aa5874

"So What" you ask??? How bizarre!!!! You are the one who INITIALLY introduce the absurd charge. Have you forgotten what you wrote so soon?

Please don't ever FORGET from now on that HJers CANNOT comprehend that the Jesus story was NOT based on an actual human.

HJers CANNOT comprehend that the Jesus story was based on a PHANTOM, the sea-water Walker who Transfigured.

You KNOW the Myths about Alexander the Great are NOT rejected. They are documented to SHOW what people of antiquity did claim about Alexander the Great. You KNOW that there is CORROBORATION for the historicity of Alexander the Great.

The mythology and history of Alexander the Great are DOCUMENTED and CANNOT be REJECTED.

It must be KNOWN all what was claimed about Alexander the Great to DETERMINE the historicity of Alexander the Great.

Now, tell me of the MYTH and History in gMark for Jesus.

If Jesus was an ACTUAL figure of History then we would EXPECT MYTH and History of Jesus like Alexander the Great.

There is ALL MYTH and NO history in gMark.

Well who is recognizing gMark as history? Are you claiming gMark as being ACTUAL history?

I recognize gMark as mythology


What!!!! You want me to accept HORSE-SHIT as history like HJers!!! That is funny indeed.

I accept the HORSE-SHIT in gMark as MYTH. What do you do with the Horse-Shit in gMark?

I accept HORSE-Shit in gMark as HORSE-SHIT.

Some people want to dismantle the Horse-shit in gMark looking for the history of their HJ.

Horse-shit when dismantled will only be DISMANTLED Horse-Shit.

I really don't understand what you are arguing about when you have ADMITTED that you are NOT an HJer.

HJers NEED to PROVIDE credible sources for their HJ instead of DISMANTLING the Horse-Shit in gMark.

If Jesus was a figure of History then we would EXPECT some Horse-Shit and Some History but Jesus is ALL HORSE-SHIT.

J-D

If the discussion went off-topic, you shouldn't be blaming me. My remark was a direct response to one of yours, so if my remark was off-topic it can only have been because your preceding remark was off-topic.I have not asserted the position you describe. It is also not clear to me that you have correctly characterised the issue raised by the OP.Insofar as that is the question at issue, you have not succeeded in making a case for your position on it, and neither has anybody else.

J-D

aa5874 has gone the cherry-picking route. aa5874's approach is based on considering selected verses only.

J-D

I didn't say I did. What I said was that aa5874's arguments are inadequate to establish the conclusion that none of the statements in the canonical Gospels using the name Jesus are literally accurate reports of events that actually happened. That is a specific affirmative conclusion which aa5874 has not established. Even if you are right about the impossibility of establishing another different affirmative conclusion, failure to establish one possibility does not automatically equate to success in establishing another one. The question is still open.

aa5874

Your claim is ERRONEOUS and appears to be DELIBERATELY mis-leading and yet you REPEAT your KNOWN error continuously.

I have enough of your CRAP.

I have NOT attempted or stated anywhere in my thread that I will show that none of the statements in the Canonical Gospels using the name Jesus are literally accurate reports.

I have STATED that gMark's supports the Myth Jesus theory and that Jesus was an OBSOLETE ABSOLUTE PHANTON in gMark when he Walked on the sea and Transfigured. See Mark 6.48-49 and 9.2.

The SPECIFIC GRAVITY of Jesus in gMark is NOT that of human beings.

And further many miracles of the supposed Jesus in gMark are IMPLAUSIBLE.

For example, the feeding of the 5 thousand and 4 thousand men with a few loaves and fish is impausible and support mythology not history. See Mark 6 and 8.

The INSTANT healing of the blind, deaf and dumb in gMark 7 and 9 are IMPLAUSIBLE and SUPPORT Mythology NOT history.

The Resurrection of Jesus in Mark 16.6 is IMPLAUSIBLE and SUPPORTS Mythology NOT history.

gMark's Jesus is an Obsolete Absolute Phantom that carried out Implausible Miracles and the disciples of the PHANTOM participate in the very same implausibilities.

gMark is the Perfect HJ argument Killer.

Adam

Thanks for saving me from making my first reply ever to Stringbean. You nailed it exactly.

aa5874

You don't know what you are talking about.

1. J-D has utterly failed to show that anything about Jesus in gMark is history.

2. I have provided passages in gMark that SUPPORT the Myth Jesus theory.

J-D is a DISASTER.

J-D has ZERO sources to CONTRADICT the MYTH Jesus theory.

J-D

There is nothing new in any of those posts. Everything in them is things you have posted before, repeatedly. It wasn't enough to make out your case before and it isn't now. Repetition adds no weight. You can protract the thread with repetition as much as you like, but it's a pure waste of time and space, contributing nothing of value to the discussion.

J-D

Given that you acknowledge that it is possible for supernatural stories to be told about historical individuals, I do not see how you exclude the possibility that the Gospel tales are examples of this. The question is still open.

aa5874

Your claims appears to be FALSE. You have NOT found one single fault with my posts at all. You have even ADMITTED that some statements in the Canon CANNOT be historically accurate.

You DON'T even realise that ALL the TIME you were SUPPORTING me.

1. You ADMITTED that the Canon contain statements that CANNOT be historically accurate.

2. In ALL your POSTS, You have UTTERLY FAILED to show that anything about Jesus in gMark is historically accurate.

You DON'T even understand that you have DONE EXACTLY what I wanted you to DO.[

You HAVE ZERO SOURCES for HJ. You have NOTHING but NOISE.

That is WHAT you have SHOWN for ALL YOUR POSTS.

That is EXACTLY what I WANTED you to do. EXPOSE that HJ is without SUPPORT or Corroboration from sources of antiquity.


And further, in gMark the so-called Miracles of Jesus were IMPLAUSIBLE and fiction.

1. The Baptism story is IMPLAUSIBLE.

2. The Temptation by the Satan is IMPLAUSIBLE.

3. The Cursing of the Fig tree is IMPLAUSIBLE.

4. The Calming of the sea-storm is IMPLAUSIBLE.

5. The Raising of the dead is IMPLAUSIBLE.

6. The Trial of Jesus is IMPLAUSIBLE.

7. The INSTANT healing of the blind, deaf and dumb is IMPLAUSIBLE.

8. The feeding of the five and four thousand is IMPLAUSIBLE.

9. The claim that Jesus would BAPTIZE with Holy Ghost is IMPLAUSIBLE.

10. The Claim that Jesus resurrected is IMPLAUSIBLE.

The MYTH JESUS theory is WELL supported by gMark.

gMark is the Perfect HJ argument killer since there are statements in gMark about Jesus that are TOTAL FICTION and it is NOT known that any event about Jesus in gMark is historical.

Without any credible sources for an historical Jesus then HJ must be ABANDONED. No question about HJ can be answered.

J-D, you can't do history with SILENCE and IMAGINATION.

But on the other hand, gMark's Jesus was an OBSOLETE ABSOLUTE PHANTOM. IT WALKED on sea-water and Transfigured. Mark 6.48-49 and 9.2.