The question that wants an answer

"What do you think of this?" was the question we ended with on the last page.

So now its time to answer that question.

It is one of those questions that just seems to demand an answer, and so the answer, I suppose, is going to be one of three.

" I accept what Jesus said about himself, "

"I do not accept what Jesus said about himself"

or "I am still not sure."

If you are ready to accept that Jesus is who he claims to be then I would recommend that you click on the button below " Good news".

If you are no ready to accept that what Jesus said about himself as true then lets just spend a little time exploring the alternative options of who Jesus is.

There is no doubt that there was a man called Jesus who lived in the area of Judea in Israel around the years that is accepted by Christians. we now in our calendar would count that year as around year 0 to 33. many sceptical historians have concluded that there is irrefutable evidence that this man did exist in this place and in this time.

So, the question then is who was he? Clearly there are those who claim that he was the Son of God. but also clearly there are many who reject this idea as ridiculous and laughable and absurd.

There is plenty of evidence that the man Jesus was influential and in his day many followed him and his teachings, also there is plenty of evidence that he upset the religious people of the day so much that they contrived a plan to get the Romans who were the occupying rulers of the time to sentence him to death and be executed in the same way common criminals were in those days, by nailing his hands and feet to a lump of wood and letting him hang from the nails until he died an agonising death.

So was he a criminal deserving the death sentence?

There has been quite a bit written down by eye witnesses of his life and and recorded the things that he had said and did while he was making such a reputation for himself.

So much of what has been written about this man Jesus both in historical writings of the romans and other observers of those days. most of it in terms of his gentle and kind nature and the amazing things that he did, and about the numbers of people who saw good things that he did.

so maybe he was a good man and maybe he did do some good things and maybe he was an influence for good.

The things attributed to him by observers talk about his compassion and kindness.

So it may be you will be happy to accept the idea that Jesus was a good man who did kind things.

But If that is who he was then what about the things that Jesus claimed and said about himself? I listed a few of them on the previous page.

Is is plausible that someone who is deluded so much that he was convinced that he was God, could be still accepted as being a kind and good man? If he was not deluded but sane, then was he a liar and a counterfeit and a con man? does this sill work? can you accept him to be a conman and a good man at the same time?

It's a Problem. There does not seem to be a way to accept the evidence about his life and death and his actions and accept him as being a good man but at the same time not accept what he said about himself as being also true. because if you do not accept those statements as being true then Jesus knowingly mislead his friends. He could not have been a good man!

So, what will you do with this problem of who Jesus was?

Maybe He was who he claimed himself to be?

Can you accept this may be the only plausible explanation?

maybe you feel you need to talk about this more and go over some things where you find accepting this idea as problematic?

We can set up a zoom meeting or if you are near someone who can meet up with you then it may well be possible to arrange a meeting in person. use the contact us button below.