Because none of those behaviors have anything to do with magical sky monkies. Except the last one. The consequence of believing in Jesus is that it makes you look stupid when someone asks why.
Clearly you haven't investigated the evidence for Christ. You should research:
-- The evidence, including extra-biblical evidence, that Jesus was known to draw large crowds due to his ability to perform miracles.
-- The evidence that Jesus claimed to be God and the Messiah during his trial in the Sanhedrin.
-- The evidence that Jesus really was put to death for his Messianic claims. Including the INRI inscription, the crown of thorns, etc.
-- The medical evidence that Jesus really did die on the cross.
-- The historical evidence for the burial.
-- The evidence that the tomb really was found empty.
-- The evidence that the apostles really did experience the resurrected Christ.
-- The evidence that thousands of people were worshiping Christ as God in the weeks after the tomb was found empty, in the very city where he was put to death.
-- The evidence of the conversions of James and Paul.
Where is all this evidence? I admit I haven't checked since 20 years ago. Back then there was no evidence he ever existed at all. Not a single contemporaneous mention or shed of physical evidence.
I'm surprised these new discoveries didn't make the news!
Even the most liberal, atheist scholars admit the basic facts of Jesus Christ based on the evidence: That he was born, preached in Judea, drew large crowds, was known by his enemies for "sorcery" (miracles), was executed by Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius Caesar on the Passover, was buried, and his tomb was shortly thereafter found empty, and his followers believed and claimed within a short time that he had risen from the dead, and that thousands of people in the same city were soon worshiping him as God, including several unbelievers who claimed to have seen him alive again. (Such as Paul).
If you look it up you will find all kinds of evidence since some of these facts are the best-attested in all of history. The idea that he never even existed at all is completely fringe and not taken seriously in scholarly circles.
Because none of those behaviors have anything to do with magical sky monkies. Except the last one. The consequence of believing in Jesus is that it makes you look stupid when someone asks why.
Clearly you haven't investigated the evidence for Christ. You should research:
-- The evidence, including extra-biblical evidence, that Jesus was known to draw large crowds due to his ability to perform miracles.
-- The evidence that Jesus claimed to be God and the Messiah during his trial in the Sanhedrin.
-- The evidence that Jesus really was put to death for his Messianic claims. Including the INRI inscription, the crown of thorns, etc.
-- The medical evidence that Jesus really did die on the cross.
-- The historical evidence for the burial.
-- The evidence that the tomb really was found empty.
-- The evidence that the apostles really did experience the resurrected Christ.
-- The evidence that thousands of people were worshiping Christ as God in the weeks after the tomb was found empty, in the very city where he was put to death.
-- The evidence of the conversions of James and Paul.
Where is all this evidence? I admit I haven't checked since 20 years ago. Back then there was no evidence he ever existed at all. Not a single contemporaneous mention or shed of physical evidence.
I'm surprised these new discoveries didn't make the news!
Even the most liberal, atheist scholars admit the basic facts of Jesus Christ based on the evidence: That he was born, preached in Judea, drew large crowds, was known by his enemies for "sorcery" (miracles), was executed by Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius Caesar on the Passover, was buried, and his tomb was shortly thereafter found empty, and his followers believed and claimed within a short time that he had risen from the dead, and that thousands of people in the same city were soon worshiping him as God, including several unbelievers who claimed to have seen him alive again. (Such as Paul).
If you look it up you will find all kinds of evidence since some of these facts are the best-attested in all of history. The idea that he never even existed at all is completely fringe and not taken seriously in scholarly circles.
Ok. I get it. My bad.
But if it were so super easy to prove, why didn't you do it in your lengthy response?