outhouse

LOL

I made it clear what I stated. :wave:


and it was kept in said context for aa

outhouse

why would it???


were talking about the beginning of something that took off slow and snowballed later. ALL coming from a culture wrapped in oral tradition due to extremely high illiteracy rates


I dont know that he did. I dont trust paul.


the written literature we are left with is our sources. like any other ancient text, history can be pulled from its pages.


You want special pleading when its not due.

outhouse

Not every piece of literature made it through the ages. from natural fires to throwing different material into flames to rot. we only have fragments left of first century material

Sheshbazzar

Still doesn't address the basic question of what makes either oral tradition or written literature factual or mythical.

Popularity? Public opinion? Religious convictions?

A -vote- among religious scholars accredited by religiously oriented institutions? :wave:

aa5874

I don't want to hear what you IMAGINE happened.


What snowball???? Up to the mid 2nd century, Justin Martyr did NOT name a single well known Christian writer Before his time.

I understand. YOU TRUST YOUR IMAGINATION because you don't trust Paul and have no corroborative evidence.


Did you NOT just say that you don't trust Paul???

Please tell us how you PULL history from unreliable sources???

You use a Monkey Wrench???


You are the one who DOESN'T trust Paul but PULL history from sources we can't trust.

Your argument is most illogical and completely unsubstantiated.

You seem to be an INVENTOR of Myth Fables of PAUL which were DERIVED from sources that are UNRELIABLE OR UNKNOWN

outhouse

You know already, tradition plays very little if any in mythical content.

from what ive seen by the time it hit papyrus, the legend was redacted to be heavily mythical.

In this case oral tradition was closer to the real movement since were dealing with basically poor uneducated jews.


since all were left with is what would be jesus enemies version of jesus, and noting a roman audience and hellinized authors, oh ya oral tradition was definatly has a possibility of being more historical.

aa5874

How in the world did you find out that the oral tradition of illiterate Jews were closer to the real movement???

You are SPECULATING without a Shred OF EVIDENCE from antiquity.

Sheshbazzar

Wow. We don't have that original oral tradition, and have no access to that original oral tradition,
yet somehow,.... inexplicably, we know that that oral tradition defiantly has a possibility of being more historical. Huh???

Care to tell us in what ways this unrecorded oral tradition differed from the written tradition?
And WHERE ever did you come by this unrecorded oral information?

aa5874

It can be logically deduced that the post-resurrection visits in gMark and gMatthew were written BEFORE the SIX visits of the supposed resurrected Jesus in the Pauline writings.

If it was ALREADY known and circulated in the Churches of the Roman Empire that the resurrected Jesus was SEEN by the ALL the Apostles and OVER 500 people then gMark would be already Obsolete or totally irrelevant when it was claimed that NO-ONE was told that Jesus was raised from the dead in Mark 16.8

In the Pauline writings it was NOT necessary for anyone to tell PAUL that Jesus was resurrected. It was the resurrected Jesus that VISITED Paul.

In gMatthew, the author did NOT know of the Pauline post-resurrected visits by Jesus and made a most implausible claim.

In gMatthew, it is claimed that Jesus WENT to Galilee AFTER he was supposed to be DEAD to meet the disciples UP in a MOUTAIN. See Matthew 28.16.

It makes no sense for the author of gMatthew to claim the dead Jesus WALKED to Galilee when Jesus could have just APPEARED to the disciples in Jerusalem.

Based on Josephus, it would take at least three days to go from Jerusalem to Galilee.

The Pauline writings contain FAR More details about the number of people that supposedly saw the resurrected Jesus and NO Gospel writer used any Details found only in the PAULINE writings.

Bernard Muller

Why DEAD? According to 28:9-10, Jesus had resurrected.
BTW, I think that the two post-resurrection appearances in gMatthew (28:9-10 & 28:16-20) are interpolations, added up by two different interpolators at different time from late 1st to early 2nd century.

I agree with that, except the six visits have been interpolated in 1Cor15 at about the same time the post-resurrections visits were retrofitted in gMark & gMatthew. But the interpolator in 1Cor15 knew about gLuke.