Duvduv

This is true for manuscripts of one Josephus or Justin:

We have NOTHING--no artifacts, no eyewitnesses, no ancient manuscripts, no recovered writings in the 1st or 2nd century other than what has been bequeathed by the Church which starting in the 4th century had its own agenda, and had the MEANS, MOTIVE and OPPORTUNITY to produce or interpolate texts such as those ascribed to "Josephus" and "Justin."

aa5874

We have EXISTING Dated manuscripts of the Jesus story from the 2nd century.

The Jesus stories are 2nd century Myth FABLES of the Son of a God that was Delivered up to be killed by the Jews.


See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...stament_papyri

It really does NOT matter if you don't accept Justin and Josephus.

We have ACTUAL PHYSICAL DATED RECOVERED EVIDENCE and they show the Myth Fables about the Son of God in the 2nd century.

Adam

I agree with AA (not the other aa), only more so, that there were very early texts (echoing Bart Ehrman here) and that they have ample simple details. Apparently Toto keeps forgetting (and preventing us from remembering) that I have an ongoing Gospel Eyewitnesses thread here in which as an alternate thesis (to accommodate preconceptions here) I developed my Gospel According to the Atheists at Posts #526, 534, 561, 564 etc. The thread died soon afterward when no one could refute me nor point me to anyone who could. However, with at least three very early texts that had no necessarily supernatural interventions, HJ is proven over MJ.

However, I don't agree we can "Honest Abe" say that the Gospel of Mark shows us only a human Jesus, The Jesus Christ of the Nicene Creed is not there, but there are supernatural events indicating divine intervention. The Gospel of Mark is not among the eyewitness accounts I include in Gospel According to the Atheists. In it I have the Passion Narrative (as in the Johannine source), the Discourses in John, and Q.

Toto

I keep telling you that you don't know atheism, and no atheist will accept your gospel. There mere fact that there are no supernatural elements in a novel does not make the novel into history.

If you won't acknowledge this simple fact, why should anyone try to discuss anything with you?

Empty boasting.

Wrong, wrong wrong. Your texts are not early and would not prove anything even if they were.

Adam

Toto,
I authorize you to delete this post if you go back and remove the howlers from your Post #204. (Also note that I added a paragraph you could not have seen.)

Toto

What howlers?

Adam

You are claiming that the three source documents I presented were actually novels? No one has presented any evidence that they were--I am basically awaiting any sort of evidence. You've left the job to Shesh, who is not inclined that way.But if they aren't novels, the lack of supernatural features makes them evidence that you can't just dismiss. ECREE does not apply.
How about a response instead of empty boasting?

Some would agree with you about the first part (in spite of the evidence I presented that they were early), but if they were early could there have been three novels so different about someone who did not even exist? As not novels they disprove MJ. Presence of evidence is evidence of presence.

outhouse

its not reading between the lines

its called cultural anthropology. Every common hard working jew hated the roman oppression for its overtaxation, and Galilee was known as the zealots home base, not only that there was a tax war in Galilee when jesus was a child. he more then likely lost friends and family members to it.

no matter how "you" slice it romans were the enemy, and they wrote the NT so the oppression is downplayed as they made theirselves inoccent



Not only that the gospels tell us jesus preached to the tax collectors and called them sick, its stated he preached to them all. Got ole Zacc to give back much of his take, and got Matthew to quit all together

he is questioned about why he doesnt pay taxes

and at his supposed trial is said to have not paid taxes



the temple which was also the jewish treasury was corrupt, and jesus went straight to the money when he throws money tables around and tries to start a riot, which at that time was like lighting a fuse



jews not wanting to pay taxes was normal, its why the temple fell shortly after his death.

jesus wasnt remembered for being a doomsday cult leader like your OP suggest, there were hundreds of these guys.

jesus was remembered because he stood up against corruption for the common hard working oppressed jew, that got him and his doomsday cult theology remembered.

and for what it is worth, I think the kingdom of god, was the death he knew the fighting jews would soon face, and they did when the temple fell.

Sheshbazzar

There are NO such 'very early texts' that had no miracles and no supernatural interventions. PERIOD

There are NO early writings about Jesus that clearly portray him as being a mere human being.
NO such thing exists, nor can be shown to have ever existed.

NO such miracle-free early texts without supernatural interventions have ever been located.

NO such miracle-free early texts without supernatural interventions were ever reported by any known early Christian witness.

These miracle-free, 'without supernatural intervention' texts you are pretending existed are nothing more than figments of your imagination.
invented by you by the ruse of stripping the only known early texts existent, of those supernatural elements that have been integral to them, and have been attested to by Christians for as long as Christianity has existed.

These texts, as far as can be humanly determined, have ALWAYS contained the miracles and supernatural interventions.
Not ONE early Christian witness ever claimed that there ever existed any Gospel that did not contain these miracles and supernatural interventions.
You have NO evidence that any Gospel texts ever existed that did not contain the miracles and supernatural interventions.

You cannot supply even one genuine early example of the type of miracle-free, no supernatural interventions texts you are claiming.
Because such does not exist. And there is absolutely ZERO evidence that any such texts ever did exist, outside of your ego-inflated imaginations.

Your arguments for a miracle free, no supernatural interventions HJ Gospel are totally unsupported, vacuous and totally without merit.

The more you try to push this horse shit here, the more opportunity you provide me to improve my renunciations of your vacuous claim.



.

outhouse

while agree with your whole post for the most part



Some try and make a claim for a early Thomas, would that not almost fit the bill if they could make the stretch stick???

and while we dont have a Q, if we did and it was just sayings, would that fit the bill?





and I understand there is more thne a handful of "if's" and "wants" in these questions.