RE: Debate with a Christian
March 9, 2014 at 4:27 pm
(This post was last modified: March 9, 2014 at 4:30 pm by *Deidre*.)
(March 9, 2014 at 4:22 pm)discipulus Wrote:(March 9, 2014 at 4:17 pm)Deidre32 Wrote: Yea, but I think when you follow a religion, (I speak from experience) ...your only 'reliable source' is the Bible. And that's not an objectively reliable source. You can find historical writings about Jesus, and so on, but again, where are they getting their material from? The only reason Jesus comes into the historical fold, is a religious leader of sorts. (Meanwhile, I don't think he was pro-religion, but ...)
You can read different perspectives about who he might have been, but usually they are religious slants. Islam for example doesn't believe he was the Savior of the world. Doesn't even believe he was crucified. So...who he was, what he was, is up for religoius interpretation, and that is the only reason he even 'fits' into history.
What does the Encyclopedia say about Jesus Deidre?
Deidre, go here http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Jesus_...le).aspx#1 and start reading. See what you find.
I looked, and at the top of the page, we read:
Jesus (persons of the Bible)
The Bible is unfortunately the only source that breathes life to any stories of Jesus. Not trying to be flippant with you, it's just the way it is. And the motive was to breathe life into a religion, not to simply record history. You can't compare a US History book to the Bible. Noah's Ark for example...all hearsay, and most likely a fable. It doesn't share the shelves of the history book sections of book stores for a reason. The Bible is about religion, not about history.
