I have to sort of side with the 'prove it' side regarding the existence of Jesus...the inability to prove it doesn't necessarily lead to the disproof of the existence of Jesus either however....which is something that I think is overlooked by many.
I am an agnostic myself, a fence sitter...but really, where else do you sit when there is no ground on either side of an argument?
Argument 1: There is a Jesus! The bible can't be wrong!
Argument 2: There is no substantial evidence proving the existence of Jesus.
Argument 3: I really don't know whether there was a guy named Jesus or not, and whether or not he was as the bible portrays him is also a mystery. Why proclaim something to be true when I have no idea of knowing either way?
I like argument 3 myself. I've got no problems with people believing in him, or choosing to believe that he never was...I just see argument 3 as the most rational choice available.
Frankly, I don't think it even matters if Jesus did or did not exist, nor would his color matter at all.
|