[CCWoody]

My faith is strong, and reading questionable material doesn't weaken it - just like hearing Tom Daschle talk doesn't make me believe him. ~ Xenalyte

Teaching that Christ was never crucified for our sins is not a "questionable" teaching. It is a blasphemous teaching that spits on the Propitiation itself.

Teaching that Christ never rose from the dead is not a "questionable" teaching. It is a blasphemous teaching.

Woody.

[Xenalyte]

The book does not teach anything. It posits a historical alternative.

Jeez, we're all prickly today, aren't we?

[Green Knight]

A) Historians will NEVER say that Christ died for our sins. Deal with it. It'll always be about what he did in life, and getting executed for it. It WON'T be about dying for sins.

B) Historians will NEVER say that Christ was resurrected.

Geeze, do you flip out whenever you see a Discovery Channel special that doesn't mention either of these? Get over it. As far as history is concerned, Christ was just a regular guy who died for political reasons. Unless there's indisputable proof that he was resurrected (And face it, there isn't. Why else is it called "Faith"?), then no serious historian will ever claim that he was resurrected.

[RightWhale]

It is a blasphemous teaching

Heretical, certainly. Not sure if it is blasphemy, is it contemptuous?