My Opinion On Pro 's Case

Once upon a time, in a far off land lived a man named Jesus. Jesus was the Son of God. His mother was named Mary, and his earthly father was Joseph. Joseph was of the line of King David, whose line of heritage was traced back all the way to Adam and Eve. Jesus had the power to heal the sick and paralyzed, give sight to the blind, speech to the mute, and life to the dead. This may very well sound like a fairy tale, but all of this was as true and real as you and me. Jesus was the living proof of God, and was literally God on earth. Jesus was perfect in every way, and was without sin; yet the Pharisees did not like what Jesus was preaching and accused him of blasphemy. This of course was not true; because God is inerrant, and Jesus was the living and, the human version of God, he speaks no lies, nor commits any crimes. Because of the charges against Him, and the Roman Empire convinced that He was causing trouble, He was sentenced to a crucifixion. The crucifixion of

Whether you believe Christ is a liar, a lunatic or Lord, you cannot say he was only a great moral teacher. If you believe He is a liar, practice your free will and believe as you wish. If you believe He is a lunatic, practice your free will and believe in the same manner. If you believe He is Lord, practice your free will and believe it. But do not say He did not exist, or that He was just a great, moral teacher. I have found otherwise. “'I know your deeds that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.” (Revelation

Many people ridicule Christians for believing in a man who resurrected from the dead. They laugh at Christians and criticize them for basing their faith on an event that lack proof and evidence. However, the evidence that skeptics use to challenge the Christian faith, in actuality, support the claims that Jesus truly was the God that he claimed to be. The evidence that affirms Jesus’ claims to be true include his lifestyle and teachings, the prophecies that he fulfilled, historical facts, and the dramatic transformation of the lives of his disciples. Many may ask Christians how they can believe in a Savior without proof of his divinity; but, in reality, God has given us an abundance of signs. He is still providing us with compelling evidence

Here are a few of the challenges Christians face about this topic. The first is some claim that the only document he is written in is the New Testament. This is false as he is included in several other writings including Suetonius and Tacitus. It is much easier for people to question his existence 2,000 years after his death because he is not here to prove them wrong, but he was there to prove them wrong 2,000 years ago. Not once was the question ever brought up if Jesus existed 2,000 years ago. This is because they were there with him with proof in front of them. Another reason to support the claim he did exist is the way the Jews described Jesus in the Gospels. He was depicted as weak and as infamous to the Jews by being hung on the cross. Jews wouldn’t logically depict their God this

There is a lot of evidence which point to the truth of Christianity. If the resurrection of Jesus truly occurred, then Jesus is God the son. If the resurrection did not occur, then he is not God the son.

One of the co-writers of the “Pentagon Papers” Carl Bernstein’s quote brings forth the importance of writing about the truth. In the time of the “credibility gap” of the late 60’s the discrepancy between what happened and what was said to have happened generated uneasiness between the American people and their government. Factual inconsistency has been around for centuries and can be traced back to ancient Greek historians. Greek writer Herodotus is considered to be the father of history, but upon looking at his work, The Histories, they rely on storytelling and hearsay. In contrast, Thucydides, another historian at the time, writes The History of the Peloponnesian War a historical work that focuses on factual evidence and can be seen as more

G. Collingwood deems the Bible as not being historical on the basis of divine intervention. Collingwood lists seven ideas that he believes are important to historical literature. He wrongly claims that all of these are rooted to the New Testament and not the Old Testament. Oswalt clarifies how the majority of the essential requirements for historical writings were found in Israel. For instance, Israel's perspective offered a concrete foundation that superbly accommodated historical writings. Furthermore, on account of this foundation in a transcendent perspective, Israel's understanding of history was different than the non-biblical ANE's understanding of history. Thus, where did Israel's exceptional understanding of history begin? Virtuoso or elevated intellect does not fit with the bible-founded depiction of Israel; and contrasting their ANE neighbors, would put cognitive and social virtuoso somewhere else. The main conceivable explanation, accordingly, is that Israel began some place different from other people, which the Bible deems to be direct revelation from the transcendent One himself. Furthermore, this revelation was delivered through human-historical experiences; thus the history writings must have a high level of precision, which should be perused in such an adjusted route as to seek after the significance inside that account.

Now anyone may easily think, “This man is a straight lunatic.” Now no longer can He be a liar because He proved His power. If you have seen any insane people, you will notice that they don't speak the same way Jesus did. “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Mt. 5:44.) Jesus spoke to change the lives of millions of people. Calling him a lunatic would completely contradict the idea of accepting Him as a great moral teacher. Therefore once again you have been proven

This paper will not align itself behind a certain view in an attempt to twist the reader’s arm into believing one side is better than the other. It will provide no opinion whatsoever as to which side you should belong to; it will leave the qualities and failings of the argument itself alone.

Instead of looking for faults in an argument, they should be looking for the reason why they felt compelled to either say such a thing or believe in such a thing. Both approaches have their benefits and disadvantages, but the Rogerian approach proves to be the most effective because it takes account of the other parties’ feelings and motives behind why they believe in something a certain

We all know the story of Jesus. He was born to Mary the virgin and was raised to adulthood. Then, through a turn of events, became targeted and eventually, after immense pain and suffering, died on the cross. He then returned, to life, walked on water, and more. To non-believers it does seem like an extreme story that cannot possibly be factual. To believers, it is

After analyzing the evidence presented from both perspectives, it is clear to see that both sides have reasonable points that must be considered when

The quest for the knowledge on the historical Jesus started as a protest against the traditional dogma of Christianity, but when the neutral historians joined the movement, all they saw was Jesus without features. Even when these scholars decided that other biblical figures such as John the evangelist, John the Baptist, Paul, and others were at home in a symbolic and richly storied world. Jesus himself

When judging the historical reliability of the gospels many factors come into paly. In judging the historical reliability of the Gospels the kind of the gospels is important in understanding the intentions of the writers concerning the historical value of the text. When ranking the following sayings of Jesus:

First off the speaker in the video made a claim that Jesus’ did not exist and there was no primary sources