aa5874

There is NO manuscript that has been dated to the 1st century with stories about Jesus the disciples and Paul.

That is a FACT.

That is EXACTLY what I expected when Jesus, the disciples and Paul did NOT exist in the 1st century and before c 70 CE.

Examine Acts of the Apostles.

No NT manuscripts with Acts of the Apostles have been dated to the 1st century and before c 70 CE.

Recovered dated manuscripts of Acts are NO earlier than around the mid 3rd century.

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

The percentage of textual variants suggest that Acts of the Apostles was composed Later then the Gospels and Earlier than the Pauline Epistles.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novum_T..._New_Testament

An Apologetic source "Against Heresies" supposedly composed sometime around c 180 CE is the earliest source that mentioned Acts of the Apostles and quotes passages from the book.

When we carefully examine the contents of Acts of the Apostles it is clear that something is missing or should I say somethings are not found.

The Pauline Revealed Gospel from the Resurrected Jesus and acknowledgment with references to the Pauline letters to the Churches are MISSING--NOT ONE WORD.

1. The short gMark contains about 678 verses but used ZERO from the Pauline letters.

2. The later author of the Long gMark used over 600 Verses from the short gMark---but ZERO from the Pauline letters.

3. The later author of gMatthew used over 600 verses from gMark---but ZERO from the Pauline letters.

The earliest Gospels in the Canon did NOT make any references to passages from the Pauline letters.

The authors of the earliest Jesus story was completely influenced by the short gMark Jesus story.

The Synoptic type Jesus stories were used in the 2nd century as can be seen in the Memoirs of the Apostles as stated by Justin Martyr.

The Memoirs of the Apostles--A Synoptic type Jesus story was read in the Churches on Sundays in the 2nd century. See "First Apology" LXVII.

Justin did NOT acknowledge Paul and the Pauline writings or Acts of the Apostles but mentioned Revelation by John.

Now, the Pauline letters mentioned events in Acts of the Apostles.

Both Acts 7-9 and Galatians 1 claimed Paul was a persecutor, Acts 9 and 2 Corinthians 11 claimed Saul/Paul was by a wall in a basket in Damascus and both Acts 9 and Galatians 2 claim Saul/Paul was in Jerusalem.

But, the author of Acts did NOT know that Saul/Paul wrote letters to Seven Churches.

It appears that is the ONLY thing that the author did NOT know.

Virtually HALF the books of the Canon was supposedly composed by Paul.

Over 2000 VERSES of the Canon was allegedly written by Paul.

The author of Acts did NOT know any passages and did NOT even admit Paul wrote a letter.

The author of Acts Wrote many, many things about SAUL/PAUL but NOTHING of a Pauline letter.

The author of Acts claimed it was the Jerusalem Church that wrote letters to others . It is claimed James and Peter were leaders of the Church of Jerusalem and claimed Paul met James and Peter. See Acts 15.

Remarkably, incredibly, the Textual variants analysis place Acts of the Apostles AFTER the Gospels, AFTER the Epistles of James and Peter and BEFORE the Pauline letters.

gMark ---------- 45.1%
John-------------51.8%
2 Peter----------52.5%
Revelation------52.8%
Luke-------------57.2%
Matthew--------59.9%
James-----------61.6%
1 Peter--------- 66.6%

Acts----------- 67.3%

1 Corinthians---75.7%
Galatians--------76.5%
1 Corinthians----78.1%
2 Timothy-------79.5%
1 Timothy--------81.4%

From virtually every angle or any angle the Pauline letters are LAST in the Canon.

But, it must NOT ever be forgotten that the Pauline writer claimed he was a Persecutor of the Faith and was LAST to be seen of resurrected Jesus AFTER OVER 500 people.

Markan Priority does NOT only apply to the Gospels but to all books of the ENTIRE NT Canon.

And NO Jesus story has been found and dated to the 1st century.

The Jesus story and cult originated in the 2nd century.

TedM

No doubt that happens, and a lot, but HOW DO YOU KNOW that it ALWAYS is the case?

I have a very intelligent, rational, no-nonsense friend who says he audibly heard God's voice say "NO" during a period of distress, and that it resolved his crisis. A.J Ayer, the intellectual who founded positivism, admitted that he saw a Supreme Being during a NDE, which weakened his convictions about life after death. 70,000 people attended a location in Fatima in Portugal in 1917 because there was expectation of a return of a spiritual being. About half reported unusual events related to the Sun. People 10-15 miles away reported the same thing. Were those 35,000 all idiots? Hallucinating?

Even if scientifically NONE of those things really did happen in the material world, who are we to say that they didn't happen and weren't perceivable in a supernatural manner? Or that supernaturally the material was 'altered' for certain people--perhaps the hearing frequency was altered for my friend, or the visual perceptions altered for those 35,000 people?

The truth could be that they all were misled. But, it could also be that things happen that must be experienced first-hand in order to be believed by folks like you and me. Again, how can WE say that they don't happen? Isn't that terribly arrogant?

TedM

Only one that you have put into place for yourself. It's an arbitrary standard you have imposed.

Because you have chosen to view it as fiction, not having your arbitrary burdon of proof satisfied.

Yes, it opens one up to gullibility and perhaps insight to the real truths of life.

In the end, science, logic and rationality will never be able to provide an answer as to whether there is a higher purpose for our existence or whether we are quite literally as random as rocks. They can't answer that question. IMO they never will. Perhaps a willingness to suspend reliance on failing approaches such as those provide a doorway to the truth....or perhaps not.

aa5874

Please, do not DERAIL my thread. I am NOT dealing with hallucinations, "hearing voices" of God, and gullibility.

TedM

At least I'm posting something new. But I will try and respect your wishes. Back to your unsubstantiated extremist skepticism which includes the belief that if something doesn't exist now it never did exist...

Sheshbazzar

I don't. And I do not claim to be omniscient.
If this Gawd of yours that allegedly loves me so much, wants to sneak around and hide his presence and his magic tricks from my sight, then I reckon the problem of my unbelief lies with him and with his deliberate choice to hide himself and his wonderful magic tricks from me.

What I have to say on the matter is based upon my own observations and my own personal experiences, and in having close associations with, and questioned persons claiming miracles.
Invariably upon close examination, it became evident that they were 'making stuff up on the fly'.
I have never encountered one person whose 'invisible gawd' or 'angels did it ' 'miracle story' was convincing enough that I could accept as being factual without compromising my own conscience and integrity.

If I don't believe these cock and bull 'miracle' stories, why should I be expected, or be pressured and manipulated into saying otherwise?
You think no one else here has ever heard any such tall tales?

I was born into, and raised in a very religious and superstitious fundamentalist environment, and I heard these kinds of stories every single day, day in and day out for years on end. I quit being impressed or giving them any credence over fifty years ago.
And at this stage of my life I have hundreds of reasons for not buying what they are selling.

If people tell me they are hearing disembodied voices speaking in their heads, I advise them to make an appointment with their Doctor, or have their meds adjusted.
If 70,000 people go out indoctrinated and primed to expect to see a 'miracle', and some are stupid enough to stare into the sun for hours in expectation, certainly they are going to 'see' things as the cells in their cooked retinas explode.
No doubt a few in that large of a crowd will suffer dehydration and heat exhaustion and pass out or go into convulsions or suffer epileptic seizures.
Mass religious hysteria and plain stupidity does not pass as being miraculous.

Hearing voices in their heads? 'Seeing' visions and phenomenon that have, and leave no evidence in the natural world?
Sorry but I do not find this kind of crap to be the least bit persuasive. There may be psychological or neurological reasons for their 'experiences'. But the natural world goes on in its natural way in spite of anything that may be going on within their religion addled brains.

Or far more likely and reasonable, they simply wanted to 'hear' or 'see' what they wanted to see or hear, _and so they did.

Nope. But it is terribly arrogant for you to attempt to force feed, and pressure and browbeat us into accepting these lunatic religious delusions.
Just like those old Fundy loony fundamentalists tried to do to me when I was a child.

If you wish to swallow such horse shit stories no one can prevent it. But no one else need go along with your delusions either.

aa5874

My argument is that the Jesus story and cult originated in the 2nd century based on the Fact that No Jesus story, No Pauline letter, and No Acts of the Apostles have been recovered and dated to the 1st century.

Manuscripts that have been dated to the 1st century mention NOTHING at all about Jesus, the disciples and Paul.

That is EXACTLY what I expected when Jesus, the disciples and Paul had NO real existence in the 1st century and before c 70 CE.

Now, it is claimed that a writer under the name of Tertullian wrote Five Books "Against Marcion" some time around the 3rd century.

This is Extremely significant.

In "Against Marcion", It is claimed Marcion Mutilated gLuke and all the Pauline writings except Philemon.

There are very, very serious problems.

1. No books of Marcion have been found.

2. The Mutilated Pauline Epistles have NOT been found.

3. The Mutilated gLuke have NOT been found.

4. For hundreds of years No Church writer acknowledged that Tertullian wrote Five books "Against Marcion".

5. Church writers that mentioned the books of Tertullian did NOT include the Five books "Against Marcion".

6. Church writers that mentioned authors who wrote Against Marcion did NOT include Tertullian.

7. A Church writer Hippolytus claimed Marcion did NOT use the Pauline writings--he used Empedocles.

8. Justin Martyr did NOT acknowledge any writings of Marcion.

9. The author of Acts did NOT acknowledge the Pauline letters.

10. Origen in "Against Celsus" also did NOT claim Marcion mutilated the Pauline writings.

11. Ephraim the Syrian wrote Three Prose "Against Marcion" and did NOT claim that Marcion mutilated gLuke and the Pauline letters.

12. UP to the 7th century, the earliest manuscripts of the writings of Tertullian did NOT include the Five books "Against Marcion".

Incredibly, there is virtually NO credible corroboration for that Marcion mutilated the Pauline letters even from Church writers themselves and Non-Apologetic writers up to at least the 7th century.

The Five books "Against Marcion" are the largest works of the supposed Tertullian yet it was completely unknown by Church writers like Eusebius and Jerome.

It is clear that the Five books "Against Marcion" were NOT composed around the 3rd century and were NOT composed by a 3rd century Church writer called Tertullian.

Marcion did NOT mutilate the Pauline writings and gLuke.

The Pauline writings and gLuke were most likely composed AFTER Marcion was DEAD.

The Five books Against Marcion attributed to Tertullian are historically Bogus.

TedM

Actually it is arrogant.

Ridiculous. I'm just trying to encourage you to open your mind up.

The three examples I gave you (I'm not including the 'angels' account) represent to me honest people giving accounts that are not so easy to dismiss as you do. These people weren't lying. I believe all experienced something unusual, though each may have material explanations. My point is that you are being close-minded if you claim to know what those explanations are. Be skeptical, as I am. I see no reason to be dogmatic against these kinds of things though.

Let's give aa his pulpit back.

Sheshbazzar

Believe any kind of horse shit you want. I've already heard enough of it to last me for two lifetimes.

TedM

I remain agnostic on all 3 issues. Sounds like you are suffering from 'supernatural fatigue'. Hang in there.