" ... One needs to have faith in the humans who recorded the events in order to accept the records as true. Don't forget the Old Testament, either. To believe in the message of a deity conveyed by any prophet, prior faith in the prophet is a precondition."
What I said is true. Faith in someone requires evidence and cause. The examination of what someone tells you never requires prior faith. the decision to believe, or to apply some probability measure to the "knowledge" presented, requires only a rational exam of what was said.
As far as the 4 Gospels are concerned, they contain what God said directly. At least, they contain what the person who said he was God said. What He said can be examined for value. As far as any other testimony goes: Moses gave the people laws and falsely attributed them to Him. That note from God regarding what Moses said applies universally, since no one is greater than Moses and Moses is greater than no one else.
This is interesting. I know I owe replies for the replies I got earlier, but I'm a little busy at the moment. I'll get to them as soon as I'm free. Meanwhile, I hope the others can continue this discussion...
It is immaterial. Why would a supposed god need to use "messengers" and other agents, when a far superior medium is demonstrably available, according to the believers themselves? If your god could communicate directly with your prophets, why didn't he/she/it implement the same method with all humanity? The fidelity of the medium wouldn't leave room for suspicion and scepticism. Why does your god force men to believe in other men, before they can believe in this god? This is the problem with all "messiah / messenger / prophet"-based religions.