Toto

Who are the people writing within a lifetime, other than Paul? And where does Paul say anything about Pilate, or a recent crucifixion on earth? If Paul were that clear, we would not be having this debate.

There's a lot less evidence for any of this than you seem to think.

Grog

As others pointed out, he says that in Palestine the Romans spoke Greek.

He says:

Grog

The question is not did Pilate place "a Galilean Jew on a cross." The question is did Pilate ever place Jesus of Nazareth, son of Mary, on a cross. Or did he even ever hear of him. It seems like no one else rom that time did.

aa5874

Of course, you took a GIANT LEAP of imagination. The Jesus cult wrote their story of Jesus so it is a complete waste of time to imagine anything.

What you imagine is NOT history except when your Jesus is a product of your imagination.

aa5874

Which Jesus are you referring to? Jesus of Nazareth?? The first language of Jesus as described in the NT could NOT be Aramaic unless the NT is a compilation of fiction.

Jesus of Nazareth was the Logos.

What is the first Language of the LOGOS of God?

mountainman

The hypothesis that the anonymous, unprovenanced and undated gospels are products of the 1st century may not be true




The hypothesis that "Paul" wrote the non Pseudo-Pauline letters in the first century may not be true.

Both of these hypotheses have no supporting ancient historical evidence outside of the suspicious church-preserved legends and forgeries.

Outhouse do you trust your government of the 21st century to tell the truth? I don't trust your (or my) government as far as I could kick them. So if you don't trust your own government of the 21st century, why place any faith in the governments of antiquity which produced the Jesus Ghost Story?




εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

outhouse

Its only my opinion, Pilate did not ever hear of him. I dont think we will ever know.

Realistically Pilate and Caiaphas would have been busy running the affairs of the temple.


Out of 400,000 people in attendance, would a martyr be known by name and for what he preached?

Or simply by his actions alone that got him noticed in a sea of people?

outhouse

While that may be true, as it stands, it is accepted almost unanimously is it not?



True, but again, highly probable that his own disciples wrote these softening up his stance to meet changing needs in the first century is the current status quo is it not?



Hell no.




Because this movement started out by people just like you, fed up with government conspiracy and corruption.


It factually evolved from a small movement of Hellenist wanting to follow Judaism and not be persecuted like the Jews. It had nothing to do with government in its beginnings. Thankfully the original works despite many changes, have somewhat retained much of their originality regarding the core of its teachings.

mountainman

But what is the glaringly obvious demographic profile of those who accept this hypothesis as true, and more importantly, what happens to such people when they even QUESTION whether this hypothesis may not be true?



The status quo or hegemon is preserved by a collection of organisations who have a vested interest in the hypothesis being true. See above.



Well at last we have found a point of agreement



People like me were deemed heretics and "numbers without end" were tortured and executed for their OPINION.

We don't have an historical account that was written by anyone but the imperially sponsored "orthodoxy".

The historical account being used today was written by the 4th and 5th century victors.



Don't you understand that this is yet another hypothesis because if Constantine and his 4th century government had not raised the Bible to its status as the holy writ of the pagan Roman Empire at Nicaea, and sponsored the massive range of publications under his rule, such as Eusebius's "Church History", where would we be?

I do not trust the 4th century government publications.

And I do not understand why people accept them as uncritically as they do, besides the obvious ---- namely that there is no other alternative because it is all we will ever have to substantiate the official story of "Christian Origins".





εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

aa5874

What you say may not be true.