aa5874

Please do NOT underestimate my knowledge. The very fact that you find my arguments PERSUASIVE is PRECISELY because of what I know and have established.

I have developed a theory based on KNOWLEDGE of the EVIDENCE from antiquity Not on imagination.

Let us deal with KNOWLEDGE of the EVIDENCE from antiquity and NOT Speculation.

We have in Existing Codices a short-ending gMark, a long ending gMark and gMatthew.

These three books are considered the earliest gospels but all the authors are UNKNOWN. Nothing, Nothing, at all is known of these authors yet ALL THREE have the IDENTICAL story, virtually 100% and Word-for-Word from the Baptism by John to the the EMPTY Tomb.

How is it that NONE of these three authors were AWARE of the Pauline letters??

Paul supposedly wrote letters and sent them DIRECTLY, DIRECTLY to the Churches all over the Roman Empire, even in Rome, for OVER 17 years since at least 37-41 CE

Paul supposedly PREACHED DIRECTLY, DIRECTLY and PERSONALLY to the Churches all over the Roman Empire, even in Rome, for OVER 17 years since at least 37-41 CE

Remarkably, the Pauline DIRECT and PERSONAL TEACHINGS and Letters were NOT even mentioned by any author of the NT Canon.

How can it be explained that a WELL KNOWN Paul in the Roman Empire who started Churches, wrote letters was NOT emulated at all by UNKNOWN authors??

The supposed WELL-KNOWN Paul even claimed he Met Apostles like Peter, James and John and stayed with Peter for fifteen days.

Surely, the unknown authors should have read or heard of the Pauline teachings of Universal Salvation by the crucifixion and Resurrection.

All three UNKNOWN Gospel writers do NOT appear to have attended a Pauline Church or have read a Pauline letter.

There is NOTHING about Salvation by crucifixion or the Resurrection in the short-ending gMark.

This is PRECISELY how we can deduce that the Pauline teachings and letters were LAST.

None of the earliest Jesus story authors were AWARE of the Pauline teachings and INVENTED stories that CONFIRM their lack of knowledge of the Pauline letters.

Mark 9 The Pauline writer UNDERSTANDS why Jesus was resurrected.

Romans 10:9 KJV The Pauline writings are LOGICALLY AFTER the short ending gMark. The Pauline writings are NOT from the 1st century and before c 70 CE.

It was the 2nd century Jesus stories that started the Jesus cult NOT a human character.

aa5874

My point is that there was NEVER an historical Jesus.

The Jesus stories are about a Son of God that WALKED on water, Transfigured and crucified in Judea, not a Son of God that was in the Sub-lunar.

The abundance of DATED Jesus stories from the mid 2nd century suggest that it was BELIEF in the Jesus stories that INITIATED the Jesus cult and NOT a real human character.

aa5874

The short-ending gMark, the Long-ending gMark and gMatthew are considered the earliest Jesus stories in the Canon and they are EXTREMELY significant because they show that the Pauline writings were UNKNOWN at the time they were composed.

Let us examine supposed words of Jesus the Last Supper in the short-ending gMark.

Mark 14 It is MOST important to notice that gMark's Jesus did NOT tell the disciples to perform the Ritual of the Eucharist.

Now, examine the Pauline writings. It is claimed that it was REVEALED to the writer that Jesus on the night he was betrayed did tell his disciples to PERFORM the Ritual of the Eucharist in his Memory ["in remembrance of me"] but NO such request, no such command, is in the earliest Jesus stories of the Last Supper.

1 Cor.11 The sequence is extremely important.

The author of gMark supposedly writes what Jesus said while he was in Jerusalem at the Last Supper.

The Pauline writer supposedly writes what Jesus revealed AFTER the Resurrection.

Even in the Canon, the Pauline stories of Jesus were REVEALED AFTER Jesus was dead and resurrected.

The author of gMark wrote NOTHING of the AFTERLIFE resurrected of Jesus but Paul should have ALREADY PREACHED and WROTE LETTERS about the AFTERLIFE of Jesus and that he wanted the disciples to PRACTISE the Ritual in His OWN Memory.

Why did NOT gMark's Jesus say that the disciples should carry out the ritual in his Memory when he was supposedly alive but told Paul AFTER he was raised from the dead???

The author of the short-ending gMark did NOT know of the Pauline revelations although the Pauline letters supposedly went DIRECTLY to churches in the Roman Empire and the Pauline character preached DIRECTLY in person to them.

The authors short-ending gMark, the Long-ending gMark and gMatthew appear NOT to have been to a Pauline church, they appear to have NOT heard Paul preach and did NOT see his letters.

The author of the short-ending gMark did NOT know of the Commission by the resurrected Jesus to preach the Jesus and he did NOT know of the practice of the Ritual of the Eucharist.

The earliest gMark in the Canon was written BEFORE there was a Jesus cult.

The earliest gMark in the Canon was written BEFORE Paul preached the Jesus story of the resurrection.

The earliest gMark was written BEFORE there was a Ritual of the Eucharist.

The earliest DATED Jesus stories are from the 2nd century and it was the STORIES of Jesus the Son of God that INITIATED the Jesus cult.

The VERY same way that we see that the earliest authors of the Jesus stories were DIRECTLY influenced by the short-ending gMark story and copied his story virtually 100% and Word-for-Word suggests that PEOPLE of antiquity did also BELIEVE gMark's story and it was CHANGED and became the basis for a New Cult.

We can SEE the Changes to the short-ending gMark's story. The Changes have Survived and Canonised in the Existing Codices.

Just EXAMINE the Long-ending gMark--the post-resurrection visit of Jesus was added.

Just EXAMINE gMatthew--the birth narrative and the post-resurrection visit of Jesus were added.

The CHANGES are right there in the Codices.

The short-ending gMark is NOT really a Gospel--it has NOTHING about a New Religion-- it was just a Story that People Believe was TRUE and then later it was ALTERED for Theological reasons.

aa5874

The short-ending gMark is the single most important book of the Canon because it is the earliest Canonised Jesus story and we have an INTERPOLATED version which was also Canonised.

The short-ending and the long-ending gMark have been found so we can see EXACTLY what was INTERPOLATED--there is NO need to guess.

From the short-ending gMark we can see that the character called Jesus the Son of God did NOT start any new religion under the name of Christ.

In fact, on the day Jesus was crucified in gMark, his disciples had either Betrayed, Abanboned or Denied Jesus.

All the supposed Miracles of Jesus were brought to NOUGHT--the very disciples did NOT believe in the supposed Son of God on the very day he died.

The short-ending gMark is NOT a story about Salvation. It has NO theology--No doctrine--it is just a story a Miracle worker identified as the Son of God but was REJECTED by his OWN disciples and people.

The author of the short-ending gMark wrote a story that PORTRAYED the Jews as EVIL.

The Son of God in gMark healed the Sick Jews, forgave the sins of some Jews, cast out Devils from the Jews, Fed the hungry Jews and ACTED like a God.

Yet none of his own Jewish disciples and followers gave evidence on his behalf and left him in the hands of his enemies and the Sanhedrin found him guilty of Blasphemy although he did things that ONLY a God can do.

gMark was NOT written to start any cult. gMark was written to show that the Jews CAUSED the crucifixion of the Son of God.

It was the INTERPOLATOR that Changed the short-ending gMark.

The short-ending gMark was changed for the START of the Jesus cult and it was the Non-historical Jesus, the Resurrected Jesus that STARTED the Jesus movement.

Interpolated gMark 16:15 KJV

Those words are from the NON-HISTORICAL Jesus--the Non-Existing Jesus--the Resurrected Jesus..

The Jesus movement was INITIATED by a STORY not from a human Jesus.

The very Gospel of the Church, the very fundamental Jesus story, Christianity itself, was INITIATED by a FICTION story of the resurrection of Jesus FABRICATED by an INTERPOLATOR.

jdboy

Is there any evidence the short ending of Mark was published on it's own?
Or is the short ending only found in the Codex Sinaiticus?

aa5874

The Codex Vaticanus also has a short-ending gMark.

aa5874

People who argue that there was a human Jesus sometime between 2 BCE and 33 CE are arguing from a Big Black Hole.

No HJer can show that any REAL person of antiquity personally knew Jesus and became a Christian based on Direct personal knowledge of a human Jesus.

We have the DATED DSS and the DATED Jesus stories and Pauline writings and they all corroborate my theory 100%.

My theory is that it was Stories about Jesus the Son of God that INITIATED the Jesus movement sometime in the 2nd century, that is, all people of antiquity who believed in a character called Jesus either did so because of what they read or what they heard and NEVER from what they SAW of Jesus.

And to drive the point to its extreme, the very supposed Canonised CONTEMPORARIES of Jesus did NOT claim they SAW him while he was ALIVE--the supposed Paul saw Jesus when he could NOT.

The supposed Paul BOASTED that he was Visited by the Resurrected Jesus and NOT only him but the Apostles and OVER 500 people.

HJers arguing from a BIG BLACK HOLE.

ALL THE EVIDENCE is AGAINST THEM.

The SUPPOSED Paul BOASTED that he was VISITED by the resurrected Jesus.

Paul became a Christian AFTER the Resurrection--Paul could have ONLY heard or read about a resurrected Jesus.

It was BELIEF in Jesus stories that INITIATED the Jesus movement in the 2nd century.

aa5874

It is remarkable easy to see that the start of the Jesus cult was NOT based on an actual human being called Jesus the Son of God but on non-historical STORIES.

Once the Pauline writings are properly examined it can be seen that the Pauline writers claimed Jesus the Son of God was ALREADY dead when he was REVEALED.

This is EXTREMELY significant.

The Pauline writer was NOT influenced by an actual HUMAN Jesus to PREACH the Jesus story.

The Pauline writers were INFLUENCED by their REVELATIONS.

The Pauline writer was NOT influenced by FLESH and BLOOD to preach the Jesus story.

The Pauline writer was INFLUENCED by what he Heard about Jesus the Son of God.

Galatians 1.15-17 The Pauline Gospel is NOT based on direct PERSONAL knowledge of a Human Jesus or after being in Direct contact with a Human Jesus but AFTER what he heard or understood by REVELATION.

The Pauline writers ONLY required BELIEF--they just had to BELIEVE their OWN Revelations.

Jesus is a Revelation in the Pauline writings.

The supposed contemporary of the Apostles of Jesus who claimed he met the Apostle Peter and James the Lord's brother only MET Jesus in his DREAMS, or Hallucinations [Revelations]

The Pauline writings are EVIDENCE that a human Jesus was NOT at all necessary for the Jesus cult to have started.

The Pauline writer PREACHED the Jesus story all over the Roman Empire based on his REVELATIONS.

The Pauline writer supposedly started Churches by his REVELATIONS.

The Jesus cult was INITIATED by what was HEARD and REVEALED but NOT by a human Jesus.

In the Gospels,Mark 16 it was a Ghost, a Resurrected Jesus, that AUTHORISED the preaching of the Jesus stories--No-one preached the Jesus story UNTIL the Ghost met the disciples and AUTHORISED them to do so.

In Acts of the Apostles 2, it was a Holy Ghost that EMPOWERED the Apostles to Preach the Jesus story. No-one was EMPOWERED to preach the Jesus UNTIL the Ghost gave them POWER on the Day of Pentecost.

In the Pauline writings, the writers FIRST got Revelations from the same Ghost, the Resurrected Jesus BEFORE they began to preach the Jesus story. Galatians 1.15-17

The ENTIRE CANON is about some kind of Ghost character that was RESURRECTED.

The Preaching of the Jesus story is directly related to the Commission by a Ghost, the Resuurected Jesus.

It was a STORY about a resurrected Son of God that INITIATED the Jesus cult NOT a human Jesus.

A human Jesus could NOT resurrect and so could NOT have authorised the preaching of the Jesus story.

aa5874

The short-ending gMark is a most significant book because it does NOT contain anything about Universal Salvation by the Crucifixion of Jesus, Nothing about the Commission to preach the Jesus story and Nothing about a New religion under the name of Christ.

The short-ending gMark has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the PAULINE letters.

The short-ending gMark is MERELY a story about a character called Jesus, considered the Son of God, who was REJECTED by the Jews and caused to be crucified AFTER he healed them, Fed them, Raised their dead and forgave some of their sins and Cast out their Evil Spirits.
Mark 1In the short-ending gMark, the Jews were INFESTED with Evil Spirits--one Jew had enough Evil Spirits to FILL 2000 pigs.

Mark 5 The author of the short-ending gMark claimed his Jesus was ALL over Galilee casting out Demons from the Jews.

Mark 1Mark 6The short-ending gMark DEPICTED the Jews as INFESTED with Demons and Unclean Spirits and has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Universal Salvation by Sacrifice or the Resurrection.

The short-ending gMark was written BEFORE there was a Jesus cult.

People of antiquity BELIEVED the short-ending gMark AFTER it was written.

The short-ending gMark was Manipulated when there was a Jesus cult.

Duvduv

Does the fact that some manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20 prove that the "original" never had it, or that the few copies that have survived lost that "extra page"? Especially because the narrative is interrupted in the middle?