MrMacSon

De Carne Christi is a polemical work by Tertullian defending the tenets of orthodox Christianity against the Gnostic Docetism of Marcion, Apelles, Valentinus and Alexander.

It contains this passage -
The phrase c'redibile est, quia ineptum est' - "it is [wholly] credible, because it is unsuitable/ridiculous" - that is part of that text - has been often either summed up as or misquoted as

Credo quia absurdum - "I believe because it is absurd".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credo_quia_absurdum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Carne_Christi


add: Credo quia absurdum - "I believe because it is absurd" - seems to be a positive for some preachers

http://fatherhollywood.blogspot.com....t-3-oculi.html

.

aa5874

Your claim is UNSUBSTANTIATED. Please provide the source for your PRESUMPTIONS. You have NOTHING but yet continue to make assertions that are baseless and amounts to mere propaganda or Chinese Whispers.

Whatever you claim about gMark MUST be supported by sources of antiquity. I am NOT interested in fairy tales DERIVED from your imagination.

Where is source for the story that Jesus was a defeated man??? Where is it??? You don't have it!!!! You are engaged in spreading RUMORS.

Again, in gMark, Jesus TAUGHT his disciples he would be KILLED and then Resurrect so Jesus was NOT a failed Messiah in gMark.

The very Crucifixion of Jesus is the MOST FUNDAMENTAL Part of the story. Jesus MUST, MUST, MUST be Rejected by the JEWS, MUST be REJECTED by his OWN disciples and be Crucified because of the same Jews whom he FED, and HEALED.

The author of gMark INVENTED a story to EXPLAIN the Fall of the Temple and the desolation of Jerusalem and it would appear people of antiquity BELIEVED the story just like people Believed the story written by Joseph Smith in the Mormon Bible.

EarlDoherty

When you've been brought up to believe in something absurd, indoctrinated and made to fear doubt and questioning, then when (or if) you finally reach sufficient age or maturity to realize that it looks absurd, what is a common reaction? "I believe even if it looks absurd." (Others are fortunate enough to be able to cut the ties.)

Earl Doherty

Logical

aa5874,

Where in the Old Testament does it say that the Messiah would be crucified and resurrected?

The suffering and death OT references in the gospels seem to me like misinterpretations of the original text, used in ways never intended by the original authors to refer to the Messiah.

Jesus' death wasn't the only inconvenient truth for the early Christians. His being from Nazareth was another one, which is why they invented reasons to move his birth narrative to Bethlehem. If he was manufactured, they would have just said he was from Bethlehem, instead of Nazareth.

aa5874

Where does it say in the Old Testament the Messiah would WALK on water???

Where does it say in the Old Testament that the Messiah would Transfigure???

If he was NOT manufactured they would just say he did NOT walk on water and did NOT transfigure.

The Jesus character is a Water Walker, a Transfigurer, who was raised from the dead and the Son of God.

gMark is just a Manufactured story about Satan, the God of the Jews, demons, and the Son of God so I don't know why you want to make it a history book!!!!

MrMacSon

Earl, do you think the commentary by Tertullian is an acknowledgment that he was perpetuating a falsehood as myth?

No Robots

It cuts both ways, Earl. I was raised a mythicist, and had to turn against my father to reject it.

Logical

aa5874,

Walking on water does not present a propaganda problem (on the contrary). So the reason that story was invented was to bolster Jesus' image. His being from Nazareth presents a difficulty because it doesn't help their case. That's why it's likely to be true, otherwise they wouldn't have invented it only to sweep it under the rug of embarrassment by saying that his mother was rushed to Bethlehem for some reason and there she gave birth to him.

The same applies to his death and crucifixion.

EarlDoherty

Your question isn't clear. That he was *deliberately* doing this? Falsehood as myth: I don't get it.

MrMacSon

Sorry. Do you think Tertullian's writings show he knowingly perpetuated a myth?