Freethought & Rationalism Archive

maryhelena · 05-30-2010, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

I'm a mythicist re Jesus of Nazareth......

But, from your posts I get the impression that you are an historicist for Jesus of Nowhere, Jesus of the UNKNOWN, Jesus of NO history or the Jesus of Silence.

The authors of the NT and Church writers have presented THEIR evidence for Jesus of Nazareth and it is that Jesus of Nazareth who was TRULY:

1. the offspring of the Holy Ghostin the Synoptics

2. the Creator of EVERYTHING in heaven and earth in gJohn and the Pauline Epistles.

3. Did TRULY walk on the sea during a storm in the Synoptics

4. Was TRULY equal to God and did exist BEFORE all things in gJohn and the Pauline Epistles.

5. Was TRULY raised from the dead in the NT Canon.

6. DID TRULY ascend to heaven in the Synoptics, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writers

There is no other Jesus to be investigated but JESUS of NAZARETH and once you have found that JESUS of Nazareth was MYTH then your deliberations are basically done until NEW EVIDENCE can be found to contradict your conclusions.

I have Also come to the conclusion that JESUS of Nazareth as described in the NT Canon and the Church writings was TRULY MYTH. My deliberations are done until NEW EVIDENCE can be found.

There is NO credible EVIDENCE for JESUS of Nowhere, Jesus of the UNKNOWN, Jesus of NO history, or the Jesus of Silence also called the "historical" Jesus.

No way, aa5874 - deciding for a mythical Jesus of Nazareth is not the end - it is the beginning of a historical inquiry re early origins of christianity...
New evidence is of course welcome - in the meantime what we can do is re-interpret what we do have - the gospels and the rest of the NT - re-interpret it all in the light of the actual history of the relevant time period.

aa5874 · 05-30-2010, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But, from your posts I get the impression that you are an historicist for Jesus of Nowhere, Jesus of the UNKNOWN, Jesus of NO history or the Jesus of Silence.

The authors of the NT and Church writers have presented THEIR evidence for Jesus of Nazareth and it is that Jesus of Nazareth who was TRULY:

1. the offspring of the Holy Ghostin the Synoptics

2. the Creator of EVERYTHING in heaven and earth in gJohn and the Pauline Epistles.

3. Did TRULY walk on the sea during a storm in the Synoptics

4. Was TRULY equal to God and did exist BEFORE all things in gJohn and the Pauline Epistles.

5. Was TRULY raised from the dead in the NT Canon.

6. DID TRULY ascend to heaven in the Synoptics, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writers

There is no other Jesus to be investigated but JESUS of NAZARETH and once you have found that JESUS of Nazareth was MYTH then your deliberations are basically done until NEW EVIDENCE can be found to contradict your conclusions.

I have Also come to the conclusion that JESUS of Nazareth as described in the NT Canon and the Church writings was TRULY MYTH. My deliberations are done until NEW EVIDENCE can be found.

There is NO credible EVIDENCE for JESUS of Nowhere, Jesus of the UNKNOWN, Jesus of NO history, or the Jesus of Silence also called the "historical" Jesus.

No way, aa5874 - deciding for a mythical Jesus of Nazareth is not the end - it is the beginning of a historical inquiry re early origins of christianity...
New evidence is of course welcome - in the meantime what we can do is re-interpret what we do have - the gospels and the rest of the NT - re-interpret it all in the light of the actual history of the relevant time period.

You are NOW looking for who? What is the name? Where from? What century? What evidence? What source? What re-interpretation?

What a waste of time!!

You can't be looking for Jesus of Nazareth, he was was a Myth. You have NOW become an inventor (re-interpreter)?

In light of ACTUAL history Jesus of Nazareth was a MYTH unless you want to re-interpret ACTUAL history like the CHURCH writers and the authors of the NT.

I have NO INTENTION of fabricating my own history of Jesus of re-interpretation. I would not EVEN DARE to re-interpret Homer's Achilles, ZEUS or ROMULUS.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.