aa5874

Are you a moderator? Why are you engaging in these type of comments?

You have NOT addressed J-D continuous BLATANT ATTEMPTS to derail my thread.

People KNOW what is going on.

Now, I have SHOWN that gMark DESTROYS the HJ argument.

The character called Jesus in gMark had a SPECIFIC GRAVITY that was FAR LESS than that of Human Beings.

Human Beings are INCAPABABLE of walking on the sea.

In effect, gMark's Jesus was a PHANTOM. See gMark 6.48-49.

But, gMark also DESTROYS Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings.

On the day the character called Jesus was ARRESTED, his disciples FLED and later Peter DENIED knowing Jesus.

This is EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT.

The VERY LAST ACTIONS of the disciples and Peter were to ABANDON AND DENY Jesus in gMark.

Now, if Jesus was a MAN he could NOT have resurrected.

Remember, the VERY LAST DEEDS of the disciples and Peter were to ABANDON AND DENY Jesus after he was ARRESTED and then Crucified.

In order for Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings to be credible there must be GOOD NEWS of the resurrection and Jesus MUST be PHYSICALLY seen by the disciples.

If Jesus was just a man he could NOT resurrect.

In ACTS 1, the resurrected Jesus COMMISIONED the disciples BEFORE he ascended.

In 1 Cor.15, Paul claimed he and OVER 500 people saw the Resurrected Jesus AT ONCE.

But, in gMark, the disciples and Peter abandoned and denied Jesus. There was DEVASTATION when Jesus arrested and later executed.

And when the EMPTY TOMB was discovered the visitors FLED and said NOTHING to anyone.

gMark destroys Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings.

Sheshbazzar

To be fair, most atheists, if not all, do not believe any of the fantastic elements in these stories, they simply believe that there was, or might have been a flesh and blood human preacher who was the inspiration to tales that were latter much embellished before being put into written form.

Dismissive arguments, based on him being the son of a ghost, or a phantom, able to walk on water, or resurrected, are merely regarded as latter embellishments which really have no bearing on the HJ hypothesis. Thus bringing up and repeating these fantastic elements has no persuasive power at all to those atheists whom have never accepted them in first place, in arriving at their persuasions regarding jebus's level of historicity.

aa5874

Well, what people BELIEVE is their own problem. Some Christians BELIEVE Jesus is the Son of God who did EXACTLY as stated in the Bible WITHOUT any external corroboration.

Some atheists BELIEVE there was an historical Jesus of Nazareth using the Bible as evidence when the Bible claim Jesus was the Child of a Ghost born in Bethlehem.

I can't stop people from BELIEVING Myth Fables contain history.

I ONLY present EVIDENCE that SUPPORTS the MYTH JESUS theory.

Now, in gMark there was another person called CHRIST who did NOT follow Jesus and was claimed to be performing miracles.

During the life time of Jesus in gMark he was NOT known PUBLICLY as Christ and Jesus was REJECTED as Christ and EXECUTED the very FIRST time he made such claim public.

When Jesus was EXECUTED his disciples had ALREADY ABANDONED and DENIED him.

Jesus in gMark was ABANDONED, DENIED, REJECTED, and EXECUTED.

Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings are FICTION based on gMark.

The Pauline writers claimed Jesus was Christ and LORD and was given a name ABOVE every other name in heaven, on earth and under the earth and that every knee in the Roman Empire (the earth) should bow before Jesus Christ.

No such thing is found in gMark. NOT even Jesus told his own disciples he was Christ before Peter did and he Immediately BARRED them from making people know what Peter said.


If gMark's Jesus was a man then Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings are FICTION. Jesus was not known as Christ and could NOT resurrect .

If gMark's Jesus was a MYTH, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings are STILL Fiction. Jesus could NOT be Christ and did NOT Resurrect.

But, in gMark, Jesus was a PHANTOM.

Sheshbazzar

ho-hum. Most all atheists accept that the TEXTS contain fictional material, that fact however has no bearing at all upon the question of whether a real flesh and blood, fully human, preacher once lived who was the inspiration for the original religious movement, and its latter produced highly fictional narratives.

aa5874

So what SOURCE has bearing on the question of whether there was a real flesh and blood, fully human preacher?

gMark is NOT that source.

gMark is a source for an OBSOLETE ABSOLUTE PHANTOM.

We have SOURCES that support the MYTH Jesus theory.

We have NO SOURCE of antiquity for an historical Jesus.

Myth Fables support Myths.

Historical sources support historicity.

HJers can PROVIDE NO SOURCE of antiquity for their BELIEF.

People who want to argue for an historical Jesus MUST find sources for their Belief.

I really don't care about them and their HO-HUM.

I have found SOURCES of antiquity to support MYTH Jesus.

In gMark, the Specific Gravity of Jesus was NOT that of a human being.

That is all that matters to me.

HJers are doomed. They have NO material.

Kapyong

Gday,

Wow.

Can aa really not know that Toto is a moderator?
How could that be possible?

In fact that is SO astonishingly ignorant that I'd normally call "Poe" - but tragically, I think aa's ability to read and understand really is that bad.


K.

tanya

Mark 1:1 makes clear that your description here, is not an accurate summary of the ontogenesis of "the original religious movement". That religious movement was not based on a "fully human, preacher", but rather, according to Mark 1:1, upon the son of god.

Well, perhaps, MAYBE. Not exactly.

This is where you have some room to argue, Sheshbazzar. There are TWO different versions of Mark 1:1.

Bottom line:
Some versions indicate that Jesus was the son of God. Others omit that nugget.

tanya

Think again.

This time put on your wool cap.

It was obviously a rhetorical exclamation of irritation. Very logical, and intuitive.

Sheshbazzar

Apologies, but this reply was delayed by the arrival of a houseful of unexpected guests.
It seems to be beyond your ability to comprehend, that the argument for the existence of an actual person behind the myths, is not at all dependent upon anything contained within these mythical texts.
Every single line of the texts might be myth but that alone would not preclude the possibility that they were constructed based upon a vaguely recalled flesh and blood preacher whom the cult had gradually inflated to an ever greater super-human status, until by the gJohn he was elevated to a status equal with God, or of being God.

_The content of Mark 1:1 -or any other portion of the NT- has no bearing at all on the question of the initial existence of a flesh and blood charismatic preacher._

All of these texts were composed decades or even a century or more after the life of this alleged individual. As such they do not reflect any accurate information, other than suggesting by the fact of their rather sudden existence that there was this belief and that there may have been an actual person on whom the tales were based.

I am no HJer, and as hundreds of my posts in these Forums prove, I am of the most absolute and extreme MJ conviction.
Yet I am aware of what constitutes the actual atheist HJ position, and see no reason to misrepresent it. It has nothing to do with the content of these stories, and everything to do with their existence. The existence of them is the fundamental argument that there possibly existed a person on whom they were originally based.

Personally, I am fully convinced that there never was any such single individual.

aa5874

Well, the EXACT opposite charge can be made against HJers. They seem UNABLE to comprehend that there was or most likely was NO actual person behind the NT Jesus stories.

HJers blatantly REJECT the evidence of MYTH Jesus as FOUND documented in writings of antiquity.

It is UNHEARD of that actual evidence of Mythology is REJECTED in order to re-construct the past.

No-one dares REJECT the evidence of Mythology for Romulus and Remus in Plutarch's Romulus.

Your line of argument is NOT logical. HJers CANNOT argue for an Historical Jesus based on Silence. HJers CANNOT re-construct the past on IMAGINATION.

People can BELIEVE whatever they want but to argue for an historical Jesus of Nazareth then one MUST have sources.

I argue for the MYTH Jesus theory based on actual written evidence found in Matthew 1.18-20, Luke 1.26-35, John 1, Mark 6.48-49, Mark 9.2, Mark 16.6, John 20, John 21, Acts 1.9, Galatians 1.1-12, and 1 Cor.15.

Please, PRESENT the SOURCE of antiquity that show the CULT gradually INFLATED the status of Jesus.

In gMark, the disciples ABANDONED and DENIED Jesus. Those were the LAST DEEDS of the disciples and Peter in gMark.

The VERY LAST words of Peter in gMark was that he did NOT know the Man.

Mark 14.71 Peter DEFLATED Jesus in gMark.

Peter don't know WTF the maid is talking about.

Peter is CURSING and SWEARING in gMark. WHO the F--K is Jesus? I don't know the F--K--G man.

Please, tell me who inflated Jesus. Just give the SOURCE so that I can EXAMINE it.

HJers HAVE ZERO sources for their IMAGINATION of INFLATION.

Such a claim is wholly absurd. HJers themselves USE the very Gospels to claim their HJ was from Nazareth.

Have you NO idea that HJers use Galatians 1.19 to claim that James was the BROTHER of THEIR HJ of Nazareth?

Have you NO idea that HJers use gMark 6.3 to claim James was the BROTHER of THEIR HJ?

HJers USE the very sources that show Jesus was a PHANTOM as a source for their OWN HJ.

Please TELL HJers that the NT is NOT historically reliable because they USE the same sources that do NOT reflect accurate information and they do so WITHOUT corroboration from non-apologetic sources.

Tell HJers that the NT does NOT reflect accurate information and NEEDS corroboration.

Pilate, Caiaphas, Tiberius, even John the Baptist have been corroborated.

Jesus has NOT been corroborated.

I really don't understand what is your argument.

The SUPPORTING evidence for MYTH Jesus has ZERO to do with HJ or mis-representing HJ.

I have THEORISED that Jesus was MYTH based on actual written evidence found in the EXTANT Codices.

In gMark, Jesus was an OBSOLETE ABSOLUTE MYTH. It is claimed he was WITNESSED walking on the sea and that he Transfigured in the presence of disciples.

That is ALL I need to support my theory. I need documented written evidence from antiquity.

What do HJers NEED for their Historical Jesus of Nazareth?

HJers NEED SOURCES but they Have ZERO sources. HJers are DOOMED.

Did you use the NT to come to such a conclusion?

I USED gMark to SHOW that Jesus was an OBSOLETE ABSOLUTE PHANTOM.

Tell me WHAT SOURCE did HJers use to claim Jesus was INFLATED.

Listen to some of the LAST words of Peter.

Mark 14.71 Who the F--K is HJ of Nazareth?