Are 'christians' just totally unable to provide any tangible, verifiable evidence of their 'god' or 'jesus'?

"Already done that" eh? Hardly. There is no...and I repeat NO incontrovertible physical evidence to support any claims that there was ever a creator in the first place. As far as Jesus goes...I'm more inclined to believe someone like that actually existed...but if he did was more than likely just a philanthropic individual, not unlike Gandhi, whose legend grew over time...almost like a children's game of Telephone...started as a local legend, then as the story spread acquired more and more attributes until he was walking on the surface of a body of water, raising the dead like some divinely enchanted necromancer, and as a finale was endowed with the power of resurrection. Like a fisherman's tale where a minnow turns into a marlin.

Wrong, Eugene. Only those who have stopped using their brain to make their decisions do not require "proof".

Gregory: Wow...what the hell are you talking about...95% of the National Academy of Sciences (which are the top scientists) are atheist. There is no such thing as a "religious scientist". That is an oxymoron.

It is important to begin by saying that for one who has already made up his or her mind that Jesus is not the Messiah, no amount of evidence will be convincing. But for those who are honest in asking, the evidence speaks for itself.

When sincerely asked, this question is a good one. After all, there have been false Messiahs in Jewish history. Among the most prominent were Bar Kochba and Shabbetai Zevi. Bar Kochba led a revolt against Rome in the years 132-135 C.E.

During this revolt, one of the most famous figures in Jewish history, Rabbi Akiva, proclaimed him to be "King Messiah." Unfortunately, Bar Kochba, Akiva and thousands of Jews were killed in 135 C.E. when the Romans stormed the stronghold of Betar. Shabbetai Zevi, on the other hand, was a self-proclaimed Messiah. Flourishing in 17th-century Europe, the Shabbatean movement spread among both the common people and the rabbis. But when Shabbetai Zevi was arrested in 1666 by the Sultan of Turkey, he converted to Islam rather than face death. We have been tragically wrong before, so it is not surprising that hard evidence should be sought for believing in Jesus.

The idea of a Messiah is one that is found throughout the Hebrew Bible. There, the Messiah's "I.D." is given to us. Imagine looking up a friend by first locating his country. That would not be enough information, so you would need to ascertain his city, street, and specific number on that street. It would also help if you had a phone number and knew the time at which he would be home.

Similarly, the Bible tells us the "I.D." of the Messiah. His ethnic background, place of birth, time frame of his arrival and other identifying characteristics are given. These "credentials" enable us to identify the Messiah, and to recognize imposters.

Of course it might be objected that if these "credentials" are so clear, why didn't most Jewish people believe in Jesus, and why were they so taken in by false Messiahs like Bar Kochba and Shabbetai Zevi?

To understand this, one must realize that by the time of Jesus, the Messianic hope had become greatly politicized in the minds of the people. They were seeking deliverance from the tyranny of Rome. Although the Scripture spoke both of the sufferings and of the victories of the Messiah, the victorious aspect had become uppermost in the minds of the common people because of the Roman domination. This "lopsided" view of the Messiah has stuck with Jewish people, and the politicization of the Messianic hope has continued. Thus the hope of a political rather than a spiritual Messiah contributes to both the acceptance of people such as Bar Kochba, and the rejection of Jesus in his role as a Messiah.

This is not to say that all Jewish people rejected the claims of Jesus. Far from that being the case, all the first followers of Jesus were Jews. In fact, the rabbis of that time period and afterwards were well aware of the many Messianic prophecies which Christians claimed were fulfilled in Jesus. So for instance, although the Talmudic rabbis concurred that Isaiah 53 was a prediction of the Messiah, by medieval times the pressure from those who applied this prophecy to Jesus was so great that Rashi, that greatest medieval Biblical scholar, reinterpreted the chapter and said it referred to the nation of Israel. This interpretation is maintained today by many Jewish scholars

In yet another of the same broken-record questions you favor, please explain what type of physical evidence you would expect of a spiritual God. Or maybe you just do not know what spiritual is.

EDIT: LOL-ing at the fact that you've already deleted a similar question posted within an hour of this one. ;)

2nd option, they think something written in just a book with not even a single evidence can be considered as proof. If it could be, then we would be muggles, and harry potter is real.

This is the first four hundred times you asked the same old question. You wanna know the truth? Your not even better than your avatar.

By your quotation marks, are you implying that we're not really Christians, and we're failing to present evidence of something that is not God/Jesus?

no we have constantly told people the evidence god has given of him self

two thirds of current scientist see the evidence and believe in god

http://www.livescience.com/379-scientists-belief-g...

no.

they don't need to prove what they know is true.

only those ignorant of the truth require "proof."

You are a blind man who does not WANT to see.

Wu, when you can tell me that you know there is more to life than the physical, we can have a truly informed discussion.