Michael Madigan wrote: > Jesus is a prophet in Islam. > Jesus is the Messiah in Christianity > > To say that Jesus never existed is silly. >
Wow! How can we ever dare to compare Charlie's lame and short explanations with this example of clarity, of sound argumentation, of intellectual wisdom? Suddenly everything was so clear to me. Of course! Why didn't Charlie explain it so thoroughly? We should team up, buy you a ticket to Iran and send you there. I'm certain you'll be able to explain and convince all Mohammedans out of their evil ways. We'll have millions of converts in a few months! > > > --- Charlie Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> At 03:13 AM 1/26/2007 -0200, Helio W. wrote: >>> Charlie, >>> >>> Watch: http://www.thegodmovie.com >>> >>> Then think. >> I viewed the trailer. It appears it's a movie that >> claims Jesus never existed. >> >> This attack on Christianity is not new. It has been >> introduced, debunked, >> re-introduced, re-debunked many times in the past >> 200 or so years (starting >> in the late 1700's). >> >> You may find it interesting to note that the premise >> that Jesus never >> existed is not introduced by historical scholars. >> Usually philosopher's, >> atheists, anti-Christian groups, etc, are the ones >> that like to broach this >> topic. I think the reason this is the case is that >> there is just way too >> much historical evidence that supports Jesus >> Christ's life on Earth. As far >> as I know, there are no accepted scholarly claims >> that Jesus did not exist. >> >> Of course, beyond his existence, the arguments >> immediately start in about >> whether or not he actually did miraculous things, >> what he actually said, >> etc. That's where scholars will start to disagree; >> but they disagree >> primarily because they can't agree on initial >> premises. E.g. some scholars >> flat out refuse to believe any type of 'miracle' can >> ever occur. So, solely >> because of that supposition, they refuse to believe >> most of the recorded >> events in Christ's life. To me that sounds pretty >> silly and intellectually >> dishonest. It would seem better to just evaluate >> things based on what was >> written and the context it was written within. >> Anyway... I'm digressing.... >> >> I've been through many studies of Biblical, and >> Christian, criticism; the >> comparisons of Christian teachings to >> Greek/Babalonian/Sumerian mythology; >> the comparisons of religions; historical research >> and Biblical >> authenticity; and so on. So when movies like the >> above come out, I don't >> find them very interesting (unless they purport to >> have discovered >> something 'new' - which this one does not as far as >> I can tell). And so I >> just file them under the "Da Vinci Code" category of >> fiction or "Christian >> attack" pieces. >> >> Hmmm.... That sounded pretty arrogant. I was going >> to go back and delete >> part of that last paragraph, but I decided to leave >> it. I don't mean to >> sound arrogant, but I don't want to give the >> impression that I'm discarding >> opposing views flippantly. >> >> -Charlie >> _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
