![]() |
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
![]() |
#141 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
![]() Quote:
If an human is placed in gMark, or any book of the NT, the human Jesus becomes absurd. He has no news for the Jews, but false promises, who died as a blasphemer and his body cannot be accounted for. And further, if Jesus was actually known to be a man during the days of Tiberius, then the Jesus story as we have them now is total fiction. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#142 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 3,397
|
![]() Quote:
![]() In other words, he made it up. Unless, of course, you would like to present some evidence for this revelation being anything else but made up. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
#143 | |||||
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
![]() Quote:
You are just making an argument from personal incredulity here. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
#144 | |||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MidWest
Posts: 1,894
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
![]() |
![]() |
#145 | ||||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 3,397
|
![]() Quote:
Simple. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Here are a few examples: What are the earliest Christian writings, per the current scholarly consensus? Answer: The genuine Pauline Epistles. What does Paul claim as his source for his information? Answer: Divine Revelation. What is the earliest Gospel, per scholarly consensus? Answer: The Gospel of Mark. What is the genre of the Mark's Gospel? Answer: Unknown, though it contains a mixture of plain fiction and midrashic materials. Does "Mark" give any indication of his intent? Answer: No. Does it seem likely that the subsequent Gospel writers used Mark as the basis of their stories? Answer: Indeed it does. There, now you should be able to understand my "theory". |
||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
#146 | |||||
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
![]() Quote:
|
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
#147 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MidWest
Posts: 1,894
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#148 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
![]()
I have no idea what your educational level is, or what you want to learn. You could start by background reading in historiography; if you ask, you could get suggestions. But just repeating that you are right and everyone else is wrong is going nowhere.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#149 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: MidWest
Posts: 1,894
|
![]()
I'm not looking for a reading recommendation, thanks. I just see that and every time someone says to read a book as just trying to distract the conversation from the posters inability to answer the questions.
I'm looking to hear a coherent theory that explains the origin of the myth and how it was confused for history. I didn't graduate high school so try not to use too many big words. |
![]() |
![]() |
#150 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
![]()
But since you don't have enough background in myth or history or historical theories, you can't identify a coherent theory. You can't expect every poster here to bring you up to speed on what you are missing - you have to put in some effort yourself.
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|