Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
.Of course it is relevant.
If Jesus existed and was a real person of history, then we have to deal with certain established historical events i.e. His crucifixion, the discovery of His empty tomb, post-mortem appearances of Jesus after His death. The origin and explanation of the formation and rise of the early church.
I claim He was not only a real person, but that He actually was crucified, buried, and rose from the dead.
I therefore, have ample justification for maintaining that Jesus of Nazareth the Christ is not simply an imaginary friend of mine, but rather the Son of God.
Christopher Hitchens said:I'll grant you that it would possible to track the pregnancy of the woman Mary who's mentioned about three times in the Bible and to show there was no male intervention in her life at all but yet she delivered herself of a healthy baby boy. I can say I don't say that's impossible. Parthenogenesis is not completely unthinkable. It does not prove that his paternity is divine and it wouldn't prove that any of his moral teachings were thereby correct. Nor, if I was to see him executed one day and see him walking the streets the next, would that show that his father was God or his mother was a virgin or that his teachings were true, especially given the commonplace nature of resurrection at that time and place. After all, Lazarus was raised, never said a word about it. The daughter of Jairus was raised, didn't say a thing about what she'd been through. And the Gospels tell us that at the time of the crucifixion all the graves in Jerusalem opened and their occupants wandered around the streets to greet people. So it seems resurrection was something of a banality at the time. Not all of those people clearly were divinely conceived. So I'll give you all the miracles and you'll still be left exactly where you are now, holding an empty sack.
Of course it is relevant.
If Jesus existed and was a real person of history, then we have to deal with certain established historical events i.e. His crucifixion, the discovery of His empty tomb, post-mortem appearances of Jesus after His death. The origin and explanation of the formation and rise of the early church.
I claim He was not only a real person, but that He actually was crucified, buried, and rose from the dead.
I therefore, have ample justification for maintaining that Jesus of Nazareth the Christ is not simply an imaginary friend of mine, but rather the Son of God.
In regards to my response that answers your question, I'm guessing you either:
a) Didn't read it
b) Didn't understand it
Christopher Hitchens had a habit of demonstrating his ignorance of what the New Testament recorded.
That portion of his is one such demonstration.
Don't keep us in suspense. Do go on.
He was patently wrong in several things he said. Start there. Read the New Testament and then compare it to what he said.
I'm not going to do your homework for you. What exactly was his wrong about and how does it undermine the point he was making?
It is not my homework. I do not need to read the New Testament and compare it with what he said. I know what the New Testament says. You obviously do not because you thought Hitchens said something worthy of passing on to me.
I would have expected you to be thoroughly familiar with the NT before trying to discredit it. I see that you are not.
I see an evangelist making a lot of excuses.
If Christ is God, and indwells me by the Holy Spirit then could you say He was just my imaginary friend?
If you are correct about something, could I say that you are not correct.
Is that your question?
If Christ is God, and He indwells me by the Holy Spirit, could He be just my imaginary friend?
The answer is no.
So in order for you to support your view that Christ is just my imaginary friend, you would have to deny a lot of things.
You would have to deny that Christ is God and that He indwells me by the Holy Spirit.
In order to do that, you would have to demonstrate that Christ was other than what He said He was.
How would you go about that?
I think you bit off more than you could chew.
You made a claim to knowledge and you have the burden of proof to support it. Unless it is JUST YOUR OPINION...and then I will say, thank you for sharing your opinion with us!
If Christ is God, and He indwells me by the Holy Spirit, could He be just my imaginary friend?
The answer is no.
So in order for you to support your view that Christ is just my imaginary friend, you would have to deny a lot of things.
You would have to deny that Christ is God and that He indwells me by the Holy Spirit.
In order to do that, you would have to demonstrate that Christ was other than what He said He was.
How would you go about that?
I think you bit off more than you could chew.
You made a claim to knowledge and you have the burden of proof to support it. Unless it is JUST YOUR OPINION...and then I will say, thank you for sharing your opinion with us!
What knowledge claim? I said if you are right, you are right. I wouldn't need to prove that, silly.
You made a presuppositionalist if-claim, I reject it, it's yours to demonstrate and prove.
By pointing out the complete dearth of evidence for gods and any sort of force or receptors for spirits? Would seem a a good start.
So, if I claimed that Napoleon Bonaparte aids me in my strategy games... how would you go about to disprove that?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?