Sheshbazzar

Well, as the Gospels were assembled from past and then current religious myths they no doubt do contain portions that originated within an Aramaic linguistic environment.
But it is one hell of a long stretch from that, to be making a claim that one can identify by name the portions written by any particular author, when there is a high probability that the characters within these stories, just like the mythical events and speeches, are nothing more than literary fabrications.
The argument is as circular as a dog endlessly chasing its tail, with nothing but the content of these highly mythologized religious propaganda documents to give it any leg at all to stand on.
There is virtually nothing within these Jebus stories concerning either Jebus or his Apostles that can be confirmed by any external and non-apologetic sources. All of them are unknown and unreported by any contemporary history or sources, and only begin to appear decades after all allegedly involved are long dead and gone. No identifiable eyewitnesses ever recorded any of this. All of it is by anonymous religious writers.

I have been reading Adam's posts over at T-web. He has a self-admitted history of mental 'problems'.<edit> than trying to bury us under his load of ....er ....imaginations.

Adam

Gee, did you miss this on the hot new thread

Mythicism Gaining Ground: Thomas L Brodie and Philip Davies , Post #2?
I re-posted my climactic post #450 from Gospel Eyewitnesses in which I demonstrated by Bauckham's principle of inclusio that seven eyewitnesses are identifiable from my seven written gospel eyewitnesses.

Sheshbazzar

No, I didn't miss it. The horse shit was no better, and no more valid than the horse shit of your previous threads.

There were no eyewitnesses to your fairy tale events that never happened. No one ever even so much as claimed to be an eyewitness.
Why don't you stop wasting your life making this imaginary horse shit up?

Huon

[coldcase]
By Bauckham's principle of inclusio, Sherlock Holmes is a eyewitness to Dr Wtson, and reciprocally.
Jesus, the demi-god son of God and Mary, is an eyewitness to Philip, Andrew, Mitt, Barack, and some other people. Reciprocally, they are eyewitnesses to Jesus.
[/coldcase]

Vorkosigan

Adam, please stop wasting all this bandwidth, it's trolling. Go home and read some books on historical methodology, especially in HJ studies, but also in general. Then come back.

Adam

You're so out-of-date that you don't even realize HJ methodology has collapsed. Form Criticism proved so impossible to apply objectively that it has been out of favor for four decades. The tests were too stringent to yield any results that anyone could agree upon.

I called its bluff 32 years ago, but I was too in advance of the times to get it published then.

I have two Master's degrees. How many others posting here on FRDB do?

It's been a year now and no serious refutation against me has appeared here, nor has anyone pointed to any scholar who refutes my case. Maybe it's time to look into the telescope.

Sheshbazzar

Maybe its time for you to take a walk, and try peddling your horse shit elsewhere.

PhilosopherJay

Hi Adam,

Out of curiosity, what are the master degrees in?

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Toto

I don't know who this is addressed to - most skeptics here are quite aware that HJ methodology has collapsed.

How does this support your case?

Sheshbazzar

Trying to prove a HJ by diddling with the texts has also collapsed. Adam simply has not received the news.