Comments 1 - 3 of 3 Search these comments
Jesus never said he was God. He called himself "son of man".
And those who knew him thought he was the messiah.
Much later someone decided that "son of man" must have meant "son of God".
The same is probably true for his "miracles". He swam to a boat during a storm and someone wrote he "walked on water".
Your argument may be logical, but the real question is: what does it take away from Jesus's teaching?
We can learn from Herodotus without thinking he's a God, and without believing every single thing he wrote. Why not extend the same courtesy to Jesus?
Your argument may be logical, but the real question is: what does it take away from Jesus's teaching?
You mean come to set father against son, abandon your family and follow me, and that there is no way but through me?
We can learn from Herodotus without thinking he's a God, and without believing every single thing he wrote. Why not extend the same courtesy to Jesus?
Because we have no idea what Jesus said, or if he even existed. Isn't it odd that the Beatitudes, a cornerstone of Christianity, aren't mentioned at all in Paul's Letters or in half the gospels, and that the overturning of the tables in the temple is in all the Gospels, but not in Paul's letters. Not even in passing, you think Paul would write "Hey, Corinthians, be meek, because they will inherit the Earth, just like Jesus said." - but he doesn't.
Since Paul's writings are believed to predate the Gospels, it's odd that Paul omits just about every detail about Jesus' life found in all Gospels especially considering he claims to have met Jesus' living follows in person, something the Gospel writers don't claim.
Tacitus and Herodotus signed their work; the Gospels are anonymous. We only say "Gospel of Mark" because of Tradition, we really don't know even the first name of the person who put it down. Also, the Gospels are Hagiographies and Religious works; Herodotus is writing generic history without a religious axe to grind. So they are not equivalent in reliability.
There are also many problems with the "Chain of Custody" in the Gospels. Prior to the 200s, all we really have for the gospels is tiny fragments of sentences - and we have many Gospels that "Didn't make it" into Official Canon.
http://celsus.blog.com/2012/10/19/methodological-approaches-to-ancient-history/