Ahem. Pay attention. The Roman conspiracy is about the superstitious interpretations of the written texts which demonstrate complete ignorance about the figurative language of the prophets used for thousands of years by highly intelligent and dedicated Jewish people.
I am paying attention. That's your problem.
The texts are straightforward. The texts make a concerted and deliberate effort to portray the miracles performed by Christ as historical events. No interpretation is needed. Why were the texts written to make a concerted and deliberate effort to portray the miracle performed by Christ as historical events if they were just metaphors?
There's nothing hidden at all. It's an historical account.
Why would anyone want to see more sophistry from you?
He doesn't have any. He is only here to bash others.
You don't believe in the devil. You don't believe in anything supernatural. This is yet another example of your sophistry.
OK.
Sophistry.
The gospels make a concerted, deliberate effort to present the miracles of Jesus as verifiable historical events. They achieve this not by using modern academic historiography, but by embedding the supernatural within the specific geographical, political, and cultural realities of the first-century Roman world. The gospel authors build this "historical" framework in several key ways. The authors anchor the miracles to concrete historical eras, aligning them with the reigns of known political leaders. For instance, Luke opens his Gospel (and later the Book of Acts) by explicitly dating the beginning of this miraculous ministry to the rule of specific figures like Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate, and Herod Antipas. Miracle accounts are deeply localized, tying extraordinary events to real, verifiable landmarks. The authors mention specific towns (Capernaum, Cana, Bethsaida), bodies of water (the Sea of Galilee), and public locations (the Pool of Bethesda or the Temple in Jerusalem), inviting readers to verify the settings. The miracles are overwhelmingly described as public events rather than private, secret myths. Jesus heals in crowded synagogues, restores sight in bustling city streets, and feeds thousands of people in open fields. The gospels emphasize that these acts were witnessed by large, sometimes hostile, crowds. The authors routinely point to the physical, undeniable transformations of the people involved. The blind can see, the paralyzed are walking, and the dead are raised, creating empirical effects that others—including his opponents—could directly observe. Crucially, the gospels document the reactions of Jesus’s contemporary critics. Rather than denying that the events took place, the religious authorities of the time are portrayed as attributing the power to dark forces or sorcery (e.g., claiming he cast out demons by the power of Beelzebub). The gospel authors deliberately wrote their narratives as a factual, historical record to ground their theological claims about Jesus in actual space, time, and human history.
And to re-imagine a scripture account as what "really" happened as dreams. Think of having a dream of Jesus explaining all of scripture to you as he walked with you on the road to Emmaus. Then, after the meal, you walking back to Jerusalem. Dreams are seldom so well organized, not to mention spending another day walking back to where you began because you just had to immediately tell your dream to a friend(s).
Sophistry is the use of clever, deceptive, or superficially plausible reasoning that is actually unsound or meant to mislead. It prioritizes rhetorical persuasion and "winning" a debate over the actual pursuit of truth.
To this I will add (even emphasize) obedience.
The Bible never says that any one is saved by obedience. It emphasizes the importance of obedience that we're saved by grace. We don't earn grace. It's a free gift from God through His Son, Jesus Christ.
As usual ... you're lost in the weeds. There IS one group of people who has, does, and will find favor with Christ -- His Church. Those who trust in Him and believe in Him. Those who reject Him are condemned already.
Let's set the word 'saved' aside for a moment. When it comes to belief, Aramaic/Hebrew word etymology tells a different story. In modern Western society 'belief' has become almost synonymous with 'opinion' or what one thinks. In Biblical society 'belief' is lived through one's every day actions, not merely by the opinions one holds. Early Christians were not known as Christians. They were known as Followers of the Way; they were known through acting in certain ways, the ways Jesus taught. That was belief, not merely thinking that Jesus is the son of God, or thinking they were redeemed/saved. It was their actions/obedience to Jesus' Way that spoke of their redemption, announced they were saved.
Redeemed/saved in Biblical etymology was commonly known as being freed from debt. In the same way 'condemned' was not synonymous with punishment, but the common usage of when someone owed another. In other words, those who did not believe in/obey/were true to Jesus/the Word of God then they already owed God for this lack of belief/bad behavior.
Fine words indeed and much truth to them. Nevertheless ... anyone who rejects Jesus Christ as the Son of God and God in the flesh (foundational and at the core of all Christian doctrine) will NOT enter into the Kingdom of God. There's no getting around that. No amount of mental gymnastics can open a special pathway to God's Kingdom just because we wish it so.
