Arguments for God Fail Specific Religions

[athoughtfulman]

Is it really essential for Jesus to have lived? I don't think so ...so it doesn't apply to all Christians. Plus that's way too simplistic when there are very many other factors from the Bible to prove Jesus was God. The point of Jesus rising from the dead was not to prove he was God, it was about our connection with God. The idea transcends the realty of the situation. People saw people brought back to life supposedly, but they only saw Jesus die and then appear alive. You could easily discount the facts as magic tricks. The underlying truth of the message extends far wider.

Sure is essential. A Christ-ian is a follower of Christ. If Jesus didn't live, then he's not god. Why did he have to live? Because one of the most basic Christian doctrines is that we are sinful, and that because we are sinful, we need forgiveness. However, since the penalty for sin is death, Jesus had to defeat death, by dying and then rising. If he did not rise, then sin still exists, and we are left with nothing more than a nice philosophy, much less than the esteemed religion "Christianity".

If your idea of Christianity works with the idea of Jesus not existing, then I would not call you a Christian. If your idea of Christianity works with the idea of Jesus not rising from the dead, then you fail to understand the basic Christian doctrine of sin.

As nice as the message might be, you're left with nothing but a moral system.

I've never heard it suggested that the Bible has to be consistent. I think you just made a straw man. We know how the Bible came to be. Christians accept certain books are included.

The Bible contains observations about a specific god. People reading the Bible reason it out for themselves. That the Bible talks about God isn't Christianity. What people believe is Christianity. The Bible doesn't prove that God exists, but it gives solid reasoning why belief matters.

Maybe for you, with your unorthodox beliefs, it's a strawman. But the majority of Christians will vouch for their "divinely-inspired" bible. For them at least, it is 100% true. And if it weren't, then their religion is in tatters.

If the bible is inconsistent, why take any of it as true? Sure, other books are inconsistent yet we still read them and believe them. However, since the bible is written on the assumption that god exists, that Jesus died and rose, that humans are 6000 years old, etc, it's inconsistency is very, VERY damaging to it's integrity.