Transfer interrupted!

: : : : Yes, I'm familiar with this statement by Lewis. As a teenager he was my #1 favorite Christian apologist, and I think I've read every word he ever published. I do, though, take exception to this particular remark, since I can think of any number of other options besides the three he named.

: : : : : What made Jesus unique was His claim to be divine.

: : : : I'm very sorry, but this really was NOT a unique claim. I came across a story almost identical to the story of Christ in mystic Islamic literature ... Al Hajj I think his name was, or something close to that. Basicly, this Sufi mystic did and said virtually all the same things Jesus did, was even executed for blasphemy and reported by many to have risen from the dead. The problem with making absolute statements is that there are almost always exceptions.

: : : : That doesn't mean I think people should not be Christian.

: : : : : I know what Tolkien's answer would be to your question.

: : : : Compared to Lewis, Tolkein was relatively silent. What do you think he would have said?

: : : : Blessings,

: : : : Lady G.
: : : : When I said unique I meant in comparison with the other famous moral teachers and founders of major world religions. I realize others have claimed to be divine. I was thinking of some other words in the same passage by Lewis, "if you went to Socrates and asked "Are you Zeus?", he would have laughed at you, if you went to Mohammed and asked him "Are you Allah?", he would have first rent his clothes and then cut your head off", etc. As I recall, the Sufis were a Muslim sect and therefore formed well after the time of Christ, but that's neither here nor there. The point is that Jesus made a set of claims about himself that, if true, make all the difference in the world. Tolkien as a Catholic believed this. He would not be a Christian if he did not.

: : :Ha Ha! Ignore that earlier post name. As you can tell, I'm a football fan as well as a Tolkien and Lewis fan.
: : :Yours Truly,
: : :Finrod

: what the base question meant was: "if Jesus teachings were right then are they still right even if he is not a son of god, and if they were wrong, would they still be wrong if he IS?"
: or something like this. the point of the question is that it's far easier to check if his teachings are right, and then belive in christianity without beliving in Jesus, but it's practiclly impossible to know if Jesus was the son of god (hhmm, I don't think i'm saying it right, and I probably can't with my limited English...).
: anyway, this is probably a vain arguement. I suggest dropping it.(btw- Finrod, stop posting with : it makes it harder to know what's new in the post).

Looks like you're thinking of Christianity as simply a code of morals and ethics to follow and ignoring the doctrines that make Christianity what it is. There are many other religions and philosophies that have similar moral and ethical codes of conduct. However, Christianity separates itself from these other religions by making truth claims about Jesus being the son of God, His death upon the Cross as atonement for our sins, His Resurrection, etc. Now if these claims are false, then Christianity is false, regardless of whether its moral code is honorable or not. So the question of whether Christ was the Son of God or not is of paramount importance. I'm not denying anyone's freedom to believe what they want, but to insist that you can reject the divinity of Christ and still be a Christian is absurd. That's like saying you can reject the idea that Mohammed was a prophet of God and still be a Muslim. Granted, you can still try to follow the moral codes, but that's hardly the same thing. I suppose you could still call yourself Christian or Muslim but that would be dishonest.