aa5874

The NT is not credible. The NT is filled with fictitious events that could not have been witnessed by thousands of real people or thousands of real pigs.
The life of Jesus the Christ is built around fiction, I consider Jesus the Christ to be frabricated from fiction.

Do you see any other flaws in the Jesus story, notwithstanding your reasoning capability, perhaps you can see more than me ?

J-D

I can see that there are many statements in the Christian Scriptures that could not possibly be true. I can also see that there are many statements in the Christian Scriptures that could possibly be true. You have not proved that every statement in the Christian Scriptures is false.

aa5874

Your statement is of little use to this inquiry. They are preliminary and devoid of investigation. I was probably at your stage of investigation over 10 years ago, I have eliminated virtually all possibities of the historicity of Jesus the Christ based on the fictitious nature of the NT.

J-D, it is possible that you are male or female, it is possible that you own a computer and there are many other possibilities, however only upon thorough investigation can it be determine what is really true.

mountainman

J-D do you understand that, from an historical perspective,
every statement in every book of the "christian scriptures"
was first bound together in the rule of Constantine c.330 CE.

spin

He, wow, really? And when were the Hebrew bible books bound together?


spin

mountainman

Assuming by "Hebrew Bible" you mean "Old Testament",
then hundreds of years BCE. AFAIK Constantine was
the very very first recorded human being to actually
publish the combination of "NT" and "OT" together in
his "Constantine Bibles".

J-D

So you say. But you have failed to produce any demonstration on this thread. Your statements on this thread are devoid of investigation and of little use to this inquiry.

J-D

No, I didn't know that, but I don't see how it makes a particle of difference to the point I was making.

J-D

Are you sure about that? How?

spin

When I say "Hebrew bible", I probably say it for a reason. The term "Old Testament" is a christianizing dose of propaganda which supersedes the "Old" with the "New". The Hebrew bible is the Jewish literature that christians have misappropriated into that misnomer the "Old Testament". It is more neutral to call it the Hebrew bible, or the Tanakh.

Of course this is crap. If you observe the DSS there was no collection into one entity. You have more popular and less popular works. Deuteronomy being one of the most popular along with Psalms.

ETA: The LXX tradition as cited in Pseudo-Aristeas refers to the books of the law, plural. Nothing else.

Thrilling.


spin