Posted on 09/28/2013 7:58:06 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
A Jesus that is not God? Might as well just read Alexander The Great. He becomes nothing more than a historical figure. Which is exactly the author’s stated intent.
Your opinion.
Maybe so. Maybe that's what the moderates & middle-of-the-roaders like.
I would not be surprised myself if that is why.
Right, completely supported by Scripture.
I'll have to have chapter and verse on that! I'll grant there was no original sin but there is no biblical support for a sinless Adam once out of the garden.
He was dead when he left the Garden.
Yes, there was an original sin in humanity.
Adam was created sinless, he sinned in the Garden and sinned like all after he left the garden and lived 930 years most of them out of the garden. Christ alone lived a sinless life.
His human spirit died the day he sinned in the Garden. His body and soul remained alive, but not his human spirit.
Prior to the sin, he was still perfect in body, soul, and spirit. After he sinned, he was dead in the human spirit.
I agree with you both on this point. There are many people who deny that Jesus was a real person in history and try to disparage any mention of him as just myths and legends from two thousand years ago. They are incorrect, of course, and that is why this book and others like it can play a part in drawing people to Christ.
It really does have to boil down to a choice - was he a lunatic, a liar or THE Son of God just as He said He was? Getting people to that point is a good thing and those who diligently seek to know the truth WILL be rewarded.
Just as your post is your opinion.
I won't. I prefer the original version. ;o)
Death of the human spirit isn’t death, he had a Redeemer and knew it.
C.S. Lewis's trilemma is an argument intended to prove the divinity of Jesus. C. S. Lewis was an Oxford medieval historian, popular writer, and Christian apologist. He used the trilemma argument in a series of BBC radio talks later published as the book Mere Christianity. It is sometimes summarized either as "Lunatic, Liar, or Lord", or as "Mad, Bad, or God".
... A frequent criticism is the claim that the statements and actions referred to by Lewis were an invention of the early Christian movement, seeking to glorify Jesus. According to Bart Ehrman, 'there could be a fourth option – legend'. Lewis himself denied the accounts of Jesus were legends: "I have read a great deal of legend and I am quite clear that they are not the same sort of thing". N. T. Wright, a leading New Testament scholar, comments that Lewis's argument "doesn't work as history, and it backfires dangerously when historical critics question his reading of the Gospels."
There are sufficient non-Christian and Christian writings that dismiss the idea that Jesus was simply a "legend" and not a real person that existed when he was said to. The issue really is what does one "do" with Jesus?
I had an semi-atheistic (agnostic?) friend that didn't deny Jesus was a real person he just dismissed the resurrection account. He believed that Jesus wasn't really dead and that he revived in the tomb and walked out of his own strength. When I offered the rebuttal that the Romans were masters of execution and would have ensured Jesus WAS dead before they took him down from the cross, that he was wrapped in burial cloths that included about a hundred pounds of spices - (John 19:39 - the substitute for embalming back then), that there was a bunch of Roman soldiers guarding the tomb - and who, under threat of death, would not have neglected their duty to make sure Jesus stayed in the tomb - and that some of those guards conspired with the chief priests to explain how the tomb came to be empty, and, finally, how every Apostle but one died a martyr's death rather than denounce that Jesus was the risen Messiah (many people die for a lie, but no one dies for what they KNOW is a lie). All these points may have cracked a little of his skepticism but he refused to accept that Jesus really did rise from the dead. I believe the chief cause of this is pride and, of all the sins man is guilty of, this is the one the Lord hates the most. We can certainly see why Jesus said that the "poor in spirit" will be blessed and will see heaven. Being poor in spirit requires humility - an acknowledgment that we have nothing of our own works of righteousness or merit to earn salvation but must trust wholly in the grace of God who saves us through faith.
Interesting statement. I had a conversation earlier today about this very topic and how Josh McDowell's book, Evidence That Demands A Verdict presented the burial scene. If I remember correctly, those who buried Jesus in the tomb were racing against sundown and the onset of the sabbath and observance of Passover. McDowell explained in detail the Jewish tradition of burial. It has been speculated that those who buried Jesus probably didn't have enough time to complete all the details of preparation for Jesus' corpse in the grave. Here is where it gets interesting in relation to the Shroud of Turin. IF the burial was hasty, 1 could make a case that those present simply draped the burial shroud over Jesus' corpse instead of wrapping it around him in the traditional method. Such a scenario migh explain the obverse/reverse images of the crucified body on the Shroud of Turin. Interesting to talk about, but in the final analysis, I am no where convinced that the SoT is the actual burial vestment of Jesus. I just don't think the Almighty would let physical evidence/relics like that last. In the end, it always comes down to a matter of faith.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.