outhouse

well he went about it in a rough way then.


I doubt he would use someone from a jerkwater poverty stricken peasant village called Nazareth, nor label him as handworker known for being displaced renters who had lost everything. Nor hanging out with Galilian fishermen known to be poverty strcken low class people who again forced to rent their fishing boats.

why pick a town in a known area full of oppressed zealot's?

better yet. why would romans use a broke, below a peasnt class jew to compete with Odysseus. ?

tanya

Thanks for your several replies on this thread, outhouse.

"fully human", to me, means, a primate with 46 chromosomes, 22 pairs of autosomes, and one pair of "sex" chromosomes.

Absent human paternal DNA, no individual can be said to be "fully human".

If you wish to employ Mark, as a source for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, then, you must acknowledge the fact, according to Mark, that his paternal DNA was divine, supernatural, NOT HUMAN.

You are welcome to claim that JC only looked human, but was actually divine, from the beginning of time, until the present day.

Alternatively, you can suggest that he started out as a human, but then, became transfigured into a deity.

What you cannot argue, based upon the gospels is that he was "fully human". To have been "fully human", his paternal lineage could not have included a divine entity, as is claimed in Mark. Is Mark wrong? Does Jesus possess a human father?

outhouse

and how would the unknown roman authors who wrote about a jew, unknown to them, from a different culture, from a different geographic location, from a different time period.

know his DNA tasted salty?


yet a father is listed as joseph.

or do you want to run with embarrassment over mery being raped by a roman guard?


somehow these unknown roman authors must have known his father what over 70 years in the past in accurate detail!!! living in a differnt time, place, culture, religion ect ect all different yet they really knew how a peasnt jew was concieved



actually you can, theist have been doing it since the mythology started. "fully human and fully divine"


absolutely, how could a roman describe a jewish peasants life in detail ?


no one has ever walked the earth that did not




your welcome

aa5874

First of all, there is NO Jesus story dated to the 1st century at all.

Mark's Jesus was NOT human. See Mark 6.48-49. gMark's Jesus DEFIED the Laws of Gravity and Bouyancy when he WALKED on water.

Mark's Jesus was NOT human. See Mark 9.2. gMark's Jesus DEFIED the LAWS of Biology and Anatomy--gMark's Jesus Transfigured.

No author that used gMark stated Jesus was human.

The author of gMatthew used gMark and stated Jesus was FATHERED by a Ghost. See Matthew 1.18-20

The author of the Long-ending gMark that used Virtually 100% of the short gMark and claimed that it was a Resurrected Jesus who AUTHORISED the Jesus story.

The author of gLuke used gMark and ALSO claimed Jesus was FATHERED by a Ghost.

The short gMark is NOT an historical account of the character called Jesus.

It is TOTAL Fiction or implausible and based on the words of the Prophets.

Horatio Parker

So, to you, Odysseus is a superior hero compared to Jesus. Fine.

The point is, IOW MacDonald's argument, is that the ancient reader would recognize these allusions and their significance.

The book is very interesting, I recommend it.

Horatio Parker

My understanding is that tekton is the word Homer used for Odysseus. Besides the ship, he built his bed and his house.

gMark is based on Jewish scripture. The Homeric influences could be explained both by the ubiquity of Homer in ancient libraries as well as gMark's intended audience.

It is after all, a syncretic religion.

mountainman

Try literary Nerocrats.

sotto voce

:snooze:

outhouse

depending on what year the word was used and what geographic location, determines its proper translaion to a culture.

if im not mistaken



sorry but gmark is roman scripture

the movement had long failed judaism by the time of gmark


god-fearer's, that is romans who worshipped in synagogues wrote these scriptures. jews had no part in it.


yes I will go along with OT influence, that it.


cant argue that bud, other then quantity of influence

Minimalist

More likely, he "evolved," to use another word the fundies hate!