There were 3 good arguments that Jesus could have been Black:
1 He called everyone "brother"
2. He liked Gospel
3. He couldn't get a fair trial.
But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus was Jewish:
1. He went into His Father's business.
2. He lived at home until he was 33.
3. He was sure his Mother was a virgin and his mother was sure he was
God.
But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus could have been Italian:
1. He talked with his hands.
2. He had wine with every meal.
3. He used olive oil.
But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus could have been a Californian:
1. He never cut his hair.
2. He walked around barefoot all the time
3. He started a new religion.
But then there were 3 equally good arguments that Jesus could have been Irish:
1. He never got married.
2. He was always telling stories.
3. He loved green pastures.
But the most compelling evidence of all.... 3 proofs that Jesus could
have been a woman:
1. He fed a crowd at a moment's notice when there was no food.
2. He kept trying to get a message across to a bunch of men who just
didn't get it.
3. And even when he was dead, He had to get up because there was more work to do.....
Originally posted by rwingettI have to disagree. Whenever discussing works of fiction you always consider the characters in the present tense. Example: one would say "Jay Gatsby is a criminal" even though he dies at the end. (Hope this doesn't spoil the book for anyone. )
No. Was is correct.
... --- ...
Originally posted by thesonofsaulYes, but that doesn't really apply to Jesus.
I have to disagree. Whenever discussing works of fiction you always consider the characters in the present tense. Example: one would say "Jay Gatsby is a criminal" even though he dies at the end. (Hope this doesn't spoil the book for anyone. )
... --- ...
Which of these are more correct ?:
Christ is dead .
or
Christ was dead.
or
Both?
Originally posted by frogstomp'Christ was dead' would imply that he is no longer dead. As such I must presume that 'Christ is dead' is more likely to be true.
Yes, but that doesn't really apply to Jesus.
Which of these are more correct ?:
Christ is dead .
or
Christ was dead.
or
Both?
Originally posted by StarrmanBut "is dead" implies that he was real and died?
'Christ was dead' would imply that he is no longer dead. As such I must presume that 'Christ is dead' is more likely to be true.
And if he was real and died, he lived after that, or so the story goes.
That makes was dead correct too.
and if he is a fiction
none of them apply
he couldnt have been "is Dead" or " was dead" because he never was.
Originally posted by frogstompI was merely operating on the options you provided. You didn't attach the condition that if he died, he had to rise again. I was operating on the premise that he may have lived, but would certainly never have been resurrected. As to whether he did live, I am unable to say.
But "is dead" implies that he was real and died?
And if he was real and died, he lived after that, or so the story goes.
That makes was dead correct too.
and if he is a fiction
none of them apply
he couldnt have been "is Dead" or " was dead" because he never was.
Originally posted by StarrmanAh ,, easily solved , i was alluding to his story, mostly in jest
I was merely operating on the options you provided. You didn't attach the condition that if he died, he had to rise again. I was operating on the premise that he may have lived, but would certainly never have been resurrected. As to whether he did live, I am unable to say.