Hello Fellow Atheists: So here's a question. It's been bothering me for some time now and I just want to get your perspectives. When I first became a believer I was handed the book "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. I read it and at the time it made sense to me. I didn't question it much at the time. Now that I am an Atheist I'm curious what others think about it. There are only three options given in this book. Jesus was either a liar, a lunatic, or the true son of God. Of course I know some of you believe that he never existed at all, (I do not). So I want to explore this further.
Which is it?
Is it none of the above?
Why? (back yourself up with evidence)...
I hope this discussion can be educational in nature for those of us who are still learning. Thanks!
I think none of the above, I read that he was a radical Jewish rabbi, that was involved in the rebel cause against Roman rule.
When I was a senior in High School I used the "Lord, Liar or Lunatic" argument as a "speech to convince" assignment in speech class at Chambersburg Senior High School, in Chambersburg, PA. The teacher gave me an A- and she said the only reason for such a low grade was because I didn't give an alter call at the end, and my speech was so convincing that she was certain I would have receive a great response.
Today I understand that there are plenty of lunatics which make statements that would threaten their own lives. And now I regard Jesus the supposed Christ as one of them. There's plenty of documentation of this. Google "David Koresh" if you need to see a modern-day example.
Modern day evidence, evidence I've seen with my own eyes even today, indicates that the supposed "followers of Jesus" only use their religion as an excuse to hate their neighbors, which is obviously self-negating considering the Golden-Rule as stated by Jesus himself.
What more evidence would one need?
Where is everybody? It's lonelier than the last living cell in a dead body!