|
|
- I was born on 6/4/42.
- Raised as a pseudo-Christian, and budding scientist, I started becoming disenchanted with the Jesus concept/story early on – maybe, as early as 2nd grade.
- Jesus (following in the path of Santa Clause) just wasn't making sense to me...
- Today, it is 3/28/11.
- And, in the last few decades, I have drastically changed my mind about Jesus.
- I now think that there is much more to the Jesus concept/story than first meets the eye -- and, that Jesus probably was (is) the prophesied Jewish Messiah.
- I now think that I just needed to take a second -- much slower and closer -- look, in order to begin appreciating the evidence and logic...
- But then, I have to realize that I am not now -- nor have I ever been -- impartial on the subject. I have 'always' wanted, and still want, Jesus to have been (to be) the prophesied Jewish Messiah.
- Obviously, I cannot really trust my own conclusions and suspicions...
- And then (being as old as I am), I now suspect that this issue could really be important…
- And then, do I really want to “believe in” Jesus if he wasn't the prophesied Messiah?
- And besides, can I really “entrust my life to Jesus” (a real neurological event) – which is surely what Jesus wanted us to do – if I’m not “pretty darn sure” that he was who he said he was?
- What I need, therefore, is ready access to an effective presentation of both sides of this story.
- Will my current suspicions and conclusions hold up in face of the logic and evidence of dedicated skeptics?
- If so, I might be able to comply with Jesus' wishes (the neurological event, and state, to which Jesus alludes, seems only semi-voluntary).
- And even if I can't "let go and let Jesus," the holistic thinking triggered by studying Jesus seems to provide a lot of solace anyway. And In truth, I suspect that what's important, anyway, is effort -- effort to find out what's right, and then effort to do it...
- But then, back to the "both sides" issue -- effective presentation of both sides requires back and forth between the two sides. Juxtaposed pro and con presentations won’t nearly do it.
- In other words, what I need is ready access to effective debate between the two sides.
- And for me, effective debate would have to be in writing…
- And, what I really need is effective debate between two experts from the two sides.
- But at this point, no such debate exists...
- Perceiving myself as some sort of pseudo-expert for the Jesus side at this point, and having intimate access to the Internet, I can imagine the possibility of slowly presenting the best case I can muster for the Jesus side, and slowly taking on all Internet comers to the contrary…
- With luck I can engender some interest and help.
- And perhaps eventually, I might even convince a real apologist to do the same thing on a popular website.
- That’s the idea.
- But then, you might have noticed that effective debate in general, even in writing, is almost non-existent.
- Luckily, I’ve been studying human debate for 40 years, and now think that I have a way to MAKE debates effective. I present a full discussion under "Procedures," somewhere below.
- For now, it’s enough to know that I wish to carry out the debate on these pages in the form of a trial conducted in an American appeals court (Jesus has already been tried and convicted).
- I’ll start by presenting a "brief" for the appellant – Jesus – and then move on to the evidence itself.
- For now, the best I can do re the other side is to tackle their obvious objections up front -- and otherwise, present the specific debates that I’ve had with them (on other websites) so far.
- If you feel like you might be able to help – on either side – please let me know at rsavage@nycap.rr.com.
- Also, I love to number everything. If you don't like it, please let me know that.
- For more introductory stuff, click here.
|