RE: A simple challenge for atheists
January 28, 2015 at 6:08 pm
(This post was last modified: January 28, 2015 at 6:10 pm by SteveII.)
(January 28, 2015 at 6:01 pm)Esquilax Wrote:(January 28, 2015 at 5:56 pm)SteveII Wrote: No, I would say that the OT books are significantly less important that the in-person teachings of Jesus. The OT provided the basis but I would not say formed the basis. The NT teachings were a significant deviation.
But without the old testament prophets Jesus could never have come down and said "I'm the son of that god," because there wouldn't have been a god for him to reference. If you're going to dismiss the words of prophets, there goes the entire groundwork for Jesus' resurrection, and you'd have no reason at all to accept that Jesus was the son of god, because you've already denied the very people who introduced the concept of that god to the world, meaning Jesus said he was the son of a god you'd just established did not exist.
Unless you're just trying to be inconsistent, where you only apply that level of scrutiny to religious positions you don't already agree with.
No, your assessment of the OT is fine. I was trying to distinguish between revelation from God through man versus Jesus' revelation to man.
(January 28, 2015 at 6:08 pm)dyresand Wrote:(January 28, 2015 at 6:06 pm)Roxy904 Wrote: Wow! Thanks! I have seen the light and changed my wicked infidel ways! Golly-gee-whiz, Jesus saves! (Amen, sister.)
Puh-raise sweet baby Jesus!
But.. jesus never existed... historical evidence proves otherwise.
We went over that. You have to click back a few more pages.
