(June 30, 2013 at 2:26 pm)Maelstrom Wrote: I will admit I have always been divided on the historical stance of whether a figure named Jesus did exist in the past. If a historical figure named Jesus was real, it is apparent he was not the divine son of god. If he was real, he was merely a man with a few pretty words and tricks up his sleeves, a man whom society over-embellished to sell a new religion to the people.
When you start looking into the question you find scholars like Bart Ehrman who insist that there was some schlepper named jesus but who then dismisses all the miracle shit and re-casts him as an apocalyptic prophet. The problem is that there is no evidence for that either and even the fairy tales created around this character insist he was a miracle-working son-of-a-bitch er, god.
So Ehrman has no evidence at all for his position and then he tries to use the gospels and epistles to back him up but these are the very documents that he has spent the last twenty years showing us are a load of crap.
The mind of a xtian is an amazing place to explore. All of them really are batshit crazy.
