Sheshbazzar

An argument that while it is correct in pointing out that this evidence indicates that the Resurrection for Salvation 'Paulinian' 'gospel' is a late addition to an already known and existent 'Jesus' story, provides nothing at all to support its initial assertion that; "Based on the Recovered dated Texts there was NO Jesus story known in the 1st century and before c 68 CE."

Justin Martyr was aware of and wrote of a crucified Jesus story, one that he believed and wrote of as having occurred during the 1st century CE government of Pontius Pilate.
We don't know where or from whom Justin received all of those details that he does present within 'The First Apology' and in his 'Dialogue with Typhro'.

Justin cites from an then existing 'Memoirs of The Apostles', and by the content of his writings evidently believed that Jesus and his Apostles did live and preach in Jerusalem and surrounding area during the time of Pontius Pilate.

We have no positive evidence of when or where or by whom these "Memoirs of The Apostles" Justin refers to and cites from were first composed. Nor of how long they had been in circulation before coming to Justin Martyr's attention.
Justin his self evidently accepts and believes that these "Memoirs of The Apostles" originated with the Apostles or those Disciples that were present in the 1st century during the governorship of Pontius Pilate to be witnesses to, and to leave their accounts, these "Memoirs" to posterity.

Or on the other hand, one could argue that 'Justin Martyr' his self was a false witness, and that his 'accounts' of what was believed by Christians circa 100-160 CE are all actually nothing other than latter Christian forgeries.

One cannot however, rationally argue that both of these opposing scenarios are valid.

The only way a justifiable statement could be made that NO Jesus story at all was known in the 1st century CE, would be if we had available for our intensive examination, every single document ever written before 100 CE.
We don't, and unless Gawd Almighty himself eventually shows up with that missing library of lost reference materials, we never will.

Per Justin Martyr's writings, there WAS a 'Jesus story' that was known during the 1st century, (or that at the very least was set in the 1st century CE, and was commonly accepted as being genuine and of a 1st century origin) although that 'Jesus story', in the time of Justin's writings was as yet lacking in all of those latter 'Pauline' invented and added theological 'gospel' bits unknown to Justin.




.

aa5874

Your claim is absurd.

Please show that the Recovered DATED Texts support that a Jesus story was known in the 1st century and before c 68 CE.

Why do you NOT understand that there are many 1st century Texts, including the Dead Sea Scrolls, and NONE mentioned a Jesus story, the disciples and Paul??

Do you NOT comprehend that hundreds of ancient Apologetic and Non-Apologetic Texts have been recovered??

It is clear to me that you simply do NOT understand the VAST amount of ancient Texts that has been found.

Christians today BELIEVE the same thing. The Belief the NT was composed in the 1st century has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the actual date of composition.

Justin Martyr NAMED his Sources--Hebrew Scripture, the Memoirs of the Apostles, the Acts of Pontius Pilate and Revelation by John.

Now, where did Hebrew Scripture come from??? Where did the authors get those details about Creation???

Are you claiming that Moses must have been an author of the Hebrew Bible because Jews Believe so??

Again, Justin merely Believed the disciples of Jesus wrote the Memoirs but provided NO actual date of authorship or specific names of the authors.

Christians today do the same thing.

Jews do the same thing.

Muslims do the same thing.

They ALL BELIEVE their Bible.

You are merely repeating the same thing over and over. We already know what Justin wrote.

Hundreds of ancient Texts have been recovered and there is NO shred of evidence at all in any writings dated to the 1st century and before c 68 CE of Jesus, the disciples and Paul.

Can't you understand that such a scenario SUPPORTS the argument that there was No Known Jesus story in the 1st century???

This so very basic.

What??? How in the world is one going to argue such a thing when one does NOT have any Actual Evidence from antiquity??

You must now realize that one can be accused of falsehood if one have no evidence that the Memoirs are later Christian forgeries.

How does one ask me for evidence and then argue WITHOUT any??

Come on Sheshbazzar.

Your argument does NOT make much sense. You propose that One can make an argument WITHOUT evidence while simultaneously is demanding evidence from those he argues against.

How absurd!!!!

It is most absurd that every document would have to be examined. No investigation of any matter could be resolved if every single piece of evidence or statement that may have been made is first sought before a resolution is made.

Please, your position is completely unheard of and totally impratical and has NOT ever been known to have been employed in any investigation in or out a court..

With your absurdity, if a crime was committed and witnessed by thousands of people then every single person must come forward and testify or else No verdict can ever be reached.

You don't seem to understand that an argument can be made about any matter ONCE there is SOME evidence to support it.

Your claim is NOT logical at all. Christians today that believe the Jesus story was written in the 1st century has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the actual date of composition. It means a Jesus story is known TODAY.

Justin Martyr's writings suggest that there was a Jesus story in JUSTIN'S time. Recovered ancient dated Texts Corroborate Justin Martyr--a Jesus story was KNOWN in the 2nd century.

Justin did NOT show that a Jesus story was known in the 1st century because he named NO actual person in the 1st century who mentioned the Jesus story.

For example, Justin did NOT claim that any 1st century person of history like Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius or Pliny the younger wrote of Jesus.

It is utterly erroneous that Justin writings show that there was a Jesus story known in the 1st century.

Your argument is a No Source--No Evidence--No Proof Argument.

Sheshbazzar

Nice dodge, that you chose to totally ignore the sense of the bolded qualification.
First of all let me again remind you, and any readers here, that this is only a DISCUSSION FORUM, and most certainly is NOT any authoritative COURT OF LAW.
There is NO legally authorized JUDGE nor JURY present on this Board to be rendering any absolute binding decisions nor verdicts upon these matters of religious opinion.
There have been no 'SUMMONS to Jury Duty' issued to anyone here to perform JURY DUTY, nor any SELECTION amongst us to serve as the selected and impaneled and authorized JURISTS to render any VERDICT, or authoritative and final conclusions or LEGAL DECISIONS in these matters.
Your gross abuse of LEGAL terms, circumstances, and perversion of LEGAL procedures for your attempt at forming a 'KANGAROO COURT' composed of Forum members is highly inappropriate.

And THOUSANDS of other ancient Texts exist only as small and illegible fragments, or are indicated to have once existed by being referred to in those certifiably ancient texts that have been recovered.

The surviving evidence indicates that these writings did once exist, it DOES NOT support your silly proposition, that if no known copies remain, it is to be taken as some form of LEGAL evidence that they never existed.

We don't posses a single 2nd century CE copy of 'The Memoirs of the Apostles' nor 'The Dialogue with Typhro'.
That lack of DOCUMENTED and c14 DATEABLE copies cannot not be employed as an argument that such did not exist in the 2nd century CE, no more than any such similar lack of surviving 1st century exemplars of 'The Memoirs' can support your fruitcake claims that 'NO Jesus story was known in the 1st century CE'.

You simply have NO way of knowing, nor of establishing the validity of such an assertion.
You DO NOT KNOW when the first copy of 'THE MEMOIRS OF THE APOSTLES' was written.
If you DO know WHEN, WHERE, and BY WHOM "The MEMOIRS of The Apostles" was first written, You need to to reveal that information and your source for it.
And IF THIS WERE ANY VALID COURT OF LAW, any just JUDGE would demand that you reveal this important information to the JURY, or admit to your lack of knowledge in the matter, or be held in CONTEMPT of COURT.

Your asinine 'argument' would never fly in the face of any real and just Jurisprudence.

That a 1st century copy of 'The MEMOIRS' (or even a 2nd century copy) has yet to be found, is NOT any 'evidence' that such could not have existed, as you illogically and ridiculously continue to here assert.

aa5874

I dodge NOTHING. Your assertion is NOT logical. Justin's Belief is NOT evidence that the Memoirs were actually composed in the 1st century.
Please, I have ALREADY told you that your position is unheard of and totally impractical IN or OUT a Court.

It is completely illogical that every piece of Text ever found before c 100 CE has to be examined before an argument is made.

You just need to find ONE piece of evidence dated to the 1st century and before c 68 CE that mentions Jesus, the disciples and Paul and you will win the argument.

That is so basic.

Well, you go and read them and see if they mention Jesus, the disciples and Paul in the 1st century and before c 68 CE and you will WIN the argument.

That is so basic.

You say there are Thousands of fragments well it should be very easy for you to get the evidence for your Belief.

My Argument is that even if you had Millions of Texts dated to the 1st century and before c 68 CE that they would be just like those we have--Nothing about Jesus, the disciples and Paul.

Please, you don't know what you are talking about. The absence of the Memoirs does NOT mean it was composed in the 1st century.

All you have to do is get evidence from antiquity to contradict my argument.

So far you are engaged in a No Source--No Evidence--No Proof argument.

1. You have utterly failed to show that Justin Martyr is NOT Credible.
2. You have utterly failed to provide the Source for your arguments.

Sheshbazzar

Any stupid argument can be made. But when the pertinent information is KNOWN to be lacking, no absolute conclusions can be logically drawn.
YOU DO NOT KNOW what EVERY text composed before 100 CE may or may not have contained. That information is unknown to any person living.

You DO NOT KNOW when, where, or by whom the text of 'The MEMOIRS of The Apostles' was first written.
That Jack is the incontrovertible FACT.

Any claims or 'arguments' that you may tender about 'The Memoirs' are based upon your utter ignorance of its origins.

You have no case that could stand up to scrutiny in any just Court of Law, nor among any scholars learned in the proper application of the principals of logic and of evidence.

A 'Kangaroo Court' drawn from the members of an obviously and admittedly anti-religious and biased ATHEIST Internet Discussion Forum, does not constitute any valid Jury, even if your stupid and illogical 'argument' does manage to persuade a few, that consent of biased opinion carries no weight at all.

Readers do not misunderstand, this is not intended as any insult to the intelligence nor the skepticism of the members of this Forum.
Anyone who is acquainted with my posts will be well aware that I am an extreme skeptic, one that holds that there NEVER was any flesh and blood living 'Jesus', and that all of the stories concerning this individual are all religious fabrications. That makes me an MJer.

It is my sincere hope that other Forum members are intelligent, and are skeptical enough to see through the logical fallacies in aa's 'argument'.

His present 'argument' is so piss-poor that it is a shame that this Forum has to endure or be associated with it.
I continuously post here to indicate and to REMIND to all men who read, that there are Mythicists present here that vehemently protest, and absolutely DO NOT support, and do not desire to be associated with aa's line of illogical horse shit.

All that it will take is the finding of just one single piece of irrefutably 1st century evidence of a Jesus story, for aa's entire house of cards to fall flat, and for his 'NO Jesus story in the 1st century' ' 'Theory' to be forever thoroughly discredited
(and those here that did not have the guts to speak up in opposition and protest, right along with him.)

Are you reader, so confident that aa's reasonings and declarations regarding 'NO Jesus story in the 1st century CE' is such a correct, unshakable and infallible pillar that you are willing to shelter under it?

I am a Mythicist. But I for one, will NOT be found standing under, nor giving any support to this pillar of aa's shoddy construction.


Sheshbazzar The Hebrew


.

aa5874

What a load of BS. No person in the Entire world in or out of a Court has been known to draw a conclusion based on every person living or based on every written statement at the time.

Your statement is just highly illogical. Look at your own Post #262

How did you find that parts of Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings were Late and Forged???

How did you find that 'These asshats never even met any 'Jesus Christ'???

Sheshbazzar, Your own words will haunt you......."YOU DO NOT KNOW what EVERY text composed before 100 CE may or may not have contained. That information is unknown to any person living"

You have DESTROYED your own finding. You have classified your own argument as stupid.

Examine Excerpt of Post #262 of this very thread.

You have Violated your own absurd position.

You have made findings WITHOUT knowing all the Texts written before 100 CE.

[ No-one in this thread, in this forum, and in the world today will be able to find one single piece of credible evidence of Jesus, the disciples and Paul in the 1st century and BEFORE c 68 CE.

They had NO real existence in the 1st century and before c 68 CE.

For almost 2000 YEARS people of antiquity to the present time have had a chance to present one piece, YES one piece, of credible evidence for a human Jesus with a human father.

None has come forward. We were left with Forgeries and Fiction AFTER almost 2000 Years.

But, now tell me??? What will make your findings fall flat like a house of cards?? What will destroy your claim that These asshats never even met any 'Jesus Christ'???

Please, Answer Me.

Sheshbazzar---"All that it will take is the finding of just one single piece of irrefutably 1st century evidence of a Jesus story"

Well, my argument is that the Jesus story and Jesus cult originated in the 2nd century based on the Recovered Dated Texts and Compatible Sources of antiquity.

You have VIOLATED your own methodology and have made findings WITHOUT the knowledge of Every Text before 100 CE.

In Post # 262 of this very thread you claimed you Found the Jesus story in Acts and the Pauline writings were Late and Forged and that These asshats never even met any 'Jesus Christ'.

You have EXPOSED your own absurd self-contradictory argument.

Please, you appear hopelessly confused.

You are engaged in a No Source--No Evidence--No Proof argument WITHOUT the knowledge of Every Text before c 100 CE.

Please, do NOT attempt to derail my thread with your own admitted logical fallacies.

You cannot show that the writings of Justin Martyr are NOT Credible.

Sheshbazzar

There is nothing preventing you, nor anyone else from 'drawing a conclusion'.

That a 'conclusion' has been drawn is however no evidence that the conclusion so drawn has any validity.

Men who thought themselves to be well learned and intelligent, erroneously drew a conclusion that the earth was flat, and was at the center of the universe. Why? because just like you here, they had became convinced that they had to 'draw a conclusion' about matters that in all truth, they as yet lacked sufficient knowledge of.

It is not good nor reasonable to be drawing any absolute conclusions about matters where there are great gaps in our human knowledge and evidence.
Those who do so have a terrible tendency to in the end, be found out to be full of shit.

Anyone with a functioning brain, something which you evidently lack, can go back and examine the context of that quoted statement, and determine for themselves that I was speaking of the forging asshats of the 3nd through 5th centuries CE, -those 'Pauline' writers whom you also despise.

From that same post #262
The subject we were discussing was the 'Pauline' writings and 'The Book of Acts', which we both agreed were NOT authentic 1st century CE compositions. It does not require knowledge of every text written before 100 CE, to weigh the credibility or value of writings forged in the 2nd through 5th centuries CE. These forged 2nd century and latter 'Pauline' writings, being -additions- are of no significance to that which was the content of earlier texts.
In other words, the original writers would have had no knowledge of these latter produced 'Pauline' writings, nor of the 'modifications' of their texts that these latter pious 'Paulinian' Christian forgers would add.

Do you actually lack the linguistic skills needed to parse the meaning of the phrase "Not at all if those written statements were composed DECADES or CENTURIES latter. Or are you just being ignorant because you cannot help yourself?
I expect that this explanation as well as any other that might be provided will go right over your head, due to your lack of ability to parse and comprehend plain English.


You have made so many other stupid statements in the above post, they are not even worth addressing.

A simple FACT that anyone with a brain can verify; You, aa5874, DO NOT KNOW when, where, or by whom the text of 'The MEMOIRS of The Apostles' was first written.
You are in NO position to be reaching any 'conclusions' as to when, where, or by whom the text of 'The MEMOIRS of The Apostles' was first written.
It may well have been composed and circulated in 60 CE for all you know. And you cannot provide any evidence at all that it was not.

Your argument is founded wholly upon your bombastic IGNORANCE, which you are attempting to infect others with.
I am a Mythicist, and I utterly reject your ignorant assertions and faulty logic.
And as long as you continue to repeat this stupid line of bull-shit, I'll continue to argue against it.
You cannot provide one iota of proof that some form of a 'Jesus story' did not exist in the 1st century CE.



.

aa5874

Your posts are Recorded, Sheshbazzar.

Again, look at post #262.

I won't allow you to continue to make blatant mis-leading statements in order to Derail my thread. You must accept your own errors and logical fallacies.

You are wasting my time--you DON'T KNOW all the Text ever written about Jesus.

Please, your arguments have already fallen like a house of cards.



How can you make such claims based on your own position??? You don't know EVERY TEXT COMPOSED about Jesus in ANY century.

Please, you seem to want to derail my thread with your continuous BS.

It has been EXPOSED.

Sheshbazzar

I am NOT derailing your stupid thread.
I am discussing the very ignorant claim that you have repeatedly made in this thread, and am therefore 100% on topic.

All that has been 'exposed' in the foregoing is that you aa, do not understand plain English, and have a piss-poor grasp of the simplest principals of logic.



.

J-D

You don't get to decide that. Sheshbazzar does not require your permission and your purported refusal of it is fatuously futile.Sheshbazzar, I give you dispensation from complying with aa5874's requirements.