The Deity and Resurrection of Christ

Recently, I had an interesting e-mail conversation with someone who calls himself a Christian. I wanted to let everyone in on this conversation because I believe it clearly illustrates an increasingly popular way of thinking within some "Christian" circles. As I argue here, the Bible is indeed an accurate document. In it, we are told that Jesus, who died for our sins and rose again, is the son of God. Without the deity and resurrection of Jesus, Christianity falls apart (1 Cor 15:14). It appears that some Christians, in order to be socially accepted, have taken upon themselves to attack the Bible so they can deny the deity and resurrection of Christ, laying waste Christianity in the process. The name of the person with whom I conversed has been changed. The response order number appears after the responder's name.

-------------

Rob 1 (in answer to one of the survey questions):

i think that christian conservatives are far too literalist to understand the spirituality that jesus tried to impart to his disciples with only limited success....god, on the other hand, has no problem with it...therefor, jesus is an wonderful man to exemplify our lives by....but the only son of god ....no way....

Mark 1:

What do you use as the authority on who Jesus was or was not?

Mark

Rob 2:

the very same authority as you do...the only difference is that i'm not a literalist....i feel constrained to take into consideration the early christian movement...the fact that the bible was translated hundreds of times by monks who could not help but excercise free thought....the fact that the current translations cannot even be reconciled....and the fact that king james who i guess commissioned your very favorite translation of the bible was homosexual and practiced a homosexual lifestyle....so this inerrancy of scripture stuff coupled with your animosity of someone's behaviour based on a biblical translation commissioned by the very person whose behaviour you condemn equals hypocrisy of the highest order to me....and as the saying goes ...if the shoe fits.....

Mark 2:

Rob,

If you could tone it down a bit, I'd like to discuss this subject in a calm, logical and scientific way. I've been discussing and studying these subjects for quite awhile and I think you'll find me quite reasonable and logical.

What you call "facts" are hardly that. We know the translation of the Old Testament is accurate, given finds like the Dead Sea Scrolls and the book of Isaiah. Before the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest manuscript of Isaiah was 1,000 years more recent. After the find, we notice that the book of Isaiah essentially hadn't change in 1,000 years. For you to be correct about the New Testament, you must assume all known manuscripts were in a central location so they could be modified. New Testament manuscripts were actually spread all over the known world. So if they were changed, they wouldn't match up when they were brought back together in our modern age. They do match up. I haven't even expounded upon constant new finds, archeological and other support (see www.wwcw.org/qa.html).

As far as the King James Version goes, it matters not the personality of the translators. I'm not conceding your accusations but they are irrelevant. What matters is the accuracy of the translation. The King James is not the best translation but it is pretty good.

As far as the authority you use, you claim that you are not a literalist because of imagined problems of the Bible. Thus you are claiming the Bible cannot be a good authority to use. So what authority do you use on who Jesus was or was not? If you pick and choose what to believe from the Bible, what do you use as a yardstick to what parts are valid and what parts are not? Certainly not current social norms? The truth is what matters, not what makes you feel good or your mortal sense of right and wrong.

Mark

Rob 3:

mark ...you just don't get it do you ?....i disagree strongly with you basic premise that jesus is (was) the only son of god.....there is nothing to gain in carrying this discussion further.....god bless you... Rob

Mark 3:

You disagree despite the evidence to the contrary? Your opinion doesn't matter if it's not supported by evidence; the truth matters. If I'm right, which is supported by the evidence, where does that leave you? You can run from this discussion but it's not going to make your opinion any less untenable and running certainly won't make you spend eternity with God. That's what it all comes down to - and you can't ignore that. You will not spend your eternity with God if you discredit his great sacrifice. This is supported by the evidence. This is a fact.

Mark

Rob 4:

call your doctor mark...your starting to lose it...Rob

Mark 4:

Actually, I've found it. Science and logic beat blind faith any day. And eternity is a very long time...

Mark

-------------

So basically, my point was that if the Bible is the Word of God, what is says must not be taken lightly. That's why the accuracy of the Bible is attacked. The Bible says that Jesus is the son of God and he died and rose from the dead so that everyone can be saved.

Peace to you,

Mark Harpt
wwcw@wwcw.org
Editor
WWCW

I want to learn more about how I can have a relationship with the creator of the universe.