RE: I still don't understand why anyone would make up a person like the Biblical Christ..
August 13, 2011 at 2:08 pm
(This post was last modified: August 13, 2011 at 2:11 pm by Captain Scarlet.)
(August 13, 2011 at 11:57 am)Rhythm Wrote: The idea that the writers had to shoehorn a real man into the narrative is a sort of atheist version of the "embarrassing details" argument. There are prophetic reasons (and mis-translations in prophecy) that explain this, more over there was no census. In looking for physical evidence of jesus we come up well below the bar. That's taking aside the fantastic. Hercules is a demi-god, and mythical, but Jesus, also a demi-god was historical? Even after removing all of the miracles it is still special pleading. When's the last time you heard a discussion about the historical Hercules? One set of rules for everyone elses myths, another for judeo-christianity?Happily agree with all of that. Whether mythical figures existed or not Jesus, Hercules, socarates etc it will be hard now to get enough evidence either way, and thus we have to make up our own minds. I am willing to grant a historical Jesus as to me its a meaningless concession. A man is a man is a man and cannot also be a god nor perform miracles. The reason why it is unimportant as to whether Socrates actually existed or not was that there was no Divine claim and it's 'his' unique ideas that have been preserved over generations. The only reason Jesus has any notoriety is because of the divine claim, as there were plenty of other moralizing,
sermonizing apocalyptic Jews to pick from at that time. Take away his divinity and you are left with a popular version of one of those blokes with a sandwich board claiming the end of the world is nigh.
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.
