outhouse

99.9998% of scholars and myself, would disagree with you

Sheshbazzar

Then the challenge to you, and to them, is to stop with the generalizations and claims, and get down to providing your proof for each individual verse that you believe to be creditable and actual historical reporting.

I'm patient. Start at Matthew 1:1 and go through the entire NT.

Tell me which verses it is that you find to be credible and actual historical reports.

Then for each of these verses, explain what means and what methods you used to arrive at that conclusion.

So I am waiting for that first verse that you are willing to defend as being real world history.

outhouse

because mythers dont like the methods being employed, doesnt discredit the scholarly work being done.


mythers are worse, they cannot even generalize, and make no coherent attempt to explain how we have the documents that we do.


theres only been two real attempts by scholars to explain what we have, and their hypothesis, are more easily refuted, then accepting that history does show a legend built around a real man

Sheshbazzar

I didn't ask YOU about anyone else's choices of what they consider to be historically accurate text. I asked YOU.

In these posts it is YOU and YOUR personal beliefs that I am addressing.

If YOU believe some of this text to be historically accurate and verbatim reports, YOU should be able to identify and pinpoint such texts.

And provide YOUR means and methods of ascertaining that these text are indeed accurate and historical, and are not simply part of a fabricated religious narrative.

The more YOU continue to evade this personal responsibility for what YOU claim to be historical fact, the less credible YOUR assertions of a HJ become.

The verses that YOU believe are accurate history. Please.

outhouse

there are no real verses I take on with certainty

i would like to think Q and Thomas reflect sayings, but that isnt a certainty either.

No verses anyone could supply, would not change you mind so I dont understand your point.


I dont do the word play games many of you get wrapped up into. All that does is reflect the unknown authors view, not jesus real view.



this could be your fault in history, how can any verse be accurate history written long after the fact from another cultures mythology?

I look at the cultural anthropology of the time, and realize there are many scriptures from different sources and places dealing with the same human person first and formost, who was later deified. And Josephas as well to a limited amount. I dont like paul for a second, and he speaks of a human man deified, the same way roman men were deified.


Part of this is knowing the different ways people of that time created and compiled their mythology.

Sheshbazzar

Then you agree there is nothing to be found within these texts that supports their being historical accounts?

Where then are you getting your 'history' of your 'historical' Jebus from?

Is it not every last bit of it derived from these Bible STORIES, of which you cannot cite even a single verse as being a trustworthy and accurate historical event or accounting?

Take away these untrustworthy highly mythical Bible STORIES and what would be left of your Jebus? Absolutely nothing, no not even so much as a name.

You would not be claiming that your Jebus caused a ruckus in the Temple. You would not be claiming that your Jebus was arrested as a tax resistor, or that your Jebus was tried and executed by crucifixion; As every last bit of this came from texts that you will not, or cannot defend even a single paragraph of as being of any actual historical substance.

Like most, your error is in mistaking Jewish allegorical political propaganda for a historical accounting.
The Jews backs were against the wall, their sages knew they were bound to lose, so they did what they knew best, put their pens to paper and wrote a very carefully contrived and gentile pandering mythical tale of a mythical savior, with the foresight that although they might certainly become the losers in the coming confrontations, their writings would survive, and that in time to come their ruse would be discovered, and although defeated, in death they would in due time be vindicated and the shame be brought down on those who had so long abused, and then defeated them.

The Book of Revelations is NOT a christian writing -although christians rather crudely inserted their obligatory jebus fawning verses- it is a JEWISH polemic directed against the religion of christianity, with chapters 17 and 18 aimed directly at the Great Whore of Roman christianity and all of the christian sects that make up her whoring (harlot) daughters.
The religion of Christianity is coming down! Down to the lowest pit, and its leaders will no longer be lauded, but become recognized to all as the vilest of self deceived men that have ever walked this earth. No one left will ever wish to be associated with them, their very name will become a curse.
Yes, the Jews fashioned and long worked with mythology, they were skilled, they were clever, they loved their allegories, metaphors, and distinctive word plays, obscure allusions and alliterations.
Backs against the wall they set their last defense literary machinations into action, and let it roll and roll, and it is still rolling, first picking up and then crushing stupid and senseless gentiles as it rolls along.
But it does not bother me one bit whether you can understand or believe this or not, nor did it them, because believe it or not, it will continue to function, until its function has became fully accomplished.
There will be no more christians, in heaven or earth, nor any more of this christ insanity, and no man will mourn their passing, but all left will shout for joy;
"Hallelu-YAHH! kall goyim!" in perfect accord.

outhouse

STOP

determining evidence that determines historicity doesnt fit in your box. This is your problem not mine.


Because I dont believe word for word written by thris forth or fith hand sources, doesnt mean there is no historical core.

and mythers haved constantly failed to produce a better model that that explains the evidence we do have.

Sheshbazzar

Without the content that you glean from these texts, -and ONLY from these texts- you have nothing to indicate that there ever was such a person.
And you cannot find, nor produce any 'historical core' from the words of these texts.
Thus your imagined Jebus posssees no 'historical core', because the only 'historical core' he could possibly possess would need to be found someplace within the word for word content of these texts, because there simply is -no other source- where any such 'historical core' could be found.

ipso facto; No texts = No Jebus.
No texts that are historically valid = No Jebus that is validly historical.

You are believing not in anything actually found within these texts (as you admit), but in what is a figment of your own devising.
Although strangely enough, you have nothing to say about that figment, that you have not cobbed from some portion of these unreliable NT texts.

As far as Josephus, without you having the NT writings, whatever Josephus wrote about a unknown Jesus would have remained quite meaningless to you, as you would have no knowledge nor any awarness of the Jebus described within the NT.

It is the NT -and only the NT, and what you have cobbed from the NT- that informs your opinions about Bible Jebus, and whatever opinions you might have about what Josephus wrote about any Jebus 'called the Christ'.

Perhaps a lot of words, simply to say; You have no such thing as a 'historical core' to your Jebus, because you cannot produce nor demonstrate that any such 'historical core' has ever existed, hence no 'Historical Jebus' can be demostrated. As these texts are the ONLY way to do so.

Thus what in effect you do have, is a religious belief in a 'historical Jebus',
one that is based on your personal persuasion and FAITH (without resort to any concrete historical evidence) that there really was a 'historical Jebus'.

Or perhaps, .....given your FAITH, I should write;
What in effect you do have is a religious belief in The 'historical Jebus',
one that is based on your personal persuasion and conviction by FAITH that there really IS a 'Historical Jebus'.

You BELIEVE in Jebus!

And that this Jebus really was crucified.

Now all you got to do is accept that he died on that cross for YOU!

Ya THINK ???

outhouse

No not exactly


I believe there was a obscure teacher healer of judaism that traveled around Galilee healing for dinner scraps to survive with a few fishermen, and who got violent in the temple at passover over the roman infection in the temple and was crucified.


Noahs story is complete fiction, which jesus legend is not in entirety. yet there was a flood on the Euphrates in 2900 BC in which all flood legends in the levant started from.

Sheshbazzar

"No not exactly" ???
Crucified is crucified in your book is it not? Or does it mean something else to you??

By that I mean that you take this reported crucification as being a literal 'historical' event, that happened to an identifiable and literal 'historical' Jew ???
If so, I don't see were or how you can claim to 'not exactly' believe in a literal JESUS, and that this literal JESUS was quite literally crucified.

Given what you yourself have clearly stated above as "I believe.."
It certainly strongly suggests that you DO in fact "exactly" believe in a literal JESUS.

Either you DO or you DON"T, or you don't know what it is that you believe.
Have you yet made up your mind ?

Clearly stating that you 'believe' something, as in your "I believe..." statement above, would normally indicate that you have made up your mind.
Only you can decide whether that is true.

But if you clearly state that you DO believe something, how can you then not exactly believe the very thing you have stated it is that you believe?

Note that I am NOT asking you anything else about your beliefs about JESUS, or about any other thing to be found within the Bible other than;
Is it your belief (1.) that Jesus is an identifiable and literal 'historical' Jew,
and
(2.) was his crucification a literal 'historical' event ?

If so, You believe in JESUS.

That's not so hard is it?