aa5874

So, "christians" created Peter, Paul and James.....and Jesus.

And folks like Peter, Paul and James....and Jesus wrote nothing?

You mean christians created one another and that's what they had in mind?

steve_bnk

I am saying that what we have as Chritainity was created primarily by the Roman Cathlic church followed by the protestant reformations. Rather than the religious experince, ie the glory of speaking in tounges and the spirt of fellowship, Christianity became an academic set of argumnts, as with Aquinas.

And today the evangelicals loudly proclaim the dictates of the bible and the RCC purges priets in universities who question dogma.

In the time after JC's death there was no Christianity, the followers were all mostly Jews. JC himself apparently kept to the Jewish ways.

So, if you want to emulate JC, keep kosher....,make sure those pickles on your burgers are processed in accordance with Jewish law.

aa5874

Based on the NT, Jesus was executed for blasphemy so apparently he did not keep to the Jewish ways.

When did JC, the offspring of the Holy Ghost, die?


According to the NT, JC brought himself back to life and went through the clouds. The disciples saw him do it. That is what the author of Acts wrote and Eusebius claimed Acts of the Apostles is universally accepted as genuine.

spamandham

True, but from what I can see, you do have to have an in depth understanding of the culture that produced the texts, nor an understanding of the motives of the writers. I'm not claiming to have such expertise either.

steve_bnk

The Egyptain Book Of The Dead says things about an aftrelife, how is it that you come to believe the bible and not the Egyptian book of the dead?

Thew Holy Ghost was concieved by the RCC as is the mystical trinity.

aa5874

Well, from what I see, I just need to identify fiction to destroy Jesus.

It is plain to see that his conception, born of a virgin without sexual union is false. His method of healing is bogus, like when he talked to the deaf to make them hear.

The transfiguration, the resurrection and ascension of Jesus the water-walker are all nonsense.

And I have only scratched the surface.

steve_bnk

Taken as metpahor making the deaf hear, ie making someone undestand his message, makes sense.

spamandham

Indeed. And to do so requires quite a bit of knowledge that I don't see that you have.

True, but that doesn't mean the genre is fiction. Unless you understand the culture and the motives of the writers, you have no idea what the intents were. You can take that to the bank.

(When I say "you can take that to the bank", I do not literally mean you should present it for deposit at a bank. Please do not assume my post is fiction.)

Elijah

:lol: Nice example.

razlyubleno

The intent is discovered by reading what the text has to say, and we already understand the culture. Mark wrote a Hellenistic biographical novel, and we can assume he intended to do so. Matthew obsessed over scripture, and we can draw conclusions from that obsession. Luke was concerned with straightforward narrative, tried to paint himself as a serious historian. These are all clues. The gospels are not as impenetrable as people suppose. We have enough information about Hellenistic culture and rhetoric to figure a thing or two.

razly