Toto

zero

I'm getting tired of hearing about these hypothetical thousands of witnesses who disappeared from history except for hypothetical "oral traditions." You still have no evidence.

steve_bnk

Juxtapose the NT Jews and Muslims in the region today. Without modern communications and recording how would the story of Bin laden and all the composite radicals be told centuries in the future?

Instead of being shot in the head, perhaps he ascended into heaven living with celestial virgins.

2000 years from now how would you build an image of a Bin Laden with only four short manuscripts, and a general knowledge of Islam and the conditions of the times?

I read the NT in context of looking at the region today given the players are not the same. Look at Gaza vs Israel. How would that story be told after 200 years of oral history in the future if Islam and the Palestinians overthrew Israel?

Undoubtedly there would be a mystical figure/savior in some form.

After speaking at Columbia Ahmadinejad claimed through the power of his faith he mesmerized the crowd for 20 minutes in which nobody blinked. And he is a modern educated guy.

Even today there is a wide belief in the Mid East that a global cabal run from Israel that controls global banking and media. It is spread and reinforced by word of mouth without any actual evidence, the creation of a myth.

Our founders and the iconic pilgrims are mystified beyond the reality of who they were. Or the Native American media myths I grew up with. Myths created by the same process that created the gospels.

heesh...look at the conservative Reagan myth, and that was only decades back :Cheeky:

That is my cut as to how to read the gospels. IMO they make perfect sense as a follow up to some murky movement in a time ofchos, sedition, and rebellion in Israel.

aa5874

Once we examine the writings of antiquity it is clear that the Jesus cult of Christians did not need an historical Jesus.

1. The very NT Canon clearly stated that Jesus the Transfiguring Water walker was born of a Ghost and a Virgin. See the Gospels

2. In Acts, it clearly states that the Jesus cult of Christians started AFTER Jesus was already ascended in a cloud.

3. In fact, it is claimed that the disciples MUST wait for the Holy Ghost BEFORE the Gospel of repentance is to be preached. See Acts 1.

4. In the Pauline writings, Paul got his Revealed Gospel AFTER Jesus was dead. See Galatians 1

The Jesus cult NEEDED a non-existing character.

Essentially, Jesus must be in a non-historical state and place before the Jesus cult could have begun.

The Jesus story was based on belief--never on history.

That is precisely why HJers cannot ever find their Jesuses--they are the products of their own imagination and WITHOUT consensus.

The multiple Jesuses confirm a total lack of consensus among scholars.

The multiple Jesus confirm that their Jesus are the products of Guessing.

ApostateAbe

Sounds about what I believe.

aa5874

This thread is not really about belief.

We expect to see the evidence from antiquity that support your belief.

Without evidence from antiquity belief is practically of no real historical value.

Multiple Jesuses are the primary indications that HJers did not ever have any consensus.

And most revealing is that even posters here who argue for an historical Jesus have their OWN Jesus which confirms without any reasonable doubt that HJ is without consensus.

ApostateAbe's HJ is different to outhouse's HJ.

It is clear that HJers don't know who Jesus was and are guessing.

outhouse

Oh, I know you hate when evidence points towards plausibility. You don't need to remind me.

I have plenty of evidence, that fact you deny it, means nothing.

:wave:

aa5874

You have plenty of evidence?? Please, this is BC&H. You should get yourself familiar with the writings of antiquity.

Not one non-apologetic writer mentioned No Tax Jesus or any other Jesus of Nazareth.

Please, you do not have any evidence at all for YOUR Jesus.

Perhaps you mean that you have lots to speculate.

Clivedurdle

Did I coin that here?

MrMacSon

They make sense as Greco-Roman accounts intended for belief. Yet, as they were written at least a few generations after the time of their alleged central character, they CANNOT be considered biographical.

Some of the oldest Papyrus fragments date from 2nd century, most from later. Moreover, those dates are for the parchment, which could have been re-used quiet a bit later, as was common.

The fourth century is plenty of time to alter, edit, align, & collate stories written in the 2nd century.


No I'm not - None of the gospel texts date from the actual time of Jesus, and none of the non-gospel texts are contemporary to the alleged time of the alleged Jesus.


NOBODY knows who wrote the canonical gospels. They were NOT written by disciples.

MrMacSon

Huh. See this -