aa5874

That's a strange name, "we", or is it the sum of "I" and "me"?

"I+ME=WE.

Amaleq13

If you are considering uses of "I", it is simply foolish to ignore uses of "we" which clearly carry the exact same implication. Stop playing obtuse.

Ben C Smith

I said that I think most of the support for the view in question comes from Acts. I neither confirmed nor denied that it was enough support to render the view in question probable. I am not making an argument; I am telling where I think the idea comes from.

By many, yes. Others regard it as history. Still others regard it as a mixture of both. But it is not my plan to defend any of these right now; I am just giving sources.

Yes, bare assertions. But you are correct to remind me that you occasionally mix arguments from authority in with your assertions. Thanks.

Ben.

aa5874

What is the proof for NOTHING? What is the evidence for NOTHING?
Where can you find the proof or evidence for NOTHING.

I have NOTHING on Jesus, his disciples and Paul.
You have NOTHING.

That's the proof Jesus, his disciples and Paul are NOTHING.

DevilsAdvocate

You get only nothing by dismissing any reference to the characters as apologistic and therefore unreliable... So if some something disputes yuour nothing it is in reality nothing... I think...

I guess Clement of Rome was part of the conspiracy ... or another fiction ?

DevilsAdvocate

The "apologists" are in fact something whether you believe them or not... You have offered nothing not easily disputed to prove them nothing. I offered a number of types of concrete evidences from the texts that you may use to bring them into disrepute.

I think the lack of an authors name in the prose is not particularly unusual and simply grasping at straws. Did Plato identify himself in the various dialogs of Socrates? Do you dispute his existance or the basis of the dialogs at some point in historic fact?

Where is the proof of your premise...or even a significant evidence of it? I await anxiously.

aa5874

You have NOTHING, but questions, and I told you already I have NOTHING on Jesus, his disciples and Paul. They are UNKNOWN.

As far as I understand, correct me if I am wrong, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR NOTHING, or, NOTHING IS THE EVIDENCE FOR NOTHING.

DevilsAdvocate

I have questions. You have no answers. With my questions I have given a concrete path to support your premise. You have not pursued it.

If Jesus, the apostles and Paul are indeed fiction, they are something. The fictional narrative positing them is something and can be examined for evidence of its historicity or fiction. It becomes more difficult given the tendency to embellish reality in oral retransmitting and copying. But to say they are nothing and refuse to offer evidence only shows your position to be without basis.

There are writings of known and documented ancient origins speaking at length of these "fictional" characters. They are in greek, arabic, coptic, latin languages. Their origins are within 300 years of the supposed time of the life of the characters which is quite close compared to other sources of ancient literature, They are dated by some even within a few decades of their supposed death. Examine these documents for factual evidence rather than your disbelief of spurrious events. That is how to prove them a fiction. You hold them all to be fictions. Fiction almost without exception contains inconsistencies and can be dated by its content.

I innumerated several ways to use the extant evidence to prove itself false. Why do you offer only nothing as the evidence of your knowledge... unless that is all the knowledge you have on the matter. That would make your position based on less than nothing because you refuse to address it based on the little evidence available.

aa5874

Questions are not a concrete path, questions signify confusion.

Fiction is really nothing, it only appears to be something especially when you are confused. It is extremely difficult to separate reality from fiction when you have no external credible source to depend on and surrounded by material from Eusebius, Tertullian, Irenaeus and the NT.

mountainman

Lithargoel is the "Healer and Physician"
and the citizen of the city of nine gates.

Lithargoel is the "Pearl Man" and the knower
of the ascetic path to the pearl of knowledge.

Lithargoel is the main character in this text.
Lithargoel says to Peter that his name is also
the name of a stone.

Who is Lithargoel?

Lithargoel appears to be "exactly like Jesus".
But is Lithargoel identical to Jesus historically?
The answer IMO, is no.
This is not a "canon story".
It is a reaction to the "canon stories".

It is about Lithargoel, whoever he may be.
The answer to "Who is Lithargoel" is not trivial.

The city in the midst of the seas, with the man holding
the palm leaf on the dock, in which the inhabitants
endure the living in habitation, surrounded by high walls
and by large waves of the ocean, is the Hellenic empire.

It was under seige by Constantine's prohibitions
and military extortionism.

The apostles and Peter are shown as inept healers.
They do not know how to be physicians. They need
further instruction after the event.

The true healers of the empire, the priests of Asclepius,
had been disspossed of their temples and heritage, and
in some cases their lives.


IMO we may have a pagan (ascetic neopythagorean) author.
Think of the author as a resurrected Porphyry.
Or indeed, as Arius of Alexandria.
(The stuff is C14 dated to 348 CE)



Best wishes


Pete Brown