Elijah

No it’s a prayer. Did you even bother to read the psalm to see the relevance?
No you use your imagination for how the Jesus phenomenon came into existence.
Good job taking a few minutes to think of the impact of the sacrifice and responding with something to contribute to the conversation.
I’m referring to how you understand scripture, but you know that. Just more of your diversionary tactics to your incomplete and unsupported theory.
It’s your understanding of the story of Christ that all children have. The Sunday school cartoon version. My understanding is a philosophical/political understanding. You are the one dancing with the strawman.
You have no understanding of the philosophical concepts in discussion how can you claim you understand how they understood him?
And I’m talking to the person who can’t see why that is rational.
But its only you who share the cartoon understanding of Christ, void of any semblance of reality, with the fundamentalists. The fact that they think Jesus was real isn’t what makes fundies silly. It’s understanding the holy ghost like Casper and Jesus as the biological offspring of a magical genie… like you do.

I don’t see a lot of difference between the person who reads it literally and believes and the person who reads it literally and doesn’t believe. Both make me shake my head.
He was a messiah claimant within a religion, not a roman emperor. Comparing the stories written about them is apples and oranges not that you seem to be able/willing to tell the difference.

aa5874

Again it is irelevant where the words are from, the authors have contradicted you. Jesus did not sacrifice himself willingly according to the author of gMark.
That statement is completely false, I have repeatedly written that Jesus was nothing, did not exist at all. The information, the written statements or evidence from the authors appear to be bogus. I reject them as crap until credible external information can be found.

And you have already admitted that your Jesus is from your imagination.

Again, you seem to be deliberately making false and mis-leading statements about my view. I have no version of Jesus, except that Jesus did not exist. For , the last time, Jesus was nothing.

Children presuppose Jesus exist, like Santa Claus. You also suppose Jesus of the NT exist. You are the one who thinks the Suday School cartoon character called Jesus was literally alive during the reign of Tiberius.

I understand fiction. The conception of Jesus, the temptation, the baptism of the Holy Ghost like doves, the miracles of Jesus, the transfiguration, the resurrection, and the ascension through the clouds are all fiction.

All I need is credible information or written statements about Jesus by writers of antiquity external of apologetic sources. Astory can appear plausible but can be totally false.

Again, Jesus was fiction.

You and the standard uneducated fundamentalist use the same books to claim Jesus literally lived on earth.

You have humanised the Casper of the the standard uneducated fundamentalist.

Now, you have come up with the most absurd position, you are implying that the NT is figurative or that you do not read the NT literally but you still managed to come up with a LITERAL Jesus.

How absurd is that?
Why do you refuse to use the written statements or the evidence available instead of your imagination? He was the son of the God of the Jews, conceived by the Holy Ghost, used spit to make people see, walked on water, raised a man dead for four days, transfigured, resurrected and ascended through the clouds according to written statements by the authors of the NT.

Jesus was an apple? Jesus was nothing but fiction.

Elijah

No it’s completely relevant because it’s the CONTEXT of what he is saying. Acting oblivious to the reference isn’t going to make it go away.
But the Jesus phenomenon is real and how it came into existence you are imagining completely. You have no evidence to support whatever incomplete theory you are imagining. I’m not imagining, I’m using scripture and my experience in reality.
You interpret the story of Jesus as the story of a god man. That is your interpretation whether you think it is from historical or fictional origins. You interpret it like a cartoon.
No I don’t think of him as a cartoon character. I think of him as a suicidal guy with a messiah complex. It’s you again who have the Sunday school cartoon understanding. "You may be a fundamentalist atheist if..."
You mean you recognize fiction. You may want to consider that the stories were embellished of a man they were trying to position as the messiah. Seems more logical than your unexplained fiction theory.
Well they’re not out there and I don’t know why you would expect there to be so you may want to move on with the evidence you have.

Nothing plausible about the story of a guy coming back from the dead. That’s why it’s hard to see how it got confused for history.
You use same books to say he was fictional.

Casper isn’t humanized in my understanding it’s wisdom.
Yea the guy that is the actual messiah claimant that all the stuff is being said about, that’s wrong or figurative, I think existed.
Do you really think he was the son of God or walked on water? Why not hold this up to some semblance of reality? Why use your imagination to imagine what can’t be possible instead of what could be?
The stories surrounding Jesus are fiction to help establish him as the messiah.

aa5874

Your claim that Jesus sacrificied himself willingly is false, based on the author of gMark. See Mark 14.36.

Well, I have all the written statemants of the NT and the church writers, they have provided the all the fiction I need. See Matthew 1.18.

How does the Church interpret the Jesus story? You have no idea that the Church interprets Jesus as some kind of superman, some kind of God that existed before the world began, equal to the God of the Jews.

You live in your own dream world. You don't know that Jesus believers pray to Jesus and ask him to save them and give them eternal life.

That is the Jesus of the NT, that Jesus is fiction.

And nobody wrote one single thing about Elijah's Jesus. Where can I find information on your Jesus? Only in your head.

Where do you find information about Elijah's suicidal Jesus? Only from Elijah.

The Jesus of the NT did not commit suicide according to the written statements of the authors of the NT. He was arrested and put on trial and was crucified.

So, when the author of Acts claimed Jesus ascended through the clouds and was witnessed by the disciples , why is that not total fiction?

Explain what really happened then. You know what was embellished.


You would notice that the authors of the NT claimed it was true that Jesus was raised from the dead. The Church right now today believe it is plausible and did happen.

I am investigating the Jesus of the NT, not Elijah's Jesus.

The Jesus of the Church is fiction, Elijah's Jesus exists in Elijah's head.

Do you not understand what evidence means. The author provided written statements, these statements when analysed are found to be fiction, these authors are not credible. They presented a fictitious character. I MUST reject fiction.
Finally, you have admitted your own fallacy.

You use fiction to establish your messiah.

Elijah presented a Jesus based on fiction.

You have now destroyed your "historical core", your have confirmed that all you really have is a FICTIOUS CORE.

Elijah

As I already said it was trying to show he didn’t want to die but was willing to.
You still haven’t told us how you imagine the Jesus phenomenon came into existence. No matter where your inspiration is from, you are still just imagining how this all came about. Imaginer.
The church doesn’t interpret anything. The “Church” is a mental construct on your part, just more of your imagination.
Point?
Saying it doesn’t prove it. You may want to start to actually work on a more convincing case then just parroting a few lines over and over and over and over and over again.
What information do you need? The sacrifice? The followers martyrdom? What? You are just cherry picking scripture for anything you can understand as magical and trying to form a narrative. A magical skeptical narrative. Great for kids and folks who don't want to believe!
And scripture.

John 10:18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord.

John 12:23 Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.

John 15:13Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends.

That was kind of the plan. Death by authority. The son of man versus the rulers of man. I’m sure the son of man concept you are familiar with since that’s what he referrers to the majority of time instead of your son of god stuff.
Feel free to consider anything not possible as exaggeration, made-up stories, or figurative speech. But when you say that this is evidence that the person exaggerated about or stories were made up about didn’t exist in the first place you have left the area of evidence and entered the area of your imagination. Where you and a few atheist pray and wish that your incomplete myth theory is somehow correct. Just wishful thinking.
A guy sacrifices his life, his followers imitate that sacrifice and it established faith that the guy who really started the sacrifice stuff was the messiah.

Seems pretty simple and reasonable to me. Your turn.
Yep it seems that some thought the martyrdom was because the early followers witnessed something that made them believers instead of just imitating the self sacrifice act. The martyrs are still used today to argue for a literal resurrecting as evidence that it was true. I don’t know how literal everyone has taken it throughout history. Like I don’t know if Paul believed they had a physical resurrection or a vision type of deal of resurrection like he had.
You’re not investigating anything aa. You are sitting here with your arms crossed going there is no undeniable proof of someone’s existence when none is expected and are just repeating ad nauseam, statements of the obvious or unsupported claims of fiction.
The Jesus phenomenon is real. Your understanding on how it came to be is the fiction that exists only in your mind.

Tell me how you imagine it happened?
Their statements aren’t found to be fiction but not possible. Can you tell the difference? Someone can say they saw Bobby turn into a werewolf. The claim of a werewolf is fiction doesn’t make Bobby himself fiction. Get it?

I use reason to establish my histoical core, while you use wishful thinking to pretend your mythical core is reasonable.

What is fictional in my historical core?

What is historical in your fictional core? Where does this phenomenon come from and how did it come to be confused for history? Tell me what you imagine since I know you have no proof or evidence.

aa5874

You are quite illogical. You have already asuumed Bobby is a real human.

Now, consider little Red Riding Hood and the talking wolf.

The ascension of Jesus and witnessed by the disciple is fiction and is also not possible.

There is nothing in your historical core but your imagimation. The written statements from the NT and church writers claimed Jesus was a son of a God of the Jews who ascended through the clouds.
You have just recently manufactured your Jesus using erroneous data, fiction, implausibilties, and figurative statements without any external corroboration.

You have already admitted that the authors claimed Jesus did things that were not possible, now this fact must alert you that perhaps Jesus did NOT DO the things which you think are possible.

The authors seem not to be able to distinguish the real from the unreal, the possible from the impossible.


Since when fiction is history? Only in the NT.

Elijah

The example is trying to illustrate that fictional accounts of a person doesn’t directly mean a fictional source of the person. Do you get it?
What would you like me to consider? Do you just grab any text that has stuff that can’t be possible and throw it in one big box and go “fiction” without understanding the context or the author’s intent? Do you think that is wise? What about stories that don't have miracles in them, are they all historical accounts?
Either an exaggeration or figurative but does absolutely nothing to help your case of a mythical origin to Jesus. Nothing at all.
All hot air. Did you want to present a counter theory? So far you have nothing to offer for how this came about except for the miracles aren’t possible which no one is arguing with.
What die? Maybe you should consider that your unsupported incomplete theory is just wishful thinking.
Strawman assumptions. You can’t be sure how they understood any of it. Just using your imagination.
You didn’t answer my question. If you don’t believe in a historical core please explain how you imagine he came to be thought of as historical… in as much detail as you can.

I’m not asking for proof or evidence just a coherent theory.

Tiberius

In other words, the evidence that there are no elephants in your back yard is that there is no evidence that there are there. Hence, the evidence for absence is the absence of evidence.

aa5874

You illustration cannot work if you already assumed Bobby did exist. If I claimed Elijah turned into a ghost, then it is illogical to claim Elijah does not exist, since I have already assumed that Elijah was a real person.

Just read the The Little Red Riding Hood and tell me if the wolf, little Red Riding Hood, or her grandmother had an historical core, if it was all figurative, if Red Riding Hood and the wolf had a mission and if the grandmother was sacrificed and should be worshipped.

Jesus was nothing but fiction. I already have the written statements of the authors and the church writers to support my case.

The writers claimed Jesus ascended through the clouds and the disciples saw him going through the clouds in the presence of angels.

This is outrageous fiction, and there is more fiction, much, much more.



I have suggested you read Against Heresies by Irenaeus, your Jesus has been discarded over 1800 years ago. According to Irenaeus, your Jesus is a lie. Jesus was the son of the God of the Jews who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, see Against Heresies by Irenaeus.
Believers believe whatever they like. Marcion believed Jesus was all God and was not born but came directly from heaven. Believers just believe.

Jim Jones had some strange beliefs, it is claimed he was a believer.

Joseph Smith had some strange beliefs.

You are looking for plausibility, you really do not care about evidence.

My theory is simple, the authors of the NT and the church writers presented written statements about a character called Jesus. The written statements are fundamentally false, full of implausibilities, incoherencies, chronological errors, genealogical mistakes, geographical errors, errors of Jewish tradition, forgeries, and interpolations.

I just cannot accept these statements as being credible, I am forced to reject Jesus as fundamentally fiction or never existing until some other credible source can be found.

As of today, Jesus is nothing but fiction.

Elijah

My illustration is only meant to say that a person can be real and have fictional things claimed about them.

I don’t get your Elijah into a ghost analogy… am I fictionally now?
No it didn’t have a historical core it’s a completely different kind of story but it probably had symbolic meaning for something the author was trying to convey. Reading all literature the same way is not a way to understand literature. You need to keep some context and know what the author is trying to convey and where the story came from.
Who says that he was fictional again? Please post your evidence if you have any.
That could be nothing more than a description of a vision brought on by the sudden death of a beloved teacher. No magic required.
I suggest you post the evidence that you think supports your position. I don’t believe you’ve read any of the church fathers’ works and I have doubts that you have ever read a single gospel out of the bible.
You have no idea what Marcion believed about Jesus and certainly not God.
Dodging my questions again. How did he come to be thought of as historical in your opinion?
You have to start with a plausible theory. Sorry. I don’t see any way around the mythers having to put some alternate theory up for what happened if they expect to be taken serious at all.
This isn’t a theory on how the Jesus phenomenon began. This is just statements of the obvious which doesn’t clue me in at all to how you understand the Jesus phenomenon. You need to layout how you think this came about.
No one is asking you to accept them as credible are they? It’s not rational to believe in irrational statements but to jump to it’s all fiction is just wishful thinking on the part of the skeptic. Just like the believer who believes in miracles without reason just because they really want to believe; the skeptic believes in a mythical origin without any rational reasoning because they really don’t want to believe… or others to.
You have presented a very poor case to support this opinion.

You have questions you need to answer about how you understand your fictional Jesus origin. Take your time to think about it and come back with something rational that can support your position.