OK, I'll try and get through...
as generally reliable documents
Uh-huh. As reliable as any other collection of myths assembled by people who believed them, only with more contradictions than most. As history, the gospels are somewhat less reliable than the Iliad.
the four gospels bear witness to a miracle working Jesus Christ.
Well, they would, wouldn't they. They're the holy myth in the first place. They no more prove the existence of Jesus than 'Le Morte D'Artur' proves the existence of Merlin.
His enemies did not deny it
His contemporaries didn't, surely. Then again, the gospels didn't exist then to be denied. And since the precept is that Jesus did not exist anyway, as a historical figure, he'd have no enemies to deny him. The Venerable Bede (a real and reasonably accurate historian) did not 'deny' the existence of Merlin. Why would he...? More to the point, genuine, attested, non-controversial, non-miraculous contemporaries do not even mention Jesus (Josephus? Tacitus? the Younger Pliny??). BTW, plenty of people deny it now... every living Muslim, for starters <g>
our contemporaries have no arguments against it
???
I've seen some here within the last week. This is just not true.
If he means 'no arguments which we credit', then it's him dismissing anything he doesn't like... based, presumably, on his belief that the bible, if contradicted, must be right and the criticism wrong. In this case, it's an easy claim. Actually, I haven't seen any arguments to say that Merlin didn't exist...
since His status as a divinely certified messenger is established, his testimonies must be true.
But it isn't... only by the NT, and other related writings of people considerably later who (presumably) believed it to be true. This is NOT proof.
Merlin has had plenty of books written about him, and they all say he was capable of mighty magic. So, is he a 'certified' immortal magician?
No one but no one denies that He believed that the Bible was the word of God.
What does it matter what a fictional character may or may not have believed?
Further, I don't deny that you believe the Bible is the word of God... but that is not proof.
No one denies that Merlin believed Arthur should be be King of all Britain.
So...
The 'Le Morte D'Artur' bears witness to a powerful and wise magician, called Merlin. His enemies did not deny it, and our contemporaries have no arguments against it. since His status as a powerful magician is established, his testimonies must be true. Therefore Arthur should be the King of All Britain, because Merlin says so.
Would you believe that?
Do you even comprehend the analogy I draw? |
