Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
11-07-2011, 02:12 PM | #301 | ||||
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
|
Quote:
|
||||
11-07-2011, 02:56 PM | #302 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
This is your OWN post #234 Quote:
|
||
11-07-2011, 03:00 PM | #303 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
aa5874: please tell us your first language and when you learned English, and what dialect of English you use.
I don't think you understand some key points, and it ma be related to your language. |
11-07-2011, 03:33 PM | #304 | |||
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
|
Quote:
|
|||
11-07-2011, 03:53 PM | #305 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Britain
Posts: 5,259
|
Quote:
Everyone has to discover these things at some point and this is, I must admit, the first time I've ever heard this particular fact.... |
|
11-07-2011, 04:48 PM | #306 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
|
Quote:
You are neglecting the fact that Mark and all other NT texts were written long after any of the alleged events they 'report' (Some say as much as 200 years after) You are rather naively attempting to present and use these writings at face value, as though any of these things ever really happened. They are elaborate religious propaganda compositions produced by a long established religious movement. These writings are NOT contemporary reports, and their contents are not records of actual events. You are swallowing their fabricated content hook, line, and sinker as being true accounts of what 'happened' circa 33 AD. They ARE NOT. Whatever situations you draw from them are TOTALLY FABRICATED. And it borders upon plain intransigent stupidity to attempt to employ them in a fashion that presents them as being accurate historical accounts. Each of your 'situations' cited above is a totally fictional creation of a long established religious movement. THEY DID NOT HAPPEN, no more than did the miracles. Citing these fictional narratives to 'prove' the content of these fictional narratives 'show something' regarding the 'events' is 'circular reasoning' at its very worst. Quote:
Jebus didn't want a damn thing. Because there never was any such Jebus. |
|||
11-07-2011, 05:08 PM | #307 | |||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
I am not here to play games. Almost every time I post I SIMULTANEOUSLY present the source to support my claim. When I say gMark's Jesus is a PHANTOM I referred to Mark 6.48-49 Mark 6.48-49 Quote:
The SPECIFIC GRAVITY of Human beings do NOT allow for sea-water walking. I want to know what you don't understand. In gMark 9.2 Jesus transfigured. The Biology and Anatomy of the Human body does NOT allow for Transfigurations. Mark 9.2 Quote:
gMark's Jesus as described is a PHANTOM. J-D has stated QUITE correctly, and I am EXTREMELY DELIGHTED, that there some are statements in the Canonical Gospels that cannot be historically accurate. This is FANTASTIC. J-D has done EXACTLY what I wanted him to do. 1. He has ADMITTED that the Canonical Gospel contain statements about Jesus that CANNOT be historically accurate. 2. HE has NOT presented any SOURCE for HJ of Nazareth. 3. He has UTTERLY failed to present a statement about Jesus in the Canon that is historically accurate. Now J-D in his 80+ posts has UTTERLY Failed to SHOW what is historically accurate about Jesus since he repeatedly states ad nauseum that some statements about Jesus may be historically accurate. What are those historically accurate statements of Jesus? What sources show there was an HJ of Nazareth? J-D and you seem to know ENGLISH extremely well. You should be able to understand me. I just want to continue my thread and show that gMark totally destroys the HJ argument. |
|||
11-07-2011, 05:09 PM | #308 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
|
Quote:
The exclusive and universally accepted usage of ONLY Nomina Sacra also points to a highly evolved and very regimented religious heritage. The fully spelled out variation Ἰησοῦν only came into usage at some time during the 3rd century, first in the writings of the Church Fathers, and only latter within 'copies' of the NT texts themselves. Thus the 'copies' do not really 'copy' the originals in this matter, rather, they revise, supply, and impose. |
||
11-07-2011, 05:45 PM | #309 | |||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
How in the world could the Gospels be written long AFTER things that never happened? Examine your own words. Quote:
Quote:
Do you NOT understand that a PHANTOM is TOTAL Fiction? I really don't understand what you are arguing about. gMark is a FICTIONAL story of a Phantom called Jesus who was BETRAYED, ABANDONED, DENIED and REJECTED by his OWN disciples and the Jews and was Later Executed. That is the Fiction story in gMark. You can read gMark just like you can read the Myth Fable of Plutarch called "Romulus. I can ONLY tell you what Plutarch stated about Romulus and Remus. I am not allowed to change the fiction story and the very same applies to gMark. I can ONLY tell you that gMark's Jesus WALKED on the sea and Transfigured in the presence of his disciples and fed NINE thousand men with a few bread and fish. The details of the Myth Fable called gMark and Plutarch's Romulus CAN ONLY be found in the Fiction stories themselves NOT from my imagination. In gMark, there is ZERO indication that there was an actual highly evolved cult only a MYTH FABLE of a Phantom called Jesus that did NOT even want anyone to call him Christ. If you know a different story then you MUST present the Source. CLAIM+SOURCE. Claim--gMark's Jesus was a PHANTOM, a Myth character. Source--gMark 6.48-49 and 9.2. |
|||
11-07-2011, 07:11 PM | #310 | ||||||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
|
Quote:
The 'events' only 'happened' within the christians late written highly imaginative stories, not 200 years prior in Jerusalem, Galilee or its environs. The stories are entirely literary creations and religious propaganda texts, not factual accounts of actual events. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Conclusion, the church came first, then the devising of its texts and religious propaganda gMark 6:48-49 and 9:2 are no more mythical than say gMark 8:27-29 or 10:2 It is to all intents, ALL fabricated and mythical religious propaganda. Make-believe fashioned by a religious cult to support and further that religious cult. 'The horse and chariot!' -in this instance it is the 'chariot' (the rechabim> followers-retinue) that are leading 'the horse' (h'SOOCE> 'E'SUS') (the ancient Semitic letter 'H' heh became the 'E' of the Greek alphabet) but "the horse and chariot' will together be broken in pieces" and "neither shall -'he that rideth'-'the horse'- deliver himself." "Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth -the horse- heels, so that his rider shall fall backward." Being so confident, I do write for to provoke you; Can you tell me the specific gravity of the wind? or of -'the horse'- or its -'chariot'- or -'rider'-? Ah but "An -horse- is a vain thing for safety: neither shall he deliver any]by his great strength." They shall certainly all sink beneath the waters and be destroyed. No? Wooosh! said -the wind- as it passed over . |
||||||||||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|