[nwrep]

The problem is that these apologetics are fighting yesterday's battle. No serious historian today, secular or Christian, doubts the fact that a Jesus figure existed in antiquity. There is no debate about the historicity of the crucifixion of Jesus. These topics were hotly debated in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Not much any more except in fringe circles, and they are repudiated by the majority consensus.

The battlefield has moved on from historical faith tenets to gender roles and sexuality. We are losing the argument on these territories.

[daniel1212]

The problem is that these apologetics are fighting yesterday's battle. No serious historian today, secular or Christian, doubts the fact that a Jesus figure existed in antiquity. There is no debate about the historicity of the crucifixion of Jesus. These topics were hotly debated in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Not much any more except in fringe circles, and they are repudiated by the majority consensus. The battlefield has moved on from historical faith tenets to gender roles and sexuality. We are losing the argument on these territories.

No, if you read much of actual posts by anti-theists that you would see that that battlefield has not moved on from historical faith, as anti-theists with their railings abound. I just looked as a post on Quora (which has many informative articles and good writers, and has many conservatives) in response to a question, "Why do people downplay the Bible when it is nearly a historical fact that Jesus Christ died of crucifixion and that the disciples believed He rose from the dead?" and the top responses are negative. The featured on, with 1.8K views denies the premise of the question.

And relative few sound believers deal with them, though I have sometimes, by the grace of God.

One of my standard replies is, To believe that an exceedingly vast, systematically ordered universe, exquisitely finely tuned for life with intricate astounding complexity, can be all a result of purely natural processes requires much faith, more so than that the universe logically testifies to design, requiring a First Cause (at the least), that of a powerful being of supreme intelligence being behind the existence of energy and organization of matter. https://www.quora.com/How-would-you-respond-to-this-argument-Since-science-cannot-prove-or-disprove-the-existence-of-God-then-its-possible-he-exists/answer/Daniel-Hamilton-53