aa5874

You cannot say and have no evidence that the John the Baptist story was NOT originally in the gMark story.

John the Baptist is in the gMark story so I have no need to assume that it was NOT.

I am dealing with the WRITTEN statement not with Speculation.

Theories, Logical deductions, are developed from actual statements, the evidence AVAILABLE, not on WHAT IFS, NOT on maybe.

1. The character John the Baptist is found in gMark and it is written that he was baptizing ALL of Judea for the Remission of Sins. See Mark 1

2. In gMark, it is found that the charater Jesus did NOT TEACH his disciples that his resurrection was for remission of Sins. See Mark 9

3. It is found written in gMark that NO-ONE was told by the visitors that Jesus was resurrected. See Mark 16

4. In the Pauline writings it is FOUND that Paul is claiming he was NOT called to baptize but to preach the Gospel. See 1 Cor.1

4. And further, it is found written in the Pauline letters that WITHOUT the resurrection that there would be NO Remission of Sins.See 1 Cor.15

It can be logically deduced from the DATA in gMark and the Pauline writings that the author of gMark did NOT know of the Pauline letters.

gMark PREDATES the Pauline letters.

Logically, the Pauline writer made gMark's John the Baptist story OBSOLETE.

The Resurrection of Jesus made John the Baptist's Baptism null and void.

The Pauline gospel of the Resurrection was the very LAST gospel.

Duvduv

AA, what you are saying could also mean that because the crucifixion caused remission of sins so logically Paul had to know about Hinduism or Buddhism because their beliefs also become null and void. That's true, but it still doesn't mean thst Paul (the author of epistles for shorthand purposes ) KNEW about those religions.

aa5874

You have NOT presented any evidence at all for your claims. You make unsupported assertions WITHOUT putting forward any sources and a comprehensive methodology.

I have NOT made any arguments about Hinduism or Buddhism.

I have put forward a THEORY based on written statements of antiquity.

We have gMark and the Pauline writings and we can EXAMINE the statements in each source and make LOGICAL deductions.

If the Pauline letters of the Revealed Gospel of the Resurrected Jesus was known in at least SEVEN Regions of the Roman Empire for at least 30 YEARS and PAUL was WIDELY KNOWN BEFORE gMark was written then we would EXPECT the authors to EMULATE the Pauline letters.

Gospel authors EMULATED the UNKNOWN gMark.

Paul and his letters should have been known but up to the mid 2nd century an apologetic source used the "MEMOIRS of the Apostles" which contained passages found ONLY IN gMark but NOTHING from the Pauline writer.

Dialogue with TryphoMark 3:17 KJV 100 years AFTER the supposed Pauline letters, Justin's "Memoirs of the Apostles" does NOT appear to have anything on Paul's letters.

It MUST not be forgotten that the Pauline letters supposedly WENT DIRECT to the Churches via the messengers of Paul.

PAUL'S Letters should have been READ in the Churches for almost 100 years.

Well, Justin claimed it was the Memoirs of the Apostles or the words of the Prophets that was read in the Churches--NOT the Pauline letters.

First Apology The Pauline letters were NOT read in the Churches up to the 2nd century.

gMark is the FIRST of the Canon and PAUL WAS LAST.

Doug Shaver

I tweak him once in a while, but I gave up a long time ago on trying to engage him in serious discussion. He just isn't worth the time.

Duvduv

AA, I used those religions as part of a logical inference. You yourself have emphasized repeatedly that the Jesus of GMark is not a messianic figure/savior. IF he is not the messianic figure then the messiah would have no need for a PRECURSOR Elijah figure, correct?

Therefore, one can only assume in this regard that the Baptist scenario was added only later when the Jesus figure developed into the Davidic Messiah figure.

aa5874

We have FIVE Canonized Gospels and Logical deductions can be made using the written statements found in these writings.

The Logical deduction that the Canonized Synoptic Gospels were written AFTER the Fall of the Temple, After c 70 CE, is fundamentally based on the fact that ONLY one PREDICTION in ALL the Synoptics came to pass and it was the FALL of the Jewish Temple.

gMark 13, gMatthew 24 and gLuke 21 ALL contain Predictions that are 100% TOTAL Failures EXCEPT the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE.

The most logical deduction for the 100% success rate for the Fall of the Temple and 000% rate for other Predictions is that they ALL wrote AFTER the Temple FELL c 70 CE.

Now, when gMark was written AFTER c 70 CE did the Anonymous author know of the Pauline letters?? Did the author of gMark attend a Pauline Church?? Was the author of gMark a CONTEMPORARY of the Pauline writer???

It is claimed that Paul, a former PERSECUTOR of the FAITH, preached Jesus Christ CRUCIFIED and RESURRECTED since the time of King Aretas c 37-41 and DOCUMENTED his TEACHINGS in letters to Churches in at least 7 REGIONS of the Roman Empire.

NOW, we can LOGICALLY deduce that the Anonymous author of gMark used a source for Hebrew Scripture because we SEE WORD-FOR-WORD copying of passages IDENTIFIED as words of the Prophets.

For example, the author of gMark introduce his John the Baptist character by using MALACHI 3.1 and ISAIAH 40.3.

But, when the Anonymous author introduced his Jesus there is NOTHING from the supposed RECENT and DOCUMENTED Pauline letters.

There is NOT one WORD-FOR-WORD copy of a sentence in gMark associated with the Pauline letters.

If gMark was written c 70 CE then the author should have been a CONTEMPORARY of PAUL.

The PAULine writer claimed OVER 500 people, in addition to the disciples and Apostles, was VISITED by Jesus AFTER he was RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day.

The PAULINE writer and Former Persecutor claimed WITHOUT the RESURRECTION there would be NO SALVATION and NO Christian Faith.

In effect, there would be NO Pauline PERSECUTION of CHRISTIANS of the Jesus cult if Jesus was NOT Resurrected.

Quite Remarkably, and Contrary to the Pauline letters, the author of gMark claimed NO-ONE was told Jesus was raised from the dead, that NO-ONE was PUBLICLY told Jesus was Christ and that Jesus WANTED the Jews to REMAIN in SIN.

The Markan Jesus came to FULFILL the LAW but the Pauline Jesus was the END of the LAW.

In gMark, the Jesus cult came to an ABRUPT END when Jesus was arrested and Crucified up to the time gMARK was written sometime AFTER c 70 CE.

Logically, The Anonymous author of gMark who wrote sometime AFTER the FALL of the Temple c 70 CE did NOT know anything at all about Paul, the Pauline letters, the Pauline Churches and the Pauline Revealed Gospel of the UNIVERSAL SALVATION by the Resurrection.

There were NO Christians of a Resurrected Jesus when gMark was written.

There were NO Christians of a Jesus cult who claimed Jesus was raised from the dead for UNIVERSAL Salvation.

ALL claims in any writing of the Canon of SALVATION by the RESURRECTION is after gMark was written.

Examine the teaching of gMark's Jesus.

Mark 9 Examine the teachings of the Pauline writer.

Romans 10:9 KJV The author of gMARK did NOT know that Jesus would be RESURRECTED for the Salvation of Mankind and that without the resurrection there would be NO CHRISTIAN Faith.

It can be LOGICALLY deduced that gMark is BEFORE all the writings in the Canon.

aa5874

It can be logically deduced that the author of gMark composed his story AFTER the Fall of the Jewish Temple c 70 CE and that he was most likely NOT a Jew--the author did NOT know the Jewish tradition of applying spices BEFORE burial which was CORRECTD by the author of gJohn.

The author of gMark most likely used a Jewish source and Josephus is a likely candidate--only in Josephus do we have stories about John the Baptist, false prophets that led thousands of Jews astray, and the crucifixion of three where one survived.

The Markan Jesus story appears to be compatible with Jewish history, that is, the Jews of the 1st century were unaware of the Markan Jesus Christ.

In gMark, it is claimed Jesus was baptized by John, that he performed all sorts of miracles but was still unknown as the Messiah to the Jews.

It was ONLY on the day he was crucified that he PUBLICLY declared for the first time he was the Messiah, the King of the Jews, the Messianic ruler. And his FIRST-TIME public declaration was in the presence of the Sanhedrin.

The ENTIRE Jesus movement collapsed on that very day of his crucifixion based on gMark.

The disciples of Jesus had either betrayed, abandoned or denied Jesus and he was REJECTED as the Messiah by the Sanhedrin and after his burial the body of Jesus vanished, not even the disciples were told that Jesus was resurrected.

gMark's Jesus cannot be traced by genealogy, by physical description, by age, by birth, or by time of death.
gMark's Jesus came from Nazareth and at the first Passover after Baptism he was crucified, dead, buried and vanished.

gMark's Jesus story is compatible with Philo and Josephus.

gMark's Jesus story is compatible with Jewish history.

Neither Philo or Josephus, Jewish writers, claimed there was a Resurrected Messiah called Jesus who predicted the Fall of the Temple since c 33 CE.

Neither Philo or Josephus, Jewish writers, claimed there was a Resurrected Messiah who had ABOLISHED the Laws of the Jews for atonement of sins since c 33 CE.

The Pauline letters contain claims that Paul preached Jesus as a Messianic ruler and that he provided Universal Salvation since the time of King Aretas.

The Pauline writings are NOT compatible with Jewish History from Philo and Josephus.

The Pauline letters to the Churches are AFTER the writings of Philo and Josephus.

aa5874

The understanding of the Short-Ending gMark is EXTREMELY critical for the resolution of history of the Jesus cult.

But, it is most remarkable that we have the FORGED gMark in Pristine condition, a perfect example of interpolation and manipulation.

The manipulated additional verses in Mark 16.9-20 has completely changed the sgMark story. [short-ending gMark]

sgMark is compatible with non-apologetic Jewish history, that is, there was NO Known Jewish Messiah, King of the Jews, or Messianic ruler called Jesus who was Sacrificed for the Universal Salvation of mankind and that in Jerusalem there were NO known persons who also preached that Jesus was raised on the THIRD day.

The Pauline letters are in DIRECT Contradiction of sgMark.

If we assume the Pauline letters were already composed since the mid 1st century then people in at least EIGHT Regions of the Roman Empire would have been completely familiar with the Jesus story and would have known that Jesus the Messianic ruler, the King of the Jews, was already crucified and Resurrected to ABOLISH Jewish Laws for atonement of Sins.

The Pauline Gospel was essentially BLASPHEMY and was expected to create Massive arguments and controversies in the real world but these arguments only happened in the NT.

Paul argued against the Pillars of the Jerusalem church, Cephas, James and John, was beaten, stoned, and persecuted but ONLY in the NT--there is ABSOLUTE SILENCE on Paul in Jewish history.

Not one Jewish writer recorded any change in Jewish laws or that any person was declared a universal Savior through Sacrifice and resurrection.

The Pauline writings are historically and chronologically bogus. They do NOT match any non-apologetic source that wrote of events in the 1st century.

The Pauline writings are NOT compatible with sgMark.

The Pauline writings are compatible with the INTERPOLATED gMark.

Mark 16 When the author of sgMark wrote his Jesus story AFTER 70 CE there was NOBODY preaching any gospel of Jesus and no-one was commisioned to preach the Gospel.

The commission to preach the Gospel is an Interpolation--a Forgery.

Now, tell me who is the ONLY documented writer in the Canon to have preached the Gospel in at least SEVEN regions of the Roman Empire for over 17 years.

It was NOT the author of sgMark.

It was Paul.

Romans 1:16 KJV1 Corinthians 1:23 KJV The Pauline writer preached Christ crucified to the Jews and Greeks after sgMark was composed.

Duvduv

Where does the Jesus of GMark say that he is the promised Davidic messiah? Nowhere.
Then in the context of the original text, WHY would a person who is not the promised Davidic messiah need an Elijah precursor???

aa5874

The Short-Ending Mark is extremely significant because we have the interpolated version. We are able to see without guessing what was fundamentally added to the earlier story.

The short version of gMark is the FOUNDATION of the Entire Canon . In order to MASK the contradictions of the Short-Ending gMark the Jesus story was ALTERED and in so doing inadvertently the Entire Canon has been Exposed as an invention.

Once the Pauline writings are placed AFTER the Fall of the Temple AFTER C 70 CE then the history of the Church is in SHAMBLES.

No matter which way you try to get PAUL before c 70 CE there are MAJOR obstacles.

The Short-Ending gMark is an IMPASSABLE OBSTACLE has completely sealed off the Pauline letters from entering the 1st century before c 70 CE.

When the Jewish Temple Fell Christians of the JESUS cult should have REMEMBERED Paul and the Pauline letters.

The Pauline writer would have been Prophetic. The Pauline Gospel should have been seen as most theologically sound.

But, nothing of the sort happened. The Christians supposedly forgot about Paul and his letters.

An unknown writer who portrayed Jesus as a Magician that walked on water and transfigured became the most BELIEVED story.

This unknown author claimed Jesus did NOT want the Jews to be converted, and did NOT want anyone to know he was Christ.

How did people Just ABANDON the Pauline writings when they appear to be PROPHETIC and made a lot of sense as soon as the Temple Fell???

The Pauline PREACHED for over 17 years that Jesus was the End of the LAW and the Temple Fell.

How could no-one remember Paul after the Temple??

None of the authors of the Gospels used a single verse associated with the Pauline writer.

It is obvious that the PAULINE WRITINGS could NOT been known to the author of gMark since the Pauline letters would have made the Short-Ending gMark OBSOLETE.