To: dmz; Jim Hill
You are confusing 2 issues. The historical nature of Jesus Christ, and his being the Son of God. I can easily believe the first without believing the 2nd. The petard you speak of must be in your own eye to not see that distinction.Your reasoning is flawed. If you believe in the historical nature of Jesus Christ, you necessarily believe he is the Son of God. On the other had you can believe in the historical nature of Jesus of Nazareth and believe he was only a man.
53 posted on
12/11/2008 1:27:56 PM PST by
stripes1776
("That if gold rust, what shall iron do?" --Chaucer)
To: stripes1776
Your reasoning is flawed. If you believe in the historical nature of Jesus Christ, you necessarily believe he is the Son of God. On the other had you can believe in the historical nature of Jesus of Nazareth and believe he was only a man. You got me.
It was my word choice that was flawed. I should not have used Christ in describing the historical man.
See what happens when you let us agnostics post on the religion forum :-)
54 posted on
12/11/2008 1:41:06 PM PST by
dmz
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson