Freethought & Rationalism Archive

J-D · 11-08-2011, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

In "Against Herseies" 3.1 the author claimed OR IMPLIED that gMark is NOT an eyewitness report from gMark's author but that it was based on information or the preaching of Peter.

Now Examine "Against Heresies" 3.1

Quote:

....Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews(3) in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church.

After their departure, [i][b]Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter[i][b]....

This piece of information is Extremely CRITICAL.

According to the Church and its writers gMark is really compiled from what Peter conveyed to the author.

The author of gMark was supposedly an Interpreter of Peter.

Now, the Church and its writers have made Peter into a Monstrous Liar.

Peter could NOT have seen Jesus as he WALKED on the sea.

Human Beings do NOT have the Specific Gravity to allow them to be sea-water walkers.

And, in gMark 9.2, PETER was supposedly PRESENT at the Transfiguration.

Peter COULD NOT have seen Jesus Transfigure with the resurrected Prophets Elijah and Moses as described in Mark 9.

Human Beings cannot Transfigure or resurrect.

The Credibility of the very Church and its writers are questionable.

It is CLEAR that gMark's water-walking and transfiguration episodes are FICTION.

It is CLEAR that the Church and its writers have presented stories where PERSONS, Elijah and Moses, who did NOT exist in the 1st century and were supposedly already dead were with the Transfigured Jesus.

There is NO character in gMark that can be PRESUMED to have lived since we know that there are characters that were INVENTED.

Elijah and Moses were INVENTED for the transfiguration.

Mark 9.2-4

Quote:

And after six days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.

3 And his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow; so as no fuller on earth can white them. 4 And there appeared unto them Elias with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus.

Without external corroboration gMark cannot be trusted for historical purposes. People were INVENTED when the obsolete PHANTOM Transfigured.

Moses and Elijah were INVENTED in gMark.

Some of the statements using the name Jesus in the canonical gospels CANNOT POSSIBLY BE literally accurate reports of events that actually took place, while others MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE literally accurate reports of events that actually took place. If you are unable to take account of the difference between 'cannot possibly be' and 'might or might not be', intelligent discussion with you becomes impossible.

Toto · 11-08-2011, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Some of the statements using the name Jesus in the canonical gospels CANNOT POSSIBLY BE literally accurate reports of events that actually took place, while others MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT BE literally accurate reports of events that actually took place. If you are unable to take account of the difference between 'cannot possibly be' and 'might or might not be', intelligent discussion with you becomes impossible.

You've made your point to anyone who can understand. Please don't repeat this.

Let aa5874 keep on talking to himself if he can't communicate with others.

aa5874 · 11-08-2011, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

And Jesus went into Jerusalem and into the temple. So when He had looked around at all things, as the hour was already late, He went out to Bethany with the twelve. (Mark 11:11)

Based on your own understanding aa, Please SHOW us why this statement and event cannot be a historically accurate account.

I really don't know how I can show that a PHANTOM was in Jerusalem and in the Jewish Temple.

Based on details given in gMark about Jesus he was described as one who WALKED on sea-water and transfigured with the resurrected Moses and Elijah.

Based on my OWN UNDERSTANDING of SPECIFIC GRAVITY, BIOLOGY and the Human ANATOMY the Jesus of gMark was a PHANTOM, a Myth character.

I must get EXTERNAL CREDIBLE non-apologetic sources for Jesus of gMark or else I can only consider gMark as a Myth Fable of a Phantom.

I can find Credible external non-apologetic sources for geographical locations called Jerusalem and Bethany, and a Jewish Temple but NOTHING for gMark's Jesus.

My OWN UNDERSTANDING is that gMark's Jesus was a PHANTOM, a Myth Fable.

JEBUS was FICTION. That is YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING????

J-D · 11-08-2011, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

And Jesus went into Jerusalem and into the temple. So when He had looked around at all things, as the hour was already late, He went out to Bethany with the twelve. (Mark 11:11)

Based on your own understanding aa, Please SHOW us why this statement and event cannot be a historically accurate account.

I really don't know how I can show that a PHANTOM was in Jerusalem and in the Jewish Temple.

Based on details given in gMark about Jesus he was described as one who WALKED on sea-water and transfigured with the resurrected Moses and Elijah.

Based on my OWN UNDERSTANDING of SPECIFIC GRAVITY, BIOLOGY and the Human ANATOMY the Jesus of gMark was a PHANTOM, a Myth character.

I must get EXTERNAL CREDIBLE non-apologetic sources for Jesus of gMark or else I can only consider gMark as a Myth Fable of a Phantom.

I can find Credible external non-apologetic sources for geographical locations called Jerusalem and Bethany, and a Jewish Temple but NOTHING for gMark's Jesus.

My OWN UNDERSTANDING is that gMark's Jesus was a PHANTOM, a Myth Fable.

JEBUS was FICTION. That is YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING????

Mark 11:11 doesn't say anything about phantoms.

Toto · 11-08-2011, 07:29 PM

There is a certain logic to aa5874's madness (or is it vice versa?) Once Jesus has been identified as a phantom in any part of the gospels, all other mentions of him are thereby supernatural.

OK, we get it, aa5874. No need to go on.

Just note that no one else agrees that the phantasmic nature of Jesus has to be read into every verse. Some people actually think that it was an add on to a non-supernatural Jesus.

You're going to argue that there is no evidence of this non-supernatural Jesus, and you are right, except that is not how the game is played. There could be a historical basis for the gospel Jesus, which is what most people mean when they talk about a historical Jesus. If you can't admit that, you have no common basis for discussing the issue with anyone else, and you are wasting your time here. So please stop.

Sheshbazzar · 11-08-2011, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

And Jesus went into Jerusalem and into the temple. So when He had looked around at all things, as the hour was already late, He went out to Bethany with the twelve. (Mark 11:11)

Based on your own understanding aa, Please SHOW us why this statement and event cannot be a historically accurate account.

I really don't know how I can show that a PHANTOM was in Jerusalem and in the Jewish Temple.

Based on details given in gMark about Jesus he was described as one who WALKED on sea-water and transfigured with the resurrected Moses and Elijah.

Based on my OWN UNDERSTANDING of SPECIFIC GRAVITY, BIOLOGY and the Human ANATOMY the Jesus of gMark was a PHANTOM, a Myth character.

I must get EXTERNAL CREDIBLE non-apologetic sources for Jesus of gMark or else I can only consider gMark as a Myth Fable of a Phantom.

I can find Credible external non-apologetic sources for geographical locations called Jerusalem and Bethany, and a Jewish Temple but NOTHING for gMark's Jesus.

My OWN UNDERSTANDING is that gMark's Jesus was a PHANTOM, a Myth Fable.

JEBUS was FICTION. That is YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING????

This does not address the specific verse, and question which I asked you concerning -this- verse and event;

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

And Jesus went into Jerusalem and into the temple. So when He had looked around at all things, as the hour was already late, He went out to Bethany with the twelve. (Mark 11:11)

Based on your own understanding aa, Please SHOW us why this statement and event cannot be a historically accurate account.

SHOW that this verse CAN NOT BE a literally accurate report of an event that actually took place.

aa5874 · 11-08-2011, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

There is a certain logic to aa5874's madness (or is it vice versa?) Once Jesus has been identified as a phantom in any part of the gospels, all other mentions of him are thereby supernatural...

Come on, Toto.

Once Pilate in gMark is IDENTIFIED AS A Governor of Judea during the reign of Tiberius then he is a GOVERNOR of Judea in ALL BOOKS of ALL ANTIQUITY.

Not only the NT, but every book that merely mentions Pilate.

Come on, Toto.

I am amazed at how illogical you can be.

Toto · 11-08-2011, 07:46 PM

aa5874 - Are you claiming that the gospels are an exercise in logic?

aa5874 · 11-08-2011, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

aa5874 - Are you claiming that the gospels are an exercise in logic?

Answer your own question. You may not even know the answer yourself.

Characters in the NT MUST be IDENTIFIED and corroborated BEFORE they can be ACCEPTED as historical.

I CANNOT use gMark to corroborate a character described as a Phantom in the very same book.

The IDENTITY or description of Jesus is FIXED in gMark just like the character called Pilate.

The IDENTITY of Pilate in the NT DOES NOT change from verse to verse and from book to book and the very same applies to ALL Characters.

In the NT, SATAN is the Devil, the God of the Jews is God , King Herod the Great is King , the angel Gabriel is an Angel, Tiberius is Emperor.

Jesus is a PHANTOM in gMark, Matthew, Luke and John, the Pauline writings, and the Entire NT.

Toto, I am really amazed how illogical you can be.

Characters in the NT MUST be IDENTIFIED as described.

Sheshbazzar · 11-08-2011, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

And Jesus went into Jerusalem and into the temple. So when He had looked around at all things, as the hour was already late, He went out to Bethany with the twelve. (Mark 11:11)

Based on your own understanding aa, Please SHOW us why this statement and event cannot be a historically accurate account.

I really don't know how I can show that a PHANTOM was in Jerusalem and in the Jewish Temple.

But you are not being asked to show that Jebus was in Jerusalem and in the Jewish Temple.

You are being asked to SHOW that Jebus WAS NOT in Jerusalem and in the Jewish Temple.

And to DEMONSTRATE why -this- particular verse CANNOT BE a literally accurate report of an event, involving real people, that actually took place.

Unless you can SHOW that this event COULD NOT have happened, and that it CANNOT be an accurate report of an actual event involving real people,
J-D's point that a situation or event MIGHT BE a literally accurate report of an event that actually took place, stands and is vindicated.

.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-08-2011, 07:29 PM	#335
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	There is a certain logic to aa5874's madness (or is it vice versa?) Once Jesus has been identified as a phantom in any part of the gospels, all other mentions of him are thereby supernatural. OK, we get it, aa5874. No need to go on. Just note that no one else agrees that the phantasmic nature of Jesus has to be read into every verse. Some people actually think that it was an add on to a non-supernatural Jesus. You're going to argue that there is no evidence of this non-supernatural Jesus, and you are right, except that is not how the game is played. There could be a historical basis for the gospel Jesus, which is what most people mean when they talk about a historical Jesus. If you can't admit that, you have no common basis for discussing the issue with anyone else, and you are wasting your time here. So please stop.

11-08-2011, 07:46 PM	#338
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	aa5874 - Are you claiming that the gospels are an exercise in logic?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.