Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Marcinkiewicz
I'm an atheist, but I mean, imagine if historical Jesus as portrayed in the Bible (as 'leader of men') truly existed in the role that the gospels portrayed him occupying...he'd constantly be having to explain to his disciples and assorted onlookers that he was talking to his father who was also himself...that this sort of 'clarification to onlookers' is not ever provided in the gospels is a major strike against trinitarian doctrine--how can you follow the son who is also the father if the son is in your presence and continually presents the father as a distinct entity from himself?
Mind you, I don't believe in the gospels as a historical account, per se, and I don't believe in god at all, but if I were a Christian, this 'lack of cognitive dissonance' on Jesus' part would, among many other things, present a problem for me
|
I think the problem of the early Christians was how to make a mere Messiah (like the high priests, King David, Emperor Cyrus, etc) more important or equally important to "the single God" (rather than a high priest, a kingdom king, or an empire ruler).
Otherwise, the pagans would not have taken the bait, since they could care less who exactly their priests or oracles were, since their focus was "the gods" and not "the ancestors".
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
