I want to thank Pro for his arguments. I find debate on the subject of God to be fascinating, especially from the side of the theist. As Christopher Hitchens said… “Well, why do I say charming? Because I think it 's rather sweet that people of faith also think they ought to have some evidence. “
Summary of Pro’s argument
Pro argues that Jesus existed, that the New Testament is a reliable source for history and thus as it claims Jesus was raised from the Dead that Jesus is God. It should be apparent already that even if you grant a miracle, like resurrection, it does not lead to proving one is God. This is a non-sequitur. Also of note, even if it is found that Jesus existed historically, it does not follow that this means the Christian God exists. More on this later, I will address Pro’s argument in depth.
1: The Existence of Jesus
Pro states that almost all scholars in our age believe that Jesus was a real person who claimed to be God. He quotes C.S. Lewis who argued erroneously that Jesus could not have been a good person; rather he is either God or Crazy. Pro goes even further claiming that you can’t be a good person or a good teacher if you are insane. …show more content…
Famous scientist, helped society begin to understand physics. He believed in Alchemy. This demonstrates that a great scientist is capable of subscribing to falsehoods. Likewise, consider Mahatma Gandhi. Often he is referred to as a moral leader. There is evidence that he was a pedophile. Furthermore, consider Martin Luther King Jr. Certainly a significant figure in civil rights and a moral leader, also a Christian. We know now he often committed adultery. My point being as follows; It is reasonable to say Jesus taught moral things as a good man and also taught nonsense or was imperfect. The simple idea of Jesus as a historical figure does not prove divinity in anyway. I am willing to concede that a man named Jesus lived, though this does little to help
Summary of Pro’s argument
Pro argues that Jesus existed, that the New Testament is a reliable source for history and thus as it claims Jesus was raised from the Dead that Jesus is God. It should be apparent already that even if you grant a miracle, like resurrection, it does not lead to proving one is God. This is a non-sequitur. Also of note, even if it is found that Jesus existed historically, it does not follow that this means the Christian God exists. More on this later, I will address Pro’s argument in depth.
1: The Existence of Jesus
Pro states that almost all scholars in our age believe that Jesus was a real person who claimed to be God. He quotes C.S. Lewis who argued erroneously that Jesus could not have been a good person; rather he is either God or Crazy. Pro goes even further claiming that you can’t be a good person or a good teacher if you are insane. …show more content…
Famous scientist, helped society begin to understand physics. He believed in Alchemy. This demonstrates that a great scientist is capable of subscribing to falsehoods. Likewise, consider Mahatma Gandhi. Often he is referred to as a moral leader. There is evidence that he was a pedophile. Furthermore, consider Martin Luther King Jr. Certainly a significant figure in civil rights and a moral leader, also a Christian. We know now he often committed adultery. My point being as follows; It is reasonable to say Jesus taught moral things as a good man and also taught nonsense or was imperfect. The simple idea of Jesus as a historical figure does not prove divinity in anyway. I am willing to concede that a man named Jesus lived, though this does little to help