Finally, this does not deny the reality of the world-historical development, which, reserved for God and eternity, has both its time and its place.As a rule repentance is identified by one thing, that it acts.

Like Kierkegaard's God, the work molests us with its aggressive absurdity [...]. Now that religion's monopoly has been broken, it is within the compass of any human being to see these evidences and proofs as the feeble-minded inventions that they are.” “Modern art always projects itself into a twilight zone where no values are fixed.

He does not deny that what is said in the Scriptures about miracles and prophecies is just as reliable as other historical reports, in fact, is as reliable as historical reports in general can be.

Religion understands perfectly well that the “leap” is subject to sharply diminishing returns, which is why it often doesn’t in fact rely on “faith” at all but instead corrupts faith and insults reason by offering evidence and pointing to confected “proofs.” This evidence and these proofs include arguments from design, revelations, punishments, and miracles.

Kierkegaard didn't believe that Christ had this "upside-downness that wanted to reap before it sowed or this kind of cowardliness that wanted to have certainty before it began. As he himself pointed out, it is not a "leap" that can be made once and for all. What is baptism without personal appropriation? Faith is the objective uncertainty with the repulsion of the absurd, held fast in the passion of inwardness, which is the relation of inwardness intensified to its highest. Certainly it feels it cannot take no notice of Christ, leaving this business of Christ in abeyance and carrying on a busy life is something it is incapable of. This formula fits only the one who has faith, no one else, not even a lover, or an enthusiast, or a thinker, but solely and only the one who has faith, who relates himself to the absolute paradox. Now that religion’s monopoly has been broken, it is within the compass of any human being to see these evidences and proofs as the feeble-minded inventions that they are.”

In the Bible Abraham is presented as admirable for ignoring this normal sense of right and wrong and being ready to sacrifice Isaac. Or the double-minded one perhaps had a feeling for right and wrong. This evidence and these proofs include arguments from design, revelations, punishments, and miracles.
How could he know for sure? The leap becomes easier in the degree to which some distance intervenes between the initial position and the place where the leap takes off.

Even in daily life everyone experiences that it is more difficult to stand directly before the person of distinction, directly before his royal majesty, than to move in the crowd; to stand alone and silent directly before the sharp expert is more difficult than to speak in a common harmony of equals-to say nothing of being alone directly before the Holy One and being silent. The sectarian punchinello, instead of that, has a private theatre, i.e. Kierkegaard agreed with Lessing, a German dynamist, that truth lies in the search for an object, not in the object sought. A father has a basic duty to look after his son, and certainly shouldn't tie him to an altar and cut his throat in a religious ritual. And yet the 'unrecognizable' (according to his degree) will have a double work compared with the 'outstanding' man (of the same degree), because he will not only have to work continuously, but at the same time labour to conceal his work.”

It wouldn't have been faith otherwise. The reason I cannot really say that I positively enjoy nature is that I do not quite realize what it is that I enjoy. Leap, then, into the arms of God'. It seems to me a function of modern art to transmit this anxiety to the spectator, so that his encounter with the work is--at least while the work is new-- a genuine existential predicament. That is past; he is either lost in the dizziness of unending abstraction or saved for ever in the reality of religion. Nobody knows how it will take place in humanity, but every man feels it clearly in himself. In the world of spirit no swindling is tolerated.”

Kierkegaard stuck to his concept of Christianity as an inner struggle where the single individual stands before God rather than before others. It is a leap that has to go on and on being performed, in spite of mounting evidence to the contrary. Søren Kierkegaard, Where is the boundary for the single individual in his concrete existence between what is lack of will and what is lack of ability; what is indolence and earthly selfishness and what is the limitation of finitude? The change from motion to rest, or vice versa, is a transition which cannot be logically construed; this is the basic principle of Zeno's dialectic, and is also expressed in Newton's laws of motion, since the external force by which such change is effected is not a consequence of the law, but is premised as external to the system with which we start. "Compared with the Hegelian notion that the outer is the inner and the inner the outer, it certainly is extremely original. Lessing said, "accidental truths of history can never become the proof of necessary truths of reason." This sectarianism is an attempt to leap away from the narrow path of the paradox and become a tragic hero at a cheap price. Therefore there is no vague talk that being a Christian means to accept and accept, and accept altogether differently, to appropriate, to have faith, to appropriate in faith altogether differently (nothing but rhetorical and sham definitions); but to have faith is specifically qualified differently from all other appropriation and inwardness. For an existing person, when is the period of preparation over, when this question will not arise again in all its initial, troubled severity; when is the time in existence that is indeed a preparation?