My questions are for everyone. The statement is made:
“I am sorry but Josh McDowell, Norman Geisler and Lee Strobel apologetics are failures. It’s easy to bankrupt them all on intellectual grounds. Lewis’s trilemma is equally a silly argument with no probative value. It rests on the assumption that Jesus walked around claiming to be God. In other words it assumes the historicity of the Johannine sayings material. Assuming is not arguing. 'The Gospel of John is absolutely true despite much of it not being history-remembered. Rather, it a realization of who Jesus was. Who he is and recasts his earthly life in that framework. John is correct. The transforming and risen Jesus is most certainly the way despite probably never issuing long monologues about his personal divinity and co-eternity with the Father while waking around Palestine.’”
How does someone prove that John is not history but a reframing? How can we know He is most certainly the way? Upon what then do we base these conclusions?