Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that show Jesus never existed

[Brainache]

Once you admit the "evidence" is ambiguous then your fringe idea is basically unsustainable and of little value.

It is a failure of logic to BELIEVE you have a good case using admitted ambiguous.

You used a list of names found in Acts including Paul where it is clear that Paul LISTED in Acts of the Apostles was described as a Jew multiple times.

Your idea that Paul was not a Jew is debunked by your own source.

The "evidence" that you cite is also ambiguous, your failure to admit that doesn't add to the credibility of your position, quite the opposite.

Pretending certainty about matters of Ancient History just makes your arguments look even more ridiculous than they might otherwise appear.

Keep it up.

 

[dejudge]

I'm just reading what Paul says in his epistles. Nowhere that I know of in the authentic Pauline corpus does he use the word "Jew" to describe himself. He uses arcane convoluted phrases that don't exactly mean the same thing as "Jew", but could be mistaken for meaning that by someone not paying close attention to the specific words. I'm sure you are familiar with that style of writing...

Well, nowhere does it state in the Pauline Corpus that Paul was an Herodian.

Based on the WRITINGS of Josephus, Jews were circumcised on the 8th day and ARABS were circumcised AFTER the 13th year.

See Antiquities of the Jews 1

It must also be noted that in gLuke Jesus of Nazareth was circumcised on the 8th day.

Luke 2--- 21And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child , his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.[/quote]

Philippians 3:5 KJV -----Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee.

1. Jews are circumcised on the 8th day of birth. See Antiqities of the Jews

2. Pharisee is a sect of Jews. See Antiqities of the Jews

3. Jews are refered to as Hebrews. See Antiqities of the Jews

4. Jews are also claimed to be of the tribe of Benjamin. See Antiqities of the Jews

You have no source to argue that Paul was an Herodian.

The Pauline character was considered a Jew in the NT.

 

[Brainache]

Well, nowhere does it state in the Pauline Corpus that Paul was an Herodian.

Based on the WRITINGS of Josephus, Jews were circumcised on the 8th day and ARABS were circumcised AFTER the 13th year.

See Antiquities of the Jews 1

It must also be noted that in gLuke Jesus of Nazareth was circumcised on the 8th day.

Luke 2--- 21And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child , his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.

Philippians 3:5 KJV -----Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee.

1. Jews are circumcised on the 8th day of birth. See Antiqities of the Jews

2. Pharisee is a sect of Jews. See Antiqities of the Jews

3. Jews are refered to as Hebrews. See Antiqities of the Jews

4. Jews are also claimed to be of the tribe of Benjamin. See Antiqities of the Jews

You have no source to argue that Paul was an Herodian.

The Pauline character was considered a Jew in the NT.

Of course they don't say Paul was a Herodian. It is a conclusion drawn from analysing the texts, not just accepting them at face value.

Your objections are as cogent as usual. The study of Ancient History is not as black and white as your infantile objections would suggest.

I'm sick of bothering with your idiotic arguments, get some new ones, these are broken.

 

[dejudge]

The "evidence" that you cite is also ambiguous, your failure to admit that doesn't add to the credibility of your position, quite the opposite.

Your statement is an established fallacy.

The Pauline character is a JEW in the NT.

Acts 21:39 KJV----But Paul said , I am a man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and, I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people.

Acts 22:3 KJV----I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day

Philippians 3:5 KJV----Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

Pretending certainty about matters of Ancient History just makes your arguments look even more ridiculous than they might otherwise appear.

Keep it up.

Pretending that Paul in the NT was an Herodian using ADMITTED ambiguous evidence is extremely low on logics.

We have stories of a character called Paul in the NT.

The character Paul is described as a Jew--Not an Herodian.

If the very sources which state Paul was a Jew are NOT certain then how in the world are you even going to argue that Paul was an Herodian WITHOUT a source of antiquity?

Your argument is extremely ridiculous.

It is certain that Paul was described as a Jew in the NT.

 

[dejudge]

Of course they don't say Paul was a Herodian. It is a conclusion drawn from analysing the texts, not just accepting them at face value.

Well, they said Paul was a Jew.

You accepted Robert Eisenman's claims at face value WITHOUT doing a proper examination of Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline Corpus and Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews.

You don't know how History is done.

You are an amateur and know virtually nothing of how the pst is reconstructed.

The NT is a compilation of Myth Fables--no different to Plutarch's Romulus and other Myth fables of the Jews, Greeks and Romans.

Your objections are as cogent as usual. The study of Ancient History is not as black and white as your infantile objections would suggest.

I'm sick of bothering with your idiotic arguments, get some new ones, these are broken.

I am obligated to expose your fallacies. Paul in the NT Myth Fables was a JEW of Tarsus--Not an Herodian.

 

[dejudge]

Of course they don't say Paul was a Herodian. It is a conclusion drawn from analysing the texts, not just accepting them at face value.

Well, they said Paul was a Jew.

You accepted Robert Eisenman's claims at face value WITHOUT doing a proper examination of Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline Corpus and Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews.

You don't know how History is done.

You are an amateur and know virtually nothing of how the past is reconstructed.

The NT is a compilation of Myth Fables--no different to Plutarch's Romulus and other Myth fables of the Jews, Greeks and Romans.

Your objections are as cogent as usual. The study of Ancient History is not as black and white as your infantile objections would suggest.

I'm sick of bothering with your idiotic arguments, get some new ones, these are broken.

I am obligated to expose your fallacies. Paul in the NT Myth Fables was a JEW of Tarsus--Not an Herodian.