Freethought & Rationalism Archive

J-D · 10-29-2011, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

'a little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to sleep......' Sleep on now, and take your rest;
For the morrow, it comes quickly.

A man in the wilderness asked me
How many strawberries grow in the sea
And I answered him as I thought good
As many red herrings swim in the wood

aa5874 · 10-29-2011, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

It is clear that your arguments are meaningless since you have been arguing without first establishing the meaning of any of your terms, including 'myth fables', 'historically reliable sources', 'Myth Jesus theory', 'data', 'mythology', 'evidence', 'HJers', and 'HJ'.

You have reached the end.

You are ONLY PARROTING what I say.

You have been making STATEMENTS without even FIRST establishing what the HJ/MJ argument is about.

You may very well PARROT my post again.

You MUST FIRST understand what a THEORY is.

A THEORY is developed from DATA not from SPECULATION or IMAGINATION.

1. Jesus was described as the Child of a Ghost and also ACTED as a Ghost and it was PUBLICLY PUBLISHED based on EXTANT Codices.

2. People, Paul and the author iof Acts, who claimed or implied they were contempoeraries of the supposed Jesus did NOT Acknowledge having actually seen Jesus BEFORE he allegedly died,.

3. Even though condidered forgeries, It is claimed in Josephus that Jesus RESURRECTED.

The THEORY that Jesus was MYTH like the other MYTHS of the Greeks and the Romans CANNOT ever be defeated once the NT is presented as evidence.

In the NT, Jesus was a Child of Aghost, God and the Creator.

Romulus and Remus are considered MYTHS and they were described as HUMAN BROTHERS and BORN of a WOMAN. See Plutarch's "Romulus".

Jesus was described as a Child of Ghost and he was WITH MYTH SATAN on the Jewish Temple IN the NT. Satan was NOT with Riomulus and Remus in the writing OF Plutarch.

An historical Jesus is NOT in the NT.

The HJ theory CANNOT be argued WITHOUT FACTS.

J-D · 10-29-2011, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

It is clear that your arguments are meaningless since you have been arguing without first establishing the meaning of any of your terms, including 'myth fables', 'historically reliable sources', 'Myth Jesus theory', 'data', 'mythology', 'evidence', 'HJers', and 'HJ'.

You have reached the end.

You are ONLY PARROTING what I say.

You have been making STATEMENTS without even FIRST establishing what the HJ/MJ argument is about.

You may very well PARROT my post again.

You MUST FIRST understand what a THEORY is.

A THEORY is developed from DATA not from SPECULATION or IMAGINATION.

1. Jesus was described as the Child of a Ghost and also ACTED as a Ghost and it was PUBLICLY PUBLISHED based on EXTANT Codices.

2. People, Paul and the author iof Acts, who claimed or implied they were contempoeraries of the supposed Jesus did NOT Acknowledge having actually seen Jesus BEFORE he allegedly died,.

3. Even though condidered forgeries, It is claimed in Josephus that Jesus RESURRECTED.

The THEORY that Jesus was MYTH like the other MYTHS of the Greeks and the Romans CANNOT ever be defeated once the NT is presented as evidence.

In the NT, Jesus was a Child of Aghost, God and the Creator.

Romulus and Remus are considered MYTHS and they were described as HUMAN BROTHERS and BORN of a WOMAN. See Plutarch's "Romulus".

Jesus was described as a Child of Ghost and he was WITH MYTH SATAN on the Jewish Temple IN the NT. Satan was NOT with Riomulus and Remus in the writing OF Plutarch.

An historical Jesus is NOT in the NT.

The HJ theory CANNOT be argued WITHOUT FACTS.

You have been making statements without even first establishing what the 'HJ/MJ argument' is about. It is clear that your arguments are meaningless since you have been arguing without first establishing the meaning of your terms, including 'HJ/MJ argument', 'myth', 'defeated', 'historical Jesus', and 'HJ theory'.

aa5874 · 10-30-2011, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

It is clear that your arguments are meaningless since you have been arguing without first establishing the meaning of any of your terms, including 'myth fables', 'historically reliable sources', 'Myth Jesus theory', 'data', 'mythology', 'evidence', 'HJers', and 'HJ'.

You have reached the end.

You are ONLY PARROTING what I say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

You have been making statements without even first establishing what the 'HJ/MJ argument' is about. It is clear that your arguments are meaningless since you have been arguing without first establishing the meaning of your terms, including 'HJ/MJ argument', 'myth', 'defeated', 'historical Jesus', and 'HJ theory'.

Now, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_f...storical_Jesus

Quote:

The quest for the historical Jesus is the attempt to use historical rather than religious methods to construct a verifiable biography of Jesus.

As originally defined by Albert Schweitzer, the quest began in the 18th century with Hermann Samuel Reimarus, up to William Wrede in the 19th century.[1][2] The quest is commonly divided into stages, and it continues today among scholars such as the fellows of the Jesus Seminar....

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

Quote:

The term historical Jesus refers to scholarly reconstructions of the 1st-century figure Jesus of Nazareth.[1]

These reconstructions are based upon historical methods including critical analysis of gospel texts as the primary source for his biography, along with consideration of the historical and cultural context in which he lived.....

1.There is NO known credible historical sources for MYTHS.

2.There is NO known credible historical sources for the historical Jesus of Nazareth.

3. Myths can be described as humans.

4. Jesus was described as the MALE Child of a Ghost, God and Creator.

Jesus of the NT can be THEORISED to be PURE unadulterated MYTH until credible sources can be found.

After all, the supposed contemporaries of Jesus did NOT write that they EVER saw Jesus alive. And Paul BOASTED that he saw Jesus as a RESURRECTED . See Galatians1 and Corinthians 15.

MYTH Jesus cannot ever be destroyed once HJers continue to INTRODUCE the NT as evidence.

Jesus was a Ghost Child in the NT.

The MYTHS Romulus and Remus were HUMAN brothers and Born of the same woman. See Plutarch "Romulus".

The MJ theory CANNOT ever defeated when people use the NT as a source for HJ.

J-D · 10-30-2011, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

It is clear that your arguments are meaningless since you have been arguing without first establishing the meaning of any of your terms, including 'myth fables', 'historically reliable sources', 'Myth Jesus theory', 'data', 'mythology', 'evidence', 'HJers', and 'HJ'.

You have reached the end.

You are ONLY PARROTING what I say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

You have been making statements without even first establishing what the 'HJ/MJ argument' is about. It is clear that your arguments are meaningless since you have been arguing without first establishing the meaning of your terms, including 'HJ/MJ argument', 'myth', 'defeated', 'historical Jesus', and 'HJ theory'.

Now, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_f...storical_Jesus

Quote:

The quest for the historical Jesus is the attempt to use historical rather than religious methods to construct a verifiable biography of Jesus.

As originally defined by Albert Schweitzer, the quest began in the 18th century with Hermann Samuel Reimarus, up to William Wrede in the 19th century.[1][2] The quest is commonly divided into stages, and it continues today among scholars such as the fellows of the Jesus Seminar....

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

Quote:

The term historical Jesus refers to scholarly reconstructions of the 1st-century figure Jesus of Nazareth.[1]

These reconstructions are based upon historical methods including critical analysis of gospel texts as the primary source for his biography, along with consideration of the historical and cultural context in which he lived.....

1.There is NO known credible historical sources for MYTHS.

2.There is NO known credible historical sources for the historical Jesus of Nazareth.

3. Myths can be described as humans.

4. Jesus was described as the MALE Child of a Ghost, God and Creator.

Jesus of the NT can be THEORISED to be PURE unadulterated MYTH until credible sources can be found.

After all, the supposed contemporaries of Jesus did NOT write that they EVER saw Jesus alive. And Paul BOASTED that he saw Jesus as a RESURRECTED . See Galatians1 and Corinthians 15.

MYTH Jesus cannot ever be destroyed once HJers continue to INTRODUCE the NT as evidence.

Jesus was a Ghost Child in the NT.

The MYTHS Romulus and Remus were HUMAN brothers and Born of the same woman. See Plutarch "Romulus".

The MJ theory CANNOT ever defeated when people use the NT as a source for HJ.

It is clear that your arguments are meaningless since you have been arguing without first establishing the meaning of your terms, including 'credible historical sources', 'myth', 'myth Jesus', 'destroyed', 'HJers', and 'MJ theory'.

aa5874 · 10-31-2011, 01:33 AM

The distinction between HJ and MJ is that HJ has NO credible historical sources.

There is a Consensus among virtually ALL Scholars that the Gospels are historically UNRELIABLE.

The past cannot be re-constructed from KNOWN and ADMITTED Fables about Jesus the Child of a Ghost.

That is the PRECISE distinction between HJ and MJ.

MJ does NOT require any credible sources. The more FICTION, the More implausibilities, the more inconsistencies the BETTER for Myth Jesus.

There is ONE fundamental criteria for MJ and it is for the MYTH Fables of Jesus to be DOCUMENTED.

That is a MAJOR difference between HJ and MJ.

The MYTH Fables of Jesus were DOCUMENTED in EXTANT Codices dated since the 4th century.

Nothing has been DOCUMENTED for HJ.

HJ is NOT even MYTH.

HJ is far different to MJ.

HJ is NOTHING and was NOT EVER ANYTHING. Not even a story.

MJ was the TALK of the TOWN for over 1600 years.

Even the EMPEROR of ROME BELIEVED in the Child of the Ghost according to the Church.

MJ did make a difference. HJ was NOTHING.

MJ is based on DOCUMENTED written evidence for HUNDREDS of years.

HJ is based on IMAGINATION for the same time.

Everybody MUST know the difference now.

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

10-31-2011, 01:33 AM	#26
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	The distinction between HJ and MJ is that HJ has NO credible historical sources. There is a Consensus among virtually ALL Scholars that the Gospels are historically UNRELIABLE. The past cannot be re-constructed from KNOWN and ADMITTED Fables about Jesus the Child of a Ghost. That is the PRECISE distinction between HJ and MJ. MJ does NOT require any credible sources. The more FICTION, the More implausibilities, the more inconsistencies the BETTER for Myth Jesus. There is ONE fundamental criteria for MJ and it is for the MYTH Fables of Jesus to be DOCUMENTED. That is a MAJOR difference between HJ and MJ. The MYTH Fables of Jesus were DOCUMENTED in EXTANT Codices dated since the 4th century. Nothing has been DOCUMENTED for HJ. HJ is NOT even MYTH. HJ is far different to MJ. HJ is NOTHING and was NOT EVER ANYTHING. Not even a story. MJ was the TALK of the TOWN for over 1600 years. Even the EMPEROR of ROME BELIEVED in the Child of the Ghost according to the Church. MJ did make a difference. HJ was NOTHING. MJ is based on DOCUMENTED written evidence for HUNDREDS of years. HJ is based on IMAGINATION for the same time. Everybody MUST know the difference now.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.