RE: Why is Jesus not a "madman"?
February 11, 2013 at 9:46 pm
(This post was last modified: February 11, 2013 at 9:50 pm by naimless.)
(February 11, 2013 at 9:35 pm)Minimalist Wrote: In the comic books Superman can leap tall buildings in a single-bound. Do you believe that? If not, why not? It is "written" after all.
No, I was hoping that someone that understands what Lewis said can help me understand. I believe Jesus, or at least the character of Jesus, is there for moral lessons and his existence has been picked and chosen by writers of him. I believe, if he existed, he was human, unlike what Lewis believes.
Lewis made the distinction that if he was human, he would be a "madman". I was wondering why someone, after understanding this, could then choose that he was the only son of god instead.
Given the two options that Lewis gives, I'd lean towards madman. But then I'd also proclaim myself as a madman before the only son of god, as with any other human being.
(February 11, 2013 at 9:36 pm)futilethewinds Wrote: I read this as "Why is Jesus not a madam?" at first. That's a very different question.
Indeed.
