outhouse

Don't get me wrong brother, There are aspects the authors or oral tradition carried, that do reflect exactly that.

But does the story reflect the author or a man?


I am just of the position that yes there was a historical Jesus, but once we get beyond a few basic descriptions, reconstruction enters guess work on who the man may have been.

What we really know in better detail is how the early movement progressed, and what they perceived within a few decades after death. That does help recreate different versions with different plausibility.


There is a good chance a young peasant was influenced by many things. I do see a socioeconomic struggle, hardship faced by those who were not accepting of Hellenism. whether he was influenced by cynics or how much he adopted because it worked for him, is another question.

aa5874

Prescisely! Your Jesus is the product of guessing. The Quest for an historical Jesus cannot be maintained.

You do not know where, when or who HJ was.

It was multiple attested in and out the Canon that Jesus was the product of a Ghost and a Virgin.

Jesus is a product of Jewish, Roman and Greek mythology.

We have no good details about Jesus.

If you claim Paul was early then since 37-41 CE it was known publicly all over the Roman Empire that Jesus was the Son of God, was Raised from the dead and was seen by over 500 people.

It is clear that the Pauline stories of Jesus support Mythology.

If the Pauline letters were early then Jesus was a Myth.

Jesus had no history in the Pauline letters.

The Pauline letters are about a Resurrected and Ascended Being.