From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Date: Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:28:11 EST
Paul Seely wrote:
<<
The actual historical existence of Jesus is a question only raised by very
biased and/or ignorant people. The arguments adduced against it are pitiful.
>>
The reason I reject these nonexistence claims off hand is mainly
because they look too much like variants of historical revisionism.
I can at least understand the mind of the atheist who rejects Jesus
as the resurrected risen Christ, but I cannot get into the mind of
someone who insists that Jesus did not live at all. One thing that
seems least in need to question is the politics and self interests
of the Jewish elite (Pharisees), the crowd who said "crucify him",
Judas or Pilate. They all behaved quite predictably. Likewise
I can name many examples both from recent and past history
where "crowds" (whole churches, nations, and groups)
have rationalized similar kinds of brutality on basically good
people.
Fools refuse to open the history books and examine themselves
squarely in the face. That says about how inane I find atheists
who insist on embracing the nonexistence platform. It is horrifying
to realize what man can do, but we are all capable of this unspeakable
ugliness and suggests the grasping of a disturbed mind to insist on
denying the existence of Christ.
by Grace alone we proceed,
Wayne
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 10:19:33 EST