(Q)
Why should that matter? They believe, they have faith, that’s all that should matter.
No, that's my point - you are still sitting on your strawman. Faith is not all that matters, because it is
not enough to make someone a credible, believable witness
Nonsense, this is pure guesswork. You have no idea if Jesus and his followers were mentally, psychologically and morally trustworthy. If they showed up today making the same claims, you’d have them committed to an asylum.
Their teachings are healthy and sound, and applicable in any society. The fruit says a lot about the tree...
Is that all it takes for you to consider someone credible – their claim to believe in God?
No, it's a ladder of crebility - gentiles (of which I am one) were convinced by the disciples, who testified about the believability of Jesus, who testified about the believability of God.
If you do not believe that Jesus lived or was sane, then that's a decision you make based on evidence that
you in turn find believable. Why don't you tell me on what grounds you deny their credibility?
But you said it yourself, you consider anyone credible if they believe in God – how can you tell the difference?
You misunderstood - that's not what I said. As I said, you can tell the tree by its fruit. Their credibility is easily measured by the standards set by Jesus. I would not propose to be a perfect Christian myself, even while I would like other people to attest to my trustworthiness, I frequently fall short. But the worth of the ideals I follow - the ones proposed by Jesus and his followers, traced back to the commandments - are sound and their validity overrides any objections about impracticality. I guess the real difference is that of authority. Who and what is more authorized to represent an ideal or evidence?
Since I believe in the authenticity of Jesus, I also believe in his authority, and He testified about God's authority.
You’re contradicting yourself. If someone proclaiming to be Jesus walked the Earth today doing good deeds, would you believe him to be the son of God or would you have him put away as a nutter?
Yes, unless he manages to convince me that he is truly sent by God, and authorized by God - unfortunately it is impossible to say how God would create credibility in anyone in our present culture. At the moment the common philosophy is humanism, and everybody has more faith in their own superioirity and ability to know the truth than many people had in God during history.
Anyway, in the light of what I know and believe, nobody will surpass the authority of Jesus, and much less of God. There are two options: either they lead lives that reflect God, or they don't. Even someone who is simple-minded can love and have faith. This does not make them God, but it is a testimony to the power of God. This brings me to an old favourite argument: If faith in God depended on you ability to reason and understand, your perception and insight, your mental powers and intellect - how many perfectly loving and worthy people would be excluded from knowing God? But, how hard is it to know somebody? God's grace is the only wisdom they need.
1 Corinthians 1:21
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.