phoenixgirl

Ah, the old pigeonholing of the "liar, lunatic, or lord" argument. These are not the only categories into which Jesus can be placed -- how about mythological adaptation of other resurrecting god/men or allegory or sheer work of fiction? When the Christian gives you only these three answers, s/he trying to make you into some sort of malicious person for calling such a swell guy as Jesus either a liar or a lunatic, so then you're stuck with lord. However, this argument follows from a literalist interpretation of the New Testament, and once we remove those goggles from our reading of the Bible, the list of possibilities grows.

It could be that the statements made by Jesus in the Bible were outright lies. It could be that they were sincerely believed by him, but that he was loony and wrong. It could be that some of them were said by a real religious leader, but some of them were added later or mutated. It could be that none of them were ever said, but that somebody wrote the Mystery cults into the Jewish faith.

I personally don't have enough faith to ignore the contradictions in the Bible (how did Judas die? How many women/disciples/angels were at the resurrection? Which creation account is the truth?). I used to. I used to say, "Well, I know my faith is real because of how I feel when I worship and because of the answers to prayer I've gotten, therefore, the validity of my faith follows from there." However, I have since learned that all believers of all faiths experience the same things and that subjective experience should not dictate what one believes.

The contradictions of the Bible and the Christian belief system are so glaring that only someone who desperately needs them to be true will find them so. Those who weigh the evidence without anything riding on the outcome will find that Christianity is just another man-made religion. Those whose whole identity is wrapped up in the mythological beliefs they adopted earlier in life will need "faith" to hang onto their fairytale in the face of logic and cognitive dissonance caused by believing mutually exclusive and contradictory things at the same time.

Queen of Swords

Too bad you also don't have enough of whatever quality it takes to respond to the points raised in your other thread.

With his pants on fire as well?

reprise

That OP actually made SENSE to you guys?

Please explain. The best I can get out it is that Jesus lied about God.

Godless Wonder

Faith?


I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Valdemar

I think I believe in Jesus. Every time I hit my thumb with a hammer, I scream "JESUS CHRIST!"

Lord Emsworth

Even if ... So what?

Mageth

First, I'm not "against Christ".

Second, where exactly did Jesus say he was "God in the flesh"?

Third, what I do not believe is what other people claim Jesus was (or is).

Fourth, not believing what someone claims is not the same as calling them a liar.

Fifth, I've never met, seen, or spoken to Jesus, so there's no way I can call him a liar.

Sixth, it takes no faith to not believe what other people say about Jesus.

TySixtus

derail

BEST MOVIE EVER! :notworthy

"No more rhymes now, I mean it!"

"Anybody want a peanut?"

/derail

Gospelog2, your tone is pretty accusatory. Are you just mad at atheists or something? And I notice you haven't chimed in on this thread yet, much like your last one. It takes no faith to not believe- prove god exists. The burden is on you and your ilk to do so.

Ty

TySixtus

Seventh, if Jesus said he was the son of god, then I am calling him a liar. Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Ty

Llyricist

Actually, at that time in Judaism, every man was considered a son of God. Nothing extraordinary in that claim at all.