Elijah

Sure, present the standard who, what, where, when, why, and how for your particular mythical origin theory as thoroughly as you can. Without the “an individual” and “another individual” explanation.

Elijah

It’s insane because it’s like comparing the evidence you or I are going to leave this world to the evidence Bush is going to leave here. Completely illogical comparison.
Most of the texts were written later by people who had no ability to speak about anything but about what had been passed down to them.

It’s not that I don’t care, it’s that your line of argument here is absurd.
Do you really think this is addressing any issue at all? How he was presented by later scribes is not of concern. It doesn’t address the origin of the person in question. You can say Jesus is mythical because of the Holy Ghost concept, but you saying it doesn’t make it true nor does the concept applied to him prove or show he was of mythical origin.

What is your understanding of the holy ghost and where did you get that understanding from?

Behold someone not even knowing what kind of evidence they need to provide to make their argument. Using the text of the bible to try to prove a mythical origin is about as effective as using the text to prove a magical one.

You were the one who was asked some simple questions about your myth theory that you have dodged now twice, because you know you can’t answer the most basic questions surrounding the theory you are so sure of.
Who wrote it? When and where? What were they writing? How did it get confused for history? Can you answer these questions or not?

bacht

I think I understand you now. You're saying that until a mythicist presents a more-or-less complete and detailed rebuttal, explaining every piece of evidence we have, you're sticking with your variant of the traditional story.

Is this a fair paraphrase? There are some people who have attempted this, though I haven't been able to pursue it that far myself.

Elijah

Yea sticking with historical origin until there is another coherent option to consider.

I'm not asking for any evidence, just a complete theory that coincides with the evidence we do have or what we think we know. It can be totally from your mind but as long as it makes sense then I will consider it but these vague empty theories aren't going to get the job done.

aa5874

So, you must therefore admit it was insane and illogical for the authors to mention the so-called prophecies, the conception, the birth, the baptism, the temptation, the miracles where he spat in people's eyes to make them see, and raised the dead, the transfiguration, the crucifixion, the resurrection and the ascension of Jesus when he was a man who just died on a cross.

It is to you insane and illogical for the authors to give all that information because Jesus was not like Tiberius.

And when we compare the information about Jesus and Tiberius, it is really insanity and illogical to think Jesus was human or sane.


What did I tell you? You cannot find any history for your suicidal man.

I told you to read the evidence for the mythical Jesus from Matthew1.18 to Acts 1.9, from birth without sexual union to ascension through the clouds.

And, please read Church History by Eusebius, he wrote the history of the Church. Eusebius can answer all your questions.

By the way, Eusebius claimed Jesus was truly the son of the God of the Jews, born of a virgin, begotten of God, and equal to God.

Elijah

Depends on if you think the authors wrote the story from scratch or if they are just recording the stories told of him at the time.
Who do you think the authors of the gospels are and what do you think their relationship with Jesus was?
Comparing the evidence left by an emperor to one left by suicidal preacher is insane yes. It’s also foolish to not consider the differences when comparing the history/legends surrounding a political emperor to a spiritual messiah. It’s ok to compare the legends surrounding a spiritual messiah to mythical gods but it’s not ok to ignore the differences.
What did I tell you? You cannot find a coherent theory to put forward to explain your mythical beliefs. Do you even have a theory? Or is that what they claim of him being impossible the limit of your argument?
As I said, you can’t use the gospels as evidence of a mythical origin any more then you can use them for a magical one.
No he can’t answer my questions, because my question is how did you come to the conclusion that the source of the legend of Jesus was a myth and not a man.

aa5874

I will continue to present the evidence that the authors did present a myth since you cannot present any evidence to show that your suicidal man has any history.

Behold the myth.

In Genesis there is a talking serpent, in the NT there are talking clouds. And dead prophets come to life and then vanish after the clouds talk.

Mark 9.2-8 Behold the myth called Jesus and the talking clouds.

Elijah

You're not presenting any evidence at all. You haven't even presented your theory yet, much less evidence. You're just forcing me to repeat myself over and over, while you dodge basic questions about what you believe did happened.

All you can say is that the claims about Jesus aren't possible, you can't show how those claims began. That's your job if you don't want to believe in a historical source and have a more far fetched theory on how Christianity came about you think we should believe.

dog-on

Sure.

Paul thought up his version of a savior god.
Mark, sometime later, made Paul's character come alive.

As I said, simple.

Your turn.

Elijah

What is your reasoning for believing Paul is the originator of the story? Are the apostles and Stephen fictional creations then? Did Paul write something else or was the Gospels based off his letters or him himself? What is the understanding of Christ that Paul is putting forward? Did Paul persecute Christians prior to inventing Christ?
Who is Mark? When was it written compared to Paul’s letters? What is the relationship between Paul and Mark? Does Mark think he is writing history or does that come later and if so by whom? What is the story that Mark is trying to tell with his gospel. When do the martyrs start and why?
Yea it’s simple until you actually try to put a complete theory together. Please answer as many questions, as thoroughly, as you can.

Your turn again.