Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Belief In Jesus But Not Book Describing Him

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2011 4:51:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
How can you believe in the character of Jesus, yet reject the book that describes the character of Jesus and his teachings? The very reason you know anything at all about Jesus is because of the Bible being one of the only sources.

It's illogical to believe that J is true if J is a subset of false B.

J = Jesus
B = Bible

And if you claim to only believe in a few select teachings of Jesus from the Bible, how is that not cherry-picking?
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2011 7:40:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/13/2011 4:51:06 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
How can you believe in the character of Jesus, yet reject the book that describes the character of Jesus and his teachings? The very reason you know anything at all about Jesus is because of the Bible being one of the only sources.

It's illogical to believe that J is true if J is a subset of false B.

J = Jesus
B = Bible

And if you claim to only believe in a few select teachings of Jesus from the Bible, how is that not cherry-picking?

I completely agree, what poor feck brought this statement to your attention?
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2011 7:58:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
You can think that the things that Jesus said in the bible were cool without necessarily believing that it is an accurate account of the events that may or may not have taken place.

Ideas stand on their own, and just so happens that the Jesus character embodies a lot of ideas. Different ideas even, depending on which gospel you are reading.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
JustinChains
Posts: 40
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2011 8:35:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
A book of words is, just that, a book of words. It cannot be looked at as proof of anything. The thing that can provide proof of something without the possession of hard evidence, is logic. Even that logic is open for speculation to the illogical, but to the logical, logic is a form of proof in itself... For without it, nothing else can make sense.

Jesus may or may not have existed as is stated in the context of the bible or any other writings.

Jesus may or may not have existed at all.

It is logical to conclude that the man Jesus did exist, but that the writings were exaggerated or fabricated. It is logical to conclude this, because history shows us that the writings of man are often exaggerated and/or fabricated in order to further personal or social agendas.

Without hard evidence to prove otherwise... It is reasonable and logical to come to this conclusion about the topic of this forum.
"Live True. Love Strong. Let the fires of integrity burn bright in your soul."

- Justin Chains -
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2011 9:42:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/13/2011 8:35:37 PM, JustinChains wrote:
A book of words is, just that, a book of words. It cannot be looked at as proof of anything.

I never claimed a book is proof of anything. My question is concerning belief in Jesus and the Bible, not the truth of Jesus and the Bible.

The thing that can provide proof of something without the possession of hard evidence, is logic. Even that logic is open for speculation to the illogical, but to the logical, logic is a form of proof in itself... For without it, nothing else can make sense.

Correct.

Jesus may or may not have existed as is stated in the context of the bible or any other writings.

Jesus may or may not have existed at all.

That's not saying much.

It is logical to conclude that the man Jesus did exist, but that the writings were exaggerated or fabricated. It is logical to conclude this, because history shows us that the writings of man are often exaggerated and/or fabricated in order to further personal or social agendas.

Yes, but to the Christian, isn't this just cherry-picking or accepting dogma that they deem acceptable?

Without hard evidence to prove otherwise... It is reasonable and logical to come to this conclusion about the topic of this forum.

Again, this is about how a Christian can believe in the character from a book, yet not accept that said book is true.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat