(February 11, 2013 at 11:01 pm)Drich Wrote:(February 11, 2013 at 9:28 pm)naimless Wrote: I found this interesting. Lewis understands the latter choice and chooses the former. Why is Jesus not a "madman", as Lewis puts it?Truth? Because Christ was who he said he was, it makes him legit. It's funny how truth is not even considered in your argument. It is almost like your trying to avoid it.
Plenty of people have claimed to be god or have been sent by god - I have had experiences where I am god.
I have no argument. I'm simply trying to understand why someone would believe Jesus to be a more credible source than myself, a madman in some eyes.
Furthermore, as I have had an experience of god, how do I follow Christ's experience instead and distinguish mine as untrue?
(February 11, 2013 at 11:01 pm)Drich Wrote:Quote:Only the bible refers to Jesus as the son of god. Why would one of these books lie about that and, furthermore, how does one know which book is a more reliable source of what Jesus said or is or was?Which source carries the narrative of Christ's life?
There are a few sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
