kcdad

Perhaps you don't understand this fact:

The Bible is a man made product.

It was written, edited, copied, translated, compiled, redacted, added to, compromised and approved and Canonized by men. Just like every other thing that has ever been written in the history of the world, God had nothing to do with it.

Does that help you understand?

Iskander

There is no original sin in the gospels and mankind was created equal and free,

Tolerating this or that does not make the birth of mankind less equal or less free.

Christianity is only a guideline created by man with a clear message of freedom and equality. Like the needle pointing North in a magnetic compass

As a model for those who must have a god it is a simple and beautiful one: man is free and bliss is a gift of god. Bliss in the afterlife is only a state of mind.

Why is senseless?

kcdad

What he said

Toto

Why do so many Christians disagree with you?


One way that "Christianity" has survived is to reinvent itself according to the prevailing beliefs of the times. Your Christianity would not have been recognized by most Christians through history, but it does seem a lot like - Buddhism?

But this forum is for the discussion of history, and this thread is about the historical Jesus. I don't think that your version of Christianity even requires a historical Jesus, much less is it based on anything that he might have said.

Iskander

Christians are free to interpret their religion. The Catholic grouping delegates this function to the pope.

The interpretation of god in Christianity is a dynamic process: it reinvents itself as often as it happens.

I like a dynamic religion that measures god by the effect it has on the well being of mankind and allows Christians to initiate and support human rights legislation and the implementation of a secular government.



This forum has carried many posts shouting time and time again a historical Jesus is senseless.

What is senseless?

kcdad

I suggest that many Christians have neither read The Bible nor thought about church doctrines other than in snippets read to them from the pulpit.

Many Christians are afraid to ask the questions that are obvious to all who have studied, even in a cursory manner, the history of church, the Canon and the evolution of doctrine from the teachings of Jesus through the latest fundamentalist movement...

Many Christians have no Theology, no Christology, no Cosmology other than what they learned in Sunday School as children.

Toto

Does any of this have anything to do with a historical Jesus? Do you know what we are talking about?

Perhaps this whole thread is. Don't worry yourself over it.

aa5874

This has nothing whatsoever to do with Jesus. Pilate is mentioned in other writings where Jesus is not mentioned.

It is unrealistic to think that the historicity of Pilate confirms the historicity of Jesus.

The very source that mentioned Jesus was before Pilate also claimed Jesus was the offspring of the Holy Ghost and a Virgin.

The history of John the Baptist does not confirm the history of Jesus the offspring of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary.

The very source that claimed John baptised Jesus also claimed Jesus, the offspring of the Holy Ghost, was tempted by the Devil on the pinnacle of the Temple and walked on water.

Same as 1 and 2. The same source that made claims about King Herod also claimed Jesus was transfigured with the once dead Moses and Elijah.

The very source that claimed Jesus was executed also claimed Jesus was raised from the dead.

The source that wrote about James and Peter also wrote that Jesus ascended to heaven. And in the first century people worhsip myths in Temples.

The source that claimed Paul and Peter died in Rome claimed Jesus had a DIVINE nature and did resurrect.

A Pauline writer claimed Jesus was raised from the dead, seen by over 500 people, and he was not the apostle of man or by men, but of Jesus.

The author of gMark claimed Jesus seemed like a Spirit when he walked on water, was transfigured with the once dead Moses and Elijah and that Jesus was risen from the dead.

Temples were establised for myths long before Jesus. The Greek/Roman mythical Gods had many Temples. There was agreement about Zeus, Apollo, and the very many mythical Gods from all over the earth.

Mythical entities have been reported in antiquity to have even created the heavens and earth.

ThreNT and Church writings are about an offspring of the Holy Ghost of God, who was tempted by the Devil on the Pinacle of the Temple , walked on water, was transfigured, resurrected and ascended through the clouds.

The NT and the Church writings are not about a mere man at all, you simply cannot use them to show that Jesus was just a man.

You cannot use mythology to argue history.

The HJ is a most SENSELESS propostion since NO credible historical sources of Jesus can be found.

By the way, Tiger Woods cannot be compared to Jesus the offspring of the Holy Ghost of God.

Iskander

I don’t worry about it.


Christianity is a historical event and the existence of a man called Jesus is part of that history.

This thread pretends that a particular man did not exist and makes risible efforts to dazzle the gullible.

Is the historical Jesus a most senseless proposition? No one is proposing anything. A man is part of the history of Christianity that is all.

History? Is that what this thread has been doing?

aa5874

What MAN was a part of history? The sources for Jesus, the NT and the Church writings did not propagate that Jesus was just a man.

You are pretending that Jesus was described as just a man when no such thing is in the NT and Church writings. You are the one who is trying to dazzle the gullible.

Look at the records of antiquity and you will see this.

Mt 1:18 - Where is your record of antiquity that Jesus was just a man?

It is you who want to DAZZLE the gullible.

Look again at records of antiquity.,

Matthew 1.20 Where is your record of antiquity for the man?

I beg of you, do not DAZZLE the gullible.

I have more records OF ANTIQUITY? Do you want to see them? I hope you won't be DAZZLED.

Lu 1:35 - The records of antiquity show that Jesus was considered the offspring of the Holy Ghost of God.

Jesus was not CONSIDERED a man.

The NT and Church writings are about the offspring of the Holy Ghost of God.

The HJ is a most SENSELESS proposition possibly designed to DAZZLE the gullible.