Sven

That's the same question I asked myself, too. What the heck is the purpose of this discussion?

From my viewpoint, there are three possible positions on the issue "How was Jesus so wise?"

(1) He wasn't wise.
(a) because he didn't exist
(b) because what the gospel writers wrote is not reliable
(c) because what he said he easily could have repeated from some widely known sources
(2) He was wise but not divine.
(a) because he simply was born this way (statistically, there have to be some exceptionally wise men)
(b) because he got an education during the time which is not mentioned in the bible
(3) He was wise and divine.
(this conclusion was reached because of additional evidence)

So which kind of people Not_registered tries to reach here?
(3) obviously doesn't make sense - they already agree with him, and there are few of those here.
(2) also makes little sense - why should they change their opinion on Jesus divinity simply because Not_registered repeats what they already (believe to) know, that Jesus was wise? And there also few here who really believe that Jesus was wise.
(1) Those people first have to be persuaded that Jesus was indeed wise (and that he existed) - a challenge which many, many people failed to met in the past and which is very difficult to achieve without an exceptionally good worked out argument. But even if Not_registered managed to persuade a few people of this, they will then be in category (2), and Not_registered is faced with the problem given above.

So I'm really confused what exactly is the purpose of this thread - wouldn't it make much more sense to dicuss the additional evidence that Not_registered uses/d to reach the conclusion that Jesus was indeed divine?

Not_Registered

Amen brother!



I hope your just playing dumb.

Sven

I hope you are not resorting to ad hominens to avoid explaining why you're not wrong here. If you are indeed serious, apparently one of us is indeed dumb. Perhaps someone else is able to explain to me how to interpret our conservation posted above in any other way.

Not_Registered

I'll make it painstakingly simple. Just for you Sven, since you seem to be the only one perpetually "confused".

What I am NOT saying

What I AM saying
Hopefully, Sven, this will help remedy your state of perpetual confusion. Any clear-minded person, viewing this objectively, could extract my point(s), without distorting it, from this list of quotes. I don't know why, or if, you have some sort of personal vendetta against me, because you continually distort the message I am trying to convey. I am not here to "win" battles against you Sven. I just don't what someone distorting my point and thinking I'm a moron because of that. That detracts from my credibility and people will always believe I don't know what I'm talking about or I'm just here to trick or mess with people, which is not the issue. If I'm to look like a "moron", I want it to be because I said something that didn't make sense, not because someone twisted or misconstrued what I was trying to say.

I don't know all there is to know about biblical matters. I am here to listen and learn just as much as I am here to talk and persuade. I just don't what people to see me as a babbling fool who's only goal is to mess with people because I don't know what I'm talking about, because that isn't the case.

Vicar Philip

This from the same person proclaiming his lack of intent to "mess" with people. How do we know you're not playing the same games with us you play with your "friend?"

Sven, there was a similar exchange back in June that ended up about like this one. NR got damn near the same responses from us then as now. What did you think of Doherty's website, NR? Did you find Doherty's argument at all convincing?

Sven

No. But perhaps an answer to this two questions helps (a simple yes or no would be most welcomed):

Do you think that Jesus being wise is one piece of evidence for his divinity or not?

Do you use this thread to help people realize that maybe Jesus was "more than a man"?

I don't think so and I also don't think that I distort anything. I rather think that you don't realize what you are doing here.

I don't think that you are a moron - only that you haven't actually realized what you are arguing here.

Let me summarize our conversation above once again:

Not_Registered: The creation of this thread was in the chance that someone might consciously come to a realization based on their belief of Jesus being wise.
Sven: What kind of "realization" do you have in mind?
Not_Registered: A realization that, would not be solely responsible for but instead, could aid in an open-mindedness to the possibility that Jesus was "more than just a man."

Please explain why this doesn't mean: The purpose of this thread is to help people realize that Jesus maybe was "more than just a man."

Note that I claimed nowhere that this is your only evidence and/or that you really want to convert someone with this. My only claim is that you apparently regard Jesus being wise as one piece of evidence for his divinity and use this to "open minds" - which is in contrast to your earlier claim "to show that, at least to me, that seems slightly amazing and just leave it at that". You don't leave it at that, you try to use it as a mind-opener.

As I said above: If someone else also thinks that I distort what you are saying, then I ask this person to please explain where my thinking goes wrong. As also said above, apparently either Not_registered or I are "dumb", since we apparently continue to talk past each other. So a contribution from a third party with some clarification would be most welcome.

Sven

Yes, I know, I participated in this thread. But I don't think it ended like this one - nobody accused the other part of playing dumb or something like this.
Perhaps you like to add your opinion if Not_registered is deluding himself about the purpose of this thread and really contradicts himself, or if I really distort what he is saying.

Vicar Philip

I went back and re-read the beginning of the thread, and I think NR's original question was addressed to those (atheists, presumably) who state that Jesus was a "wise man," but not necessarily the Son of God. I believe what he was trying to get at was that if one believed he possessed such "unearthly" (forgive me NR, I couldn't resist!) wisdom, such wisdom had to come from God. Numerous derails ensued, and we get back to the question of Jesus' existence.

As far as your and NR's exchanges, I do not see where you have distorted what NR said. The quotes you attribute to NR are exactly what was said. Only if someone can show those quotes are inaccurate would NR have any basis for that complaint.

Not_Registered

I guess I have forfieted the right to sarcasm in my private life? Maybe a thorough scan of your everyday conversation would reveal actions of the same. Do not make it seem as though all I do is mess with people. As to "how do we know you're not playing the same games with us you play with your 'friend' ", I am telling you now, I am not "playing games" or messing with anyone. You can choose to believe or not to believe that. All I can do is tell you the truth, but I will no longer discuss my "playing games" with people on this forum.


By itself, no. In collaboration with other knowledge/evidence, yes. You have tried to oversimplify the question to a yes or no, disregarding any parameters that would have an affect on the answer. If a man (we'll say Jeff) is accused of murder, does one ask "Do you think that Jeff is guilty of murder because he wasn't home on the day of the murder.....oh yeah, and answer the question yes or no." No, that is not a legitimate question, because, while the fact that Jeff wasn't home by itself proves nothing, it along "with other knowledge/evidence" might aid in the proof that he did commit the murder.


I said the creation (or purpose) of this thread was in the chance, not to help. Help implies an active, pursuing action and a mindset of I need to show these people who just don't know. That is not what I said or meant. I said chance which implies a passive or non-action. Also, my mindset is not "these people are wrong, I need to help them see the correct way", it was and is, maybe someone will see the situation from a different point of view and if not, then okay.

In other words, chance is something beyond my control. I cannot force or pursue chance. If someone sees it from a different point of view then good, if not then oh well. Help is something that involves pursuing. To help someone I must go out and show them until they get it. If a teacher "helps" you learn how to add and you do not learn then that teacher did not help you at all.

If, by saying help, you are trying to convey my same point as when I say chance then okay, lets not bicker over semantics. If not, then please do as I have done, and provide an extensive list of quotes from me where I am saying what you claim that I am saying.


I'm not using it as anything. I am just leaving it at that. I have made that clear numerous times. If someone says Jesus being wise means nothing then I have said that is OKAY. That is presenting information and leaving it at that. If I wasn't leaving it at that I would continue to pursue and "help" that person see things the way I see them. That is not what I've done and not what I'm doing.


Sven, if I say "you are saying that Jesus is stupid and an absolute moron" you might say I am distorting what you say. I would say "no, I am not distorting." So, who determines whether I am distorting what you say or not. You, the person who knows what He said and meant to say, or me, the person who is left to merely interpret what I believe you are saying?

Sven

I have not said anything like this. I even put the important part in bold: one piece of evidence. We agree that by itself Jesus being wise doesn't mean that he was divine. What I ask you is if Jesus being wise is one piece of evidence that he was divine. I still have not seen any clear answer to this.

Regarding the analogy above: That Jeff wasn't at home on the day of murder certainly is one piece of evidence that he is guilty.

I don't see any difference. Quite simply. When you see the chance that something you do results in something, then you have a mindset that you "need to show these people who just don't know".

I leave this thread with the conviction that you are just playing word games to get you out of the hole you dug yourself into - I think you don't realize this yourself and don't blame you for being dishonest or something.

So what? If I try to persuade some people of something and some of them don't believe me and I say that I'm OK with this, this doesn't mean in any way that I didn't try to persuade them in the first time.

That's why I asked you and other persons to explain why your words don't mean what they mean to me. You failed to explain it to me, other persons unfortunately didn't help either - so I'm left with the opinion that you contradict yourself and are too self-deluded to realize it.

Mods: I think this really leads to nothing. After having given Not_registered a chance for a last word (if he likes to), I think this thread should be closed.