematic and self defeating.

For someone to claim kingship, outside of Roman affiliation or acknowledgement, was cause for death and something the state would deny outright.

Consider the reality of 'revision of history'; an unwritten policy every organized political system the world over seems to have committed.

Details of the Roman account and perspective of Christ, regarding the supernatural events, do exist, but are not compiled in any single place.

These have to be pieced together through a keen search derived from various sources.

Now, of course, this is the critical argument against supernatural testimonies; they are considered anecdotal evidence.

This type of evidence, although being first-hand experience, is insufficient to convince those who had not the experience, or who do not believe such things could happen in the first place.

There are many writings from those who walked with Christ, and many writings thereafter, of supernatural events... so many outside the primary sources of what is called the bible, it is quite overwhelming.

I don't mean an event like making it somewhere on time ( although for some people, this can seriously be miraculous for them ).

I mean events like outright healing and items appearing from out of no where, to mention two examples; things which are scientifically and logically impossible.

Still Today, many people have testimonies of experiencing things beyond the explanations of science and formal logic.

These are, as I see it, evidences which continue the ancient testimonies of the bible.

Myself, and many others, are of these people.

The problem for the skeptic and doubter is that these supernatural occurrences cannot be duplicated nor anticipated.

They cannot be repeated by human effort, or according to scientific method, or by experiment in establishing a physical law.

Since the faithful base their understanding of the world according to the Gospel testimony and, for some, first-hand experiences from witnessing God move in amazing ways, how then can those who neither believe nor contemplate the supernatural come to perceive something they deny or demand substantial 'evidence' from in order to believe?

Those who do not accept the testimony, or disbelieve it, do not seem to have a desire to consider the notion of things beyond their purview.

This is what science is always reaching for ( for what today may be impossible, tomorrow may be possible ).

Why not the same approach with the topic of this blog article?