aa5874

Once you admit Jesus was theological then the character was not based on history but probably the Septuagint. The activities and words of Jesus can be found in the Septuagint or Hebrew Scripture from conception [Isaiah 7.14] to resurrection on the third day [Jonah].



You have to depend upon a forgery to claim Jesus existed but still Jesus was some kind of supernatural being. Jesus was raised from the dead.

The author of the forgery was not even certain that Jesus was a man or did not know if it was appropriate to call Jesus a man and claimed that Jesus was seen alive after he was crucified.

Jesus was a theological construct in the MINDS of Jesus believers, not historical. He was raised from the dead to save mankind from sin.

arnoldo

Those are prophetic scriptures, no?

Josephus was a real historical person who wrote about a HJ.
Just as Santa Claus is a theoretical construct in the minds of Santa believers ( who believe he lives in the north pole, flies with reindeer, etc) there still was a real historical Santa Claus (based on Saint Nicholas). In the same way there can exist a MJ (based on Marcion's phantom Christ) as well as a HJ (based on a flesh and blood Christ).

Johnny Skeptic

On the contrary, you cannot produce credible evidence that Josephus wrote the part of the Testimonium Flavianum that many Christians claim refers to Jesus.

storytime

Can God exist among people who don't believe in him? Rules of existence depend on belief. Without belief, zap! he's gone. No more glory, no more BS in his name.

aa5874

Again, congratulations.

Jesus was a construct of prophecy NOT history.

Please refer to Matthew 1.18 & 22-23
The historicity of Josephus has no bearing on the nature and historicity of Jesus.

Josephus was a real historical person who mentioned the Greek/Roman God Apollo in Wars of the Jews and Antiquities of the Jews.

It is most illogical to think that the history of Josephus is directly related to the actual existence of Gods like Apollo and Jesus the son of God, offspring of the Holy Ghost.


Well, you have deliberately provided a bogus construction of Santa Claus. It is simply not true that Santa is a theoretical construct.

Santa Claus must be an " HISTORICAL CONSTRUCT, based on your own words, Santa has an HISTORICAL CORE, Santa is based on Saint Nicholas.

Jesus is of a THEOLOGICAL CONSTRUCT. Jesus has a THEOLOGICAL CORE, Jesus was constructed from out-of-context non-prophecies, and as is expected in MYTHOLOGY, Jesus fulfilled every out-of-context non-prophecy.

See Isaiah 7.14 and Matthew 1.18-25.

And, even the resurrection of Jesus was based on MYTHOLOGY or legendary fables.

In the NT, Jesus based his resurrection on a fable found in a book called Jonah where a man was in the belly of a fish for three days and nights.

Mt 12:40 - Jesus outperformed the FABLE. What MYTH!

You seem not to understand the unique characteristics of the THEOLOGICAL CONSTRUCT called Jesus of Nazareth, the Creator, son of God, offspring of the Holy Ghost and a Woman.

Just like a Mermaid is FISH and Human, Jesus was GOD and Human but they are all MYTHOLOGICAL.

arnoldo

I congratulate you on your understanding that a mythical person attributed with supernatural powers ( Santa Claus's ability to travel the entire world and bring presents to children year after year as if immortal ) is based on a historical person. The gospels similarly portray a person with supernatural powers. The options concerning this person is ;

A. He is a myth

B. He existed and had supernatural powers

C. He existed but had no supernatural powers.

aa5874

But, let us not waste time.

According to you, Santa Claus was probably based on Saint Nicholas.

Well, according to the evidence, Jesus Christ was probably based on the HOLY GHOST of God. See Matthew 1.18-20 and Luke 1.34-35.

Option A is very good. It far exceeds option B and C. Let us not waste time and look at the evidence.

You have evidence about Saint Nicholas and Santas, well there is evidence about Jesus and the HOLY GHOST.

You can no longer deny that Jesus was a construct of the HOLY GHOST while Santas are a construct of Saint Nicholas.

The HJ is a most SENSELESS proposition.

aa5874

The HJ is a most SENSELESS proposition.

One of the most important writers of antiquity is Josephus a Jew and Pharisee, and this writer will help to destroy and obliterate the notion of an HJ.

It must be noted that Josephus was fighting with the Jews expecting a Jewish Messianic ruler. Josephus' primary aim and goal was to destroy the Romans with help of his God but he was captured by the very Romans he wanted destroyed.

The Jews suffered a massive defeat in Jerusalem and the Temple was destroyed.

But what is extremely significant about the Fall of the Temple is that Jesus Christ had predicted about 35 years earlier that the Temple would fall and that no stone would be left one upon the other.

The disciples of Jesus Christ should have been preaching day and night all over Judea that the Temple will be coming down. [b]Thousands upon thousands of people based on Acts of the Apostles were being converted to Jesus since the time of Claudius and must have heard that Jesus predicted that the Jewish Temple would be destroyed.

Josephus himself lived in Galilee and must have heard of the crazy-man called Jesus of Nazareth who had 12 disciples who were preaching for many many years all over Judea that the Jewish Temple would fall and be virtually demolished.

This is Mark 13. So the disciples of Jesus must have been spreading the news to the Jews in Galilee the same area where Josephus lived that the Temple would fall.

Now the Temple fell and Josephus does not remember Jesus of Nazareth or his disciples that predicted accurately down to the position of the stones.

It must be that if Jesus did live and made the prediction and that the disciples preached about the Fall of the Temple that at least Josephus would have remembered Jesus of Nazareth.

Josephus remembered Jesus son of Ananus, a loner--a madman, he had no disciples or thousands of followers but he was the one who Josephus recalled who made a prediction about Jerusalem.

By 93 CE when Josephus last wrote his autobiography, there should have been books about Jesus of Nazareth and his prediction, but he did not write that Jesus of Nazareth.

It was Jesus son of Ananus.

These are some of the predictions concerning the Fall of the Temple by Jesus of Nazareth. Josephus should have remembered. The disciples of Jesus should have been in Galilee.
And this is Josephus in Wars of the Jews 6.8.9 See http://wesley.nnu.edu


So Jesus of Nazareth gave far more details than Jesus son of Ananus and had a team of evangelicals who were warning people all over Judea of the awesome calamity that would befall the Jews. There were supposed to be books about the predictions available to Josephus.

But, Josephus did not write about the predictions of Jesus of Nazareth.

He just could not remember or there were nothing about Jesus of Nazareth.

But he remembered the predictions of the son of Ananus.

The HJ is a most SENSELESS proposition. The Jesus Christ God/Man was fabricated after the writings of Josephus.

arnoldo

What is senseless is that a MJ would be invented by writers in the second century or later concerning a person who was expected to "return" sometime in the late first century. Why would these post first century writers of the NT suggest to their readers that a failed prophecy occurred?

aa5874

So, why have you introduced a senseless timeline?

You can do better than that.

It must be that the time of writing by the anonymous writer was within the time zone of the supposed prophecy of the return of Jesus.

And as you may not realise, there is no information in any Gospel that state the year that Jesus would come back.

Now, please state which Gospel writer named the year that Jesus would return and which Gospel writer acknowledged his name and the time he actually wrote?