Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Because so many others have already devoted themselves to the task. And I have other things to do.

Hey, we all know that I'm just a anonymous nobody Forum poster, and what I write here will largely never go beyond here.
Nope, I hold no delusions that anything I write here will have any significant impact beyond the readers of this thread.

It is out in the big world, the Academic world, where the faults in your theory are going to have the wedges of logic and sound scholarship by known, recognized, and credible professional scholars driven into every crack in your claims until every error becomes a gaping chasm, visible to all that look.

Why am I pontificating against you here? Because you are here, arguing.
I never once mentioned you, or your views till you stuck your proboscis in.
Go away and I'll again have nothing to say about you or your conceits.

My world, contrary to your inflated ego, does not revolve around you or your ideas. You think you are really something, a real God's gift to man. To me you are just another flyspeck that time will see wiped away and forgotten.

Originally Posted by jdboy

That's fine but i'm interested in Understanding the story based on the known historical record we have Now.
I don't what Aristides understands from the story he's just stating the story.

If i want to quote one message how is that done?

Originally Posted by jdboy

That's fine but i'm interested in Understanding the story based on the known historical record we have Now.
I don't what Aristides understands from the story he's just stating the story.

If i want to quote one message how is that done?

Originally Posted by jdboy

Toto says,"Do you see a button that says "quote" below the post on the right hand side? Click on it."

Yes, there's quote all, quote 2levels and multi quote message but i can't just quote one message.
confused

Originally Posted by aa5874

]

Again, your claims about me are utterly erroneous. Your response has deteriorated over the years.

I have used and found an abundance evidence from writings of antiquity to support a WATER tight argument, Far Superior to you, that the Pauline writings are not from the 1st century and do not reflect the teachings of the Jesus cult up to at least c 180 C E.

Effectively, the Pauline corpus are now known to be manipulated sources.

You are the one who has zero wriggle room and must rely on sources that you admit were manipulated and are not credible.

You are the one who exposed or implied that the Pauline writings were interpolated but still cling to the very same writings for your history of an early Jesus cult before c 68 CE.

Only those without wriggle room must use Acts of the Apostles to date Paul.

You seem not to know or have not realized that it was the passages that make the Pauline writings appear early that were most likely inserted.

If Paul was early then he wrote NO letters--there is no wriggle room for you.

1. The only canonized WRITING, Acts of the Apostles, to claim Paul was early wrote NOTHING of the Pauline letters.

2. The Canonised earliest author of the Jesus story,from baptism to the resurrection, wrote Nothing of the Pauline revealed Gospel--Nothing of Salvation by the Crucifixion and Resurrection.

I examined multiple sources and found that there were NO Jesus cult of Christians in the 1st century and No Pauline letters.

We all know that you have zero corroborative evidence from antiquity for Paul and the Pauline writings.

We all know that the Church writers and even the Church did NOT know when Paul really lived, when he really died, what he really wrote and when he wrote them.

We all know that the earliest Pauline letters recovered and dated are no earlier than the mid-2nd century.

Every single Parameter to date the Pauline letters before c 68 CE ARE MISSING.

Every single Parameter to show that the Pauline writings represent the early Jesus cult is MISSING.

All the Parameters would be missing when there was NO Jesus cult of Christians in Jerusalem.

Originally Posted by aa5874

The supposed birth of Jesus was not even an event. The short gMark did not mention the nativity and both authors of gMattew and gLuke claimed he was the product of a Holy Ghost.

There were no Christians in Jerusalem in the time of NT Jesus.

The very Canon of the Jesus cult claimed it was the Holy Ghost that gave the disciples the power to preach the Gospel--Not Jesus.

The extraordinary event was the Fall of the Jewish Temple c 70 CE.

The Jesus story and cult came AFTER the Fall of the Jewish Temple.

Every single piece of NT manuscripts that have been dated cannot show any story or cult before c 70 CE.

Doherty's arguments are without corroboration.

The recovered dated NT manuscripts match Acts of the Apostles with respect to the Pauline letters.

All the Pauline are forgeries, fiction, and were unknown by the early Jesus cult of the 2nd century.

Originally Posted by Toto

Do you see a button that says "quote" below the post on the right hand side? Click on it.

Originally Posted by Toto

If you click on quote, you should get the entire message in a quote box. You can then edit to to only respond to part of it.

Or you can copy the text you want to quote, and click on the quote icon in the edit box.

Originally Posted by aa5874

You have not presented any actual evidence. What you think is not evidence?

Perhaps billions of people think Jesus existed as God.

I have already notified posters here that Doherty merely Presumes that the Pauline letters were composed when he thinks it does.

This is completely unacceptable to me.

Doherty must provide attestation from antiquity that early Christians believed Jesus was only heavenly, never on earth, and was not believed to be crucified on earth before c 70 CE.

Who were these early Christians?

Not even Jesus Christ of the NT support Doherty.

Mark 9:31 KJVLuke 24:7 KJV
Doherty's heavenly crucified Jesus is a modern invention and WITHOUT attestation in or out the Canon.

There were not a single Jesus cult of Christians in the 1st century before c 70 CE--we have CORROBORATION with Philo, Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, the short gMark, Aristides, Justin Martyr and Minucius Felix.

Originally Posted by jdboy

Jesus also taught that the dead don't pop out of their graves and get married on earth. The dead rise as angels in heaven.
The question is did the writers of these text believe that Jesus came down to planet earth.

Originally Posted by aa5874

How could Jesus teach such a thing when according to Doherty Jesus was never on earth? Where is your source?

You really do not understand what Doherty is arguing.

You don't seem to understand that Doherty has relied on the Pauline letters for his "never on earth heavenly crucified Jesus" even though he admits and argues that the Pauline Corpus has been corrupted.

Doherty places Paul before the Jesus story was known although the very same Pauline writings stated Paul PERSECUTED those who believed the Faith and that he was LAST after 500 people to see the resurrected Jesus.

Doherty's "never on earth heavenly crucified Jesus" is completely invented and without corroboration within the NT.

Apologetic Writers of antiquity that mentioned the Pauline letters also claimed Jesus was on earth, was baptized by John, did miracles and was crucified After a trial with the Sanhedrin and Pilate.

Once you become familiar with NT Canon and writings of antiquity you will be able to see quite easily that Doherty's claim about the "never on earth heavenly crucified Jesus" is hopelessly confused in chronology and undocumented.

Not even the Church knew when Paul lived and what he wrote.