mountainman

Where do you think the majesty of Bilbo Jesus Baggins comes from if not from the majesty of Bullneck The Great?




Majesty

sotto voce

'"Pharaoh's chariots and his army he has hurled into the sea. The best of Pharaoh's officers are drowned in the Red Sea. The deep waters have covered them; they sank to the depths like a stone. Your right hand, O Lord, was majestic in power. Your right hand, O Lord, shattered the enemy. In the greatness of your majesty you threw down those who opposed you. You unleashed your burning anger; it consumed them like stubble."' Ex 15:4-7 NIV


The next thing you will read is that the Roman republic pre-dated the above.

Sheshbazzar

You believe this ridiculous origins-myth tall tale really happened? :hysterical:

evidence? :realitycheck:

Chili

There is truth behind myth and in my reality check I see the consuming fire still burning stubble without even chaff in their speech, and least of a kernel of truth as that was the chariot they drove into the sea when they 'confessed their sins' and 'surrendered all' to become a believer in a new circle of friends.

That is what the allegory is about and notice the precondition of baptism in Matthew and Mark wherein to confess your sins is to bury your past.

Contrary to this is 'believe and repent' so you know which is which and what is what in the new promised land . . . and so 'to walk on this water' to get to the other side is a must.

Or maybe just be an ark-builder yourself and make sure all the the animals are loaded, . . . even the wolves:



Bottom line: "repent and believe" is the antithesis of "believe and repent," and so then Matthew and Mark are just opposite to Luke and John, . . . from which the real question emerges:

"From where did Mark get the intricate details to do it just wrong [if he was first] without knowing what was 'right' to do it just 'wrong'."

mountainman

So you're saying the majesty of Bilbo Jesus Baggins is derived from he who hurled Pharoah's chariots into the sea? somewhere in Middlearth?

Lovely fiction story the Hebrew Bible, and in its translation to Greek it didn't suddenly become true, despite the propaganda issued by its very first widespread publisher. And BTW there is no hard evidence that this was Ptolemy. The hard evidence suggests Bullneck popularised the Greek LXX.



The imperial propagandist Eusebius then falsely asserts Plato got his knowledge from Moses, and that the Hebrew sages have seniority and greater wisdom than the Greek sages.


If the Lord God Caesar Bullneck suddenly placed his imperial majesty behind the imperial publication of the NT and LXX, and then created laws that basically stated that "Religious privileges are reserved for readers and worshippers of the NT and LXX", we may see how the character called Jebus initially got to the top of the religious charts in the 4th century.


The political and religious majesty of Bilbo Jesus Baggins appears to be directly derived from the majesty of the Roman Emperor who published the Bilbo Jesus Baggins story.

sotto voce

You're trying to tell the world that Big Bastard Bullneck invented a story in which another Big Bastard got his come-uppance. This, I propose, is unlikely, along with very much else of a similar anomalous nature. I'm sure that many people have thought similarly, but have refrained, through politeness, from saying so.

But let us have your own explanation.

Chili

I think that somebody convinced Big Bastard Bullneck that the mythology is for the survival and prosperity of the tribe that he accepted as true.

From here he had no choice but to enforce the promise he made, and so now he did this for them and not for himself.

mountainman

There is evidence to indicate that the Emperor Julian has already tried to do this ...





Unlikely does not equate to impossible.



My own explanation involves being skeptical of the so-called evidence for the existence of anything christian (the new testament manuscripts, the existence of jesus and the apostolic boneheads and the existence of the so-called christian church (and its so-called bishops)) prior to the appearance of this Roman Emperor Constantine whom we already know first WIDELY PUBLISHED in Greek the New Testament and the LXX.

Many people have refrained from such skepticism because they think that there is incontrovertible and unambiguous physical evidence for these things. But there is not.

sotto voce

Ah. This makes much better sense. So it was 'the Galilaeans', and not Constantine, who were responsible for this notion of a toppled tyrant. Those Galileans had got that idea from their Hebrew scripture, long before him:

'"Pharaoh's chariots and his army he has hurled into the sea. The best of Pharaoh's officers are drowned in the Red Sea. The deep waters have covered them; they sank to the depths like a stone. Your right hand, O Lord, was majestic in power. Your right hand, O Lord, shattered the enemy. In the greatness of your majesty you threw down those who opposed you. You unleashed your burning anger; it consumed them like stubble."' Ex 15:4-7 NIV

So you now say that the permanent majesty of Jesus comes from Hebrew lore, and not from the fleeting majesty of a tyrant. In view of the pre-existence of that lore by at least half a millennium, that seems like a sensible realisation.

Toto

Since we now know that Mountainman is alive and well, this thread will be closed. Please start a new thread on a new topic or request a split if you wish to continue this conversation