Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
04-30-2012, 06:59 PM | #51 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 393
|
I wouldn't say our understanding of ancient Hebrew creation myth is "clear," though perhaps we can draw general inferences. But that's irrelevant to the historic Jesus issue anyway since the Jesus mythology shows no signs of being created by Jews, but rather non-Jews and anti-Jews like Mark attempting to write new prophecies by imitating the masters.
|
04-30-2012, 07:01 PM | #52 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 393
|
|
04-30-2012, 07:02 PM | #53 | ||
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 393
|
Quote:
|
||
04-30-2012, 07:06 PM | #54 |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
So, did he NOT get the name Jesus from someone else??
Once you admit that Paul never met Jesus then there are TWO fundamental ways he could have gotten the name Jesus and information about the character. Either orally or by written sources. The least likely way to obtain the history and name of Jesus is by revelation from the resurrected. The notion that the supposed Paul KNEW more about Jesus by revelation than his own supposed apostles is rather absurd if Jesus did live. If Jesus did live and had Apostles then the Apostles would have KNOWN more about Jesus than the supposed Paul. If Jesus did NOT exist then the Pauline writers could NOT have known anything about Jesus by revelation. Remarkably, whether or not Jesus existed, Paul could NOT have known about Jesus by revelation. Revelation is not known to be a credible source for biographies. |
04-30-2012, 07:10 PM | #55 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Mornington Peninsula
Posts: 1,306
|
Pg18
Quote:
Pg342, 348 & 357 cites Messiah Myth |
|
04-30-2012, 07:33 PM | #56 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
|
Quote:
why use a jewish peasant as a roman god? |
|
04-30-2012, 07:39 PM | #57 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
It is most absurd that a DEAD jewish peasant was worshiped as a Roman God. The Gospels are about the Son of God, the Word that was God, NOT a dead jewish peasant. |
|
04-30-2012, 07:44 PM | #58 | ||
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 393
|
Quote:
|
||
04-30-2012, 07:51 PM | #59 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 393
|
Quote:
They wanted something that the Jews had and they didn't: monotheism. Not just that, but a venerated and ancient monotheism. Not only that, but priceless intellectual property in the form of ancient scriptures and prophecies that went back to the creation of the world. Jesus's financial status was irrelevant to this emerging theology. He was sent by God as a prophet, wasn't recognized as one by the Jews (as prophesied), and was killed by them on Passover (also as prophesied). The only people who acknowledged him as the Messiah was -- surprise! -- the Gentiles. Shocking, huh? |
|
04-30-2012, 07:59 PM | #60 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 559
|
Quote:
or, the Pauline content could have been written fully to align with the canonical stores |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|