bacht

"Eat, drink and be merry..."?

aa5874

But, strange enough it was NOT Josephus who wrote "prophecies" about John the Baptist so why don't re-habilitate the authors who prophesied that John the Baptist was the fore-runner to Jesus?

This is the author of gMatthew with his "prophecy"

Matthew 3:1-6 - "

The is author of gMark with his "prophecies"

Mark 1 These NT "prophets" NEED to go into RE-HAB..

ApostateAbe

Thank you, I appreciate it. Do you happen to have a past thread or something where you explain many of the details? It is OK if you don't.
I am certainly not at that point. If anyone examines conspiracy theories with the mindset that they must be either entirely true or entirely false, then they will tend to believe them to be entirely true, because such theories tend to be based largely on a set of undeniable facts. They go wrong only with the inclusions of myths, faulty inferences and ignorance of or prejudice against the best explanations. I encourage you to look into conspiracy theories. Debate those people. There are many people on the Internet willing to defend the idea that the Twin Towers fell by a controlled demolition, for example. It is very much a learning experience in the field of bullshit.

bacht

Either HJ or MJ can be interpreted as conspiracy theories:

HJ: Catholics cooked up a story backed by doctored texts to prove the right of the church to speak for God

MJ: modern atheists seek to discredit the church and the Bible by pseudo-scientific textual deconstruction and projection of the worst motives onto early catholics

There are probably other possible variations

ApostateAbe

Yes, and I must again emphasize that I am not calling any historical explanation a "conspiracy theory." It is all about the poor reasoning associated with the theories, not about the conspiracies. I believe in conspiracies; they are perfectly normal.

spamandham

I can't recall a consolidated thread, though I do recall a discussion at one time that went into depth about similarities between the Eucharist and a particular Egyptian funerary rite involving bread and beer, and there have been many discussions about the Lazarus / Osiris stories, including one that focused on the source evidence from pyramid texts (many of which are translated to English and available online). There have been multiple threads discussing the wholesale substitution of Isis/Horus icons for Mary/Jesus.

maryhelena

Tea party, lemon tea and chocolate cake - the hard stuff dims the brain cells and one can't 'dream' rationally....

bacht

You do brighten up this place Mary

I'm stuck in dreams, my spare time goes to either history or science fiction, ordinary life seems so dull in comparison...

aa5874

Upon close examination what you say may not really be true or valid.

HJ, a human Jesus, requires that some theory be presented that contradicts the available evidence from antiquity, a theory that goes AGAINST the NT Canon and the Church writings and subjective suggestions are substituted as historical "facts".
HJ requires a "VIVID" imagination and rhetoric.

MJ simply uses the information PROVIDED by the NT and Church writings which the Church claimed to be true and then simply declare the character called Jesus in the NT Canon which was believed by the Church to have existed as DESCRIBED as TRUE could have been only non-historical in order to have accomplished his GOAL, salvation through his resurrection.


HJers MUST discredit their ONLY source for HJ and claim what they have "cooked up" is the truth about HJ.

HJers are possibly, as we speak, re-writing the Jesus story as found in the NT, or some have already done with scenes that require the participants to have had mass amnesia or mass hallucination to appear "realistic".

Are you implying that modern atheists wrote Matthew 1.18 where Jesus was claimed to be the offspring of the Holy Ghost?

MJ does not require any conspiracy at all. MJ simply requires an observation of the DATA that the Church PROVIDED AND claimed was TRUE or believed to be TRUE.

Church writers claimed Matthew 1.18, Mark 9.2, Luke 1.35, Mark 16.6, John 1, Acts 1.9 and Galatians 1.1 were TRUE or believed to be TRUE.

Well, based on observation of the DATA from the Church, then Jesus was a BELIEF, a myth.

MJers did NOT write, re-write or CONSPIRE to re-write the NT Canon.


Some HJers believe they know the true father of Jesus by some conspiracy theory.

maryhelena

Day dreaming does allow the creative juices to flow. It's not all logic; it's not all take step one, step two and then step three - and - eureka! - we have discovered something new.

So, keep with the day dreaming....