[IROC]

I think what Stuart is saying (and what my position essentially boils down to) is that major tenets of Christianity comprises what is - by any standard - events that most people would find to be unbelievable (e.g. virgin births, miracles, rising from the dead, etc) and yet with the exception of *one* book (the bible - whose authors are unknown and authenticity is hard to independently verify), there is *no* evidence to substantiate these extraordinary events.

When asked for evidence of these unbelievable events, one standard answer is that there can be no evidence as this would undermine "faith". Well, I hope Christians can understand (even if they don't agree) that that answer is simply not good enough for those who do not believe. It just doesn't work.

I am currently reading Lee Strobel's "The Case for Faith" and I find it almost amusingly lacking as the answers he gives are useless for those people who don't already have "faith". I fully realize that what I am saying probably does not make sense to those with faith, but it is the reality that I find myself in. Without something more than a "trust me", I simply can't believe things that - for me - are very hard to believe.