Sheshbazzar

Where is -your- Definition for the word 'Credibility' to be found aa???

Where are -your- Examples of the common and accepted English usages of the word 'Credibility' aa???

Do -you- have an English language Dictionary aa???

How does -your- English language Dictionary define the word 'Credibility' aa???

Surely you are able to 'copy and paste' or type out the Definition and Examples of usage that are printed in -your- Dictionary.

One wonders what it is that hinders you.

aa5874

Please, just go and get a dictionary to find out the meaning of BELIEF.

You are just trying to derail my thread. Please, open a thread about the Meaning of Credibility and Belief.

This thread is about my argument that the Jesus story and cult ORIGINATED in the 2nd century based on Recovered DATED Texts and compatible sources.

Sheshbazzar

You have used the words 'credible' and 'credibility' around 100 times within this thread, -beginning with your very first post.

It is thus quite on topic to spend a small bit of space in discussing whether you are properly understanding and employing these terms.

What English language Dictionary are you founding your understanding of these terms upon?

aa5874

Again, at POST #485 you attempted to show that you understood the difference between Credibility and Belief but you NEVER did show that you know the meaning of BELIEF.

Please, open a new thread and ask people for the meaning of belief.

You are cluttering my thread.

Sheshbazzar

You asked for my definition of 'belief' in this thread, and I will be replying to your inquiry in this thread.
Posting English Dictionary quotations on the Definition of 'belief', and the many Examples of the common English usage of the word 'belief'.

Of course in return I'll be asking that you -finally- provide us with -your- Dictionary's Definitions and Examples of the common English usage of the words 'Credible' and 'Credibility'.

Seems like a fair exchange. If you agree, I'll proceed.

aa5874

The history of mankind Must reconstructed from Credible Sources.

In or out a Court Credible witnesses and Credible date are imperative to find out what happened in the past.

Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings are NOT Credible.

Now, in the NT Canon KJV there are 27 books but only two authors are relevant to the historicity of Jesus, that is, only two authors implied or claimed that they lived during the 1st century and were supposed contemporaries of Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius and Nero.

The authors of the Gospels, Non-Pauline Epistles and Revelation do NOT make any claims or imply that they were contemporaries of 1st century figures of history.

I no longer accept Presumptions about date of authorship of books of the NT Canon when the authors do NOT even place themselves in the 1st century.

In Acts of the Apostles the author claimed he traveled "all over" the Roman Empire with a character called Saul whom he later called Paul. The author of Acts even claimed he Prayed with Saul/Paul.

Acts 16:13 KJV Acts 11:28 KJVThe author of Acts and Saul/Paul were supposedly living sometime around c 41-54 CE.

What does the author of Acts write about Jesus???

The author of Acts claimed Jesus ASCENDED to heaven in a cloud AFTER he spoke to his disciples and the ascended Jesus sent a Holy Ghost to give them power to preach and perform miracles.

In effect, the supposed contemporary, the author of Acts is useless as a witness of a human Jesus.

In Acts, Jesus MUST Ascend.

Without the Ascension--the Promise of the Holy Ghost would not be realized and the Gospel would NOT be preached.

In Acts, there is NO Universal Salvation without the Ascension.

Acts is a Myth Fable about an Ascended Jesus and the Holy Ghost.

Now, what about the character called Paul in 2 Cor.??

What does he know of a human Jesus??

In 2 Cor. 11.31-32, the Pauline writer claimed or implied he was ALIVE during the time of King Aretas c 37-41 CE, a supposed contemporary of the Emperor Gaius.


In 1 Cor. 15.17--the Pauline writer claimed Jesus MUST resurrect for Remission of Sins.

Such a statement implies that Jesus was NOT human.

This is Precisely what the Pauline writer stated in Galatians 1.1-12. He was NOT the Apostle of and did NOT get his Gospel from a human being.

The Pauline writings are about a Mythological Jesus who was Raised from the dead.

In the Pauline writings There is NO story of salvation without the Resurrection.
In Acts of the Apostles There is No story of Salvation Without the Ascension.

The Only TWO authors in the NT Canon who place themselves as contemporaries of the Emperors Tiberius, Gaius, Claudius and Nero show that Jesus MUST be Mythological, that is Jesus MUST resurrect and Ascend.

There is NO human Jesus in the NT Canon.

The NT Canon is a Compilation of Myth Fables of a character called Jesus.

The Recovered DATED Texts and Compatible Sources show that the Myth Fables about Jesus were Compiled in the 2nd century or later.

Iskander

Yes .

Definition of credible adjective from the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary
1 that can be believed or trusted
Synonym convincing
a credible explanation/witness
It is just not credible that she would cheat.
2 that can be accepted, because it seems possible that it could be successful
Synonym viable
Community service is seen as the only credible alternative to imprisonment.
http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionar...nary/Credible+
credible
able to be believed or trusted
They haven't produced any credible evidence for convicting him.
The story of what had happened to her was barely (= only just) credible
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dict...ble?q=credible

J-D

I suppose that may possibly be true. But I doubt it.

aa5874

The history of mankind MUST be recovered from Credible Sources not from Admitted Fiction.

The NT is admitted by Scholars to be filled with discrepancies and contradictions in the accounts of Jesus.

In effect, the NT is a source of Perjury--a Source of Admitted False statements.

Codices of the NT Canon have been recovered and dated and show what was BELIEVED or TAUGHT by the Church from as early as the 4th century.

FIVE Gospels have been recovered but they have NOTHING about a human Jesus with a human father.

ALL the Gospels either claimed or implied Jesus was the Son of a Ghost, the Son of God, or was God the Creator without ever stating that he had a human father.

The Gospel Jesus was purely Mythological--a type of Phantom.

The Gospel Jesus APPEARED like a Man but was Conceived by a Spirit.

The author of gMatthew appears to have used the gMark Jesus story and merely ADDED more Fictional details.

Essentially, the author of gMatthew is effectively claiming or implying that gMark's Jesus was the Son of a Ghost, that is, gMark's Jesus was born AFTER Mary his mother was With Child of a Holy Spirit.

See Matthew 1.18 for the authors impression of how gMark's Jesus was conceived.

Matthew 1:18 KJV It is clear that in Antiquity it was Believed and Taught in the Churches for Hundreds of years that Jesus was the Son of some kind of a GHOST--some kind of a Spirit.

NT Codices have been recovered and dated and they do indeed contain the Ghost Birth story.

The NT Codices are EXTREMELY important manuscripts because they show the Beliefs and Theology of the Church in antiquity.

The NT Gospels are NOT about a human--in effect, they are Myth Fables of a Phantom.

Now, if Jesus was NOT human during the reign of Tiberius then we would NOT expect any actual history of Jesus and his disciples from Non-Apologetic sources except the very stories in the Gospels themselves.

And this is EXACTLY what has happened.

No Non-Apologetic Source shows any impact of Jesus and the disciples on the Roman Empire historically or theologically.

No-one could have SEEN Jesus anyway. He was after all the Son of some kind of Ghost. Even the authors of the Gospels did NOT claim that they personally saw Jesus or interacted with him or his disciples.

It was Vespasian the Emperor of Rome that was considered the PREDICTED Messianic ruler found in Hebrew Scripture.

It was Vespasian the Emperor of Rome who was claimed to have made the BLIND to See with Spit and the Lame to walk with a touch.

See "Wars of the Jews" 6.5.4, Suetonius "Life of Vespasian, Tacitus "Histories" 5 and Cassius Dio "Roman History".

There is NO account in any non-Apologetic sources of a character named Jesus who was considered the PREDICTED Messianic ruler in the 1st century--Vespasian was the PREDICTED Messianic ruler.

Now, in "Dialogue with Trypho", it is claimed that the Jews did NOT ever Teach or acknowledge any character called Jesus as the PREDICTED Messianic ruler Up to the mid 2nd century.

Dialogue with Trypho CX The writings of Justin Martyr appear to confirm that Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3, 20.9.1 and Tacitus Annals 15.44 are indeed Forgeries.

Up to the time of Justin Martyr, or up to the mid 2nd century, there was NO Jewish or Roman writer that claimed there was a character known as Jesus Christ the Predicted Messianic ruler of the Jews who DIED for the Sins of the World but STILL LIVED.

The Gospel story itself cannot accomodate a human being--the Jesus character MUST be DEAD and Buried but Still LIVE simultmaenously.

The Gospel story itself cannot accomodate history--Only Mythology.

Jesus DIED for our Sins MUST BE A lie if he Still LIVES.

1 Cor.15 Jesus DIED for OUR Sins.

1 Cor. 15. 17 Jesus LIVES for Our Sins.

What Fiction!!! What Contradiction!!! What Lies!!!

The NT Canon is a Compilation of Myth Fables composed in the 2nd century or later and the Jesus cult started AFTER the Myth Fables became known at around that time.

PJLazy

What is the difference of a "credible source" and an "admitted fiction"?