The Historical Jesus II

[dejudge]

No, we're not. Look it up yourself. But of course we have already established that you can't manage this. The Church doesn't say that, and not even the risen Jesus is depicted as a ghost. It is explicitly denied that even the risen Jesus is a ghost, far less the living Jesus. Nor is there any Jesus of Nazareth in the Trinity, but an eternal being called the Son; and the Ghost in the Trinity isn't Jesus.

To see it in your favourite list format look here See the last bit
"The Father is God"
"The Son is God"
"The Holy Spirit is God"
"God is the Father"
"God is the Son"
"God is the Holy Spirit"
"The Father is not the Son"
"The Father is not the Holy Spirit"
"The Son is not the Father"
"The Son is not the Holy Spirit"
"The Holy Spirit is not the Father"
"The Holy Spirit is not the Son"

1. The Son is God.

2. God is the Son

3 God is the Holy Spirit

Jesus the God is still a Myth based on your version of the Trinity.

Jesus is GOD and the HOLY Ghost is God..

Jesus is GOD AND the Holy Ghost.

Jesus, God and the Holy Ghost are ONE.

 

[Craig B]

1. The Son is God.

2. God is the Son.

Jesus the God is still a Myth based on your version of the Trinity.

The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is not the Son.

And as I have shown, it's not "my" version of the Trinity. You seem utterly unable to comprehend that the Church has a version of the Trinity. Not me; I think it's nonsense.

You can't even look it up, and when I look it up for you, you write utter drivel about it.

 

[dejudge]

The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is not the Son.

And as I have shown, it's not "my" version of the Trinity. You seem utterly unable to comprehend that the Church has a version of the Trinity. Not me; I think it's nonsense.

You can't even look it up, and when I look it up for you, you write utter drivel about it.

The Son AND the HOLY SPIRIT AND the FATHER ARE GOD.

You don't even understand what TRINITY means.

Jesus is NOT TWO in ONE.

Jesus is THREE in ONE [TRINITY]

Jesus the SON, the GHOST AND GOD ARE ONE.

 

[Craig B]

The Son AND the HOLY SPIRIT AND the FATHER ARE GOD.

You don't even understand what TRINITY means.

Jesus is NOT TWO in ONE.

Jesus is THREE in ONE [TRINITY]

Jesus the SON, the GHOST AND GOD ARE ONE.

Jesus is not the Trinity. What gibberish is this? So Jesus is not three in one. Can you not read? "God" according to this doctrine consists of three beings, of which the Son is one. The Son is not three. And the Son is not the Holy Spirit.

You are inventing new Heresies, and if the Inquisition ever comes back you will be burned at the stake.

 

[dejudge]

Jesus is not the Trinity. What gibberish is this? So Jesus is not three in one. Can you not read? "God" according to this doctrine consists of three beings, of which the Son is one. The Son is not three. And the Son is not the Holy Spirit.

You are inventing new Heresies, and if the Inquisition ever comes back you will be burned at the stake.

You have yet again exposed your lack of knowledge of the teachings of the Church.

Your statement is complete nonsense.

Please, just go and get familiar with Church writings of antiquity. You don't know what you are talking about.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/130101.htm

Augustine of Hippo "On the Holy Trinity 1

7. All those Catholic expounders of the divine Scriptures, both Old and New, whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, Who is God, have purposed to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and therefore that they are not three Gods, but one God....

Jesus and the Holy Ghost and the Father are ONE GOD and of ONE and the same substance.

Jesus was just a Ghost story from the beginning.

 

[Craig B]

Jesus and the Holy Ghost and the Father are ONE GOD and of ONE and the same substance.

Jesus was just a Ghost story from the beginning.

Jesus, or rather the Son, and the Father, and the HG are all God; but Jesus is not the HG and the HG is not the Father, etc. Can't you read?

And the Jesus of the NT is not a ghost. Even when he is resurrected, he is not described as a ghost. In Luke 24 he eats fish to prove he's not a ghost. In John he goes out of his way to demonstrate his physicality in the Thomas incident, and by cooking fish and so on.

I'm very disappointed in you, dejudge, inventing new heresies that would have made Irenaeus do his nut and go bananas if he had ever heard about them, which mercifully he did not.

 

[dejudge]

Jesus, or rather the Son, and the Father, and the HG are all God; but Jesus is not the HG and the HG is not the Father, etc. Can't you read?

And the Jesus of the NT is not a ghost. Even when he is resurrected, he is not described as a ghost. In Luke 24 he eats fish to prove he's not a ghost. In John he goes out of his way to demonstrate his physicality in the Thomas incident, and by cooking fish and so on.

What nonsense you write.

The Bible stories themselves admit Jesus was born AFTER his mother was made PREGNANT by a Ghost.

How in the wold could Jesus be human when he was claimed to be dead for about three days, then resurrected, and was cooking and eating fish BEFORE he ASCEND to heaven in a cloud?

You argument is just totally absurd and logically bizarre.

I'm very disappointed in you, dejudge, inventing new heresies that would have made Irenaeus do his nut and go bananas if he had ever heard about them, which mercifully he did not.

Your statement is a well established fallacy. I actually showed what is found in writings of antiquity.

It is your claim that the father of Jesus was Joseph which has been multiple attested to be an Heresy.

"On the Holy Trinity" is attributed to Augustine of Hippo.

Again, you are confirming your lack of knowledge of the teachings of the Church.

You have contradicted your own HJ argument by admitting that Jesus, the Son, the Holy Ghost and the Father are ALL GOD.

You don't make much sense.

The very writers of the Church claimed that there is ONE INDIVISIBLE GOD--NOT three.

Jesus, the Holy Ghost and the FATHER are ONE INDIVISIBLE GOD.

Augustine of Hippo "On the Holy Trinity"

...All those Catholic expounders of the divine Scriptures, both Old and New, whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, Who is God, have purposed to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and thereforethey are not three Gods, but one God.

Jesus of the NT was born of a Ghost, was God and became Flesh-THREE myths in ONE

Jesus of the NT is a TRI-MYTHICAL fiction character in Ghost stories in the Bible.

Jesu of Nazareth was of INDIVISIBLE equality and ONE with God AND the Holy Ghost.

 

[Craig B]

Again, you are confirming your lack of knowledge of the teachings of the Church.

You have contradicted your own HJ argument by admitting that Jesus, the Son, the Holy Ghost and the Father are ALL GOD.

Therefore the Church Trinity doctrine does not say

"The Son is not the Holy Spirit"
"The Holy Spirit is not the Son"

I see. Well alas it does say that, so it's off to the Bad Fire for you!

 

[IanS]

Jesus, or rather the Son, and the Father, and the HG are all God; but Jesus is not the HG and the HG is not the Father, etc. Can't you read? .

Well although the above sentence is yours, i.e. you composed it yourself (you are not quoting it from anyone else), that sentence does actually say that "Jesus or rather the son" is God.

That is actually what it most definitely says. I don’t know if you meant to write that.

And the Jesus of the NT is not a ghost. Even when he is resurrected, he is not described as a ghost. In Luke 24 he eats fish to prove he's not a ghost.

You are surely not offering us lines like that from the bible claiming that you present it as reliable evidence of a human Jesus known to any of these people?

As you very well know, whoever wrote that gospel of Luke, had certainly not known any human Jesus.

Are you really offering us an anonymously written copy of Luke, written centuries after the claimed lifetime of Jesus, where the author had certainly never met anyone called Jesus, as reliable evidence that Jesus existed?

 

[Craig B]

Are you really offering us an anonymously written copy of Luke, written centuries after the claimed lifetime of Jesus, where the author had certainly never met anyone called Jesus, as reliable evidence that Jesus existed?

When was Mark written, in your opinion?

 

[dejudge]

Again, you are confirming your lack of knowledge of the teachings of the Church.

You have contradicted your own HJ argument by admitting that Jesus, the Son, the Holy Ghost and the Father are ALL GOD.

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. You don't even know what "TRINITY" means.

Your version of the TRINITY actually states that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are God.

Your version of the TRINITY actually states GOD is the FATHER, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

"The Father is God"
"The Son is God"
"The Holy Spirit is God"

"God is the Father"
"God is the Son"
"God is the Holy Spirit"..

ALL THREE Are ONE INDIVISIBLE God.

Jesus of Nazareth was a Ghost story.

1. In gMark Jesus was a Resurrecting Transfiguring Water Walking Son of a God.

2. In the Pauline Corpus Jesus was made a Spirit, the Lord from heaven and the resurrected Son of a God and a woman.

3. In gMatthew Jesus was a Resurrecting Transfiguring Water Walking Son of a God born of a Ghost.

4. In gLuke Jesus was a Resurrecting Transfiguring Son of a God who ASCENDED to heaven AFTER he was born of a Ghost.

5. In gJohn Jesus was God WITHOUT Flesh from the beginning and also God Creator.

Jesus of Nazareth is a confirmed Ghost story since virtually ALL Christian writers of antiquity who wrote about the birth of Jesus argued he was BORN of a Ghost and a Virgin.

 

[dejudge]

The doctrine of the Trinity is another indication that there was NO established historical data for Jesus of Nazareth up to at least the 5th century or up to the time of the writing of "On the Holy Trinity" attributed to Augustine of Hippo.

It is declared in "On the Holy Trinity" that Jesus is INDIVISIBLY of the SAME substance with God and the Holy Ghost.

In effect, Jesus cannot be separated from God and the Holy Ghost.

Everytime one mentions Jesus they also are INHERENTLY mentioning God and the Holy Ghost at the same time.

Jesus, God and the Ghost are INSEPARABLE.

Augustine of Hippo "On the Holy Trinity 1

4. Wherefore, our Lord God helping, we will undertake to render, as far as we are able, that very account which they so importunately demand: viz., that the Trinity is the one and only and true God, and also how the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are rightly said, believed, understood, to be of one and the same substance or essence..

...All those Catholic expounders of the divine Scriptures, both Old and New, whom I have been able to read, who have written before me concerning the Trinity, Who is God, have purposed to teach, according to the Scriptures, this doctrine, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit intimate a divine unity of one and the same substance in an indivisible equality; and thereforethey are not three Gods, but one God.

Jesus of Nazareth was a MYTH from the beginning.

 

[Craig B]

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. You don't even know what "TRINITY" means.

I do, but you are spouting Crapocratian heresies about it, which makes Jesus sad.

Your version of the TRINITY actually states that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are God.

The Church's version states that. I have no version of this doctrine.

Your version of the TRINITY actually states GOD is the FATHER, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

The Church's version states that. I have no version of this doctrine.

But it also states, and I have quoted this, dejudge: that the Father is not the Son; the Father is not the Holy Spirit; the Son is not the Father; the Son is not the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is not the Father; the Holy Spirit is not the Son.

ALL THREE Are ONE INDIVISIBLE God.

But each one of the three is not either of the others. It's quite simple really. Though not anything like simple enough for your heretical views.

Jesus of Nazareth was a Ghost story. <story snipped>

Woo!

 

[dejudge]

I do, but you are spouting Crapocratian heresies about it, which makes Jesus sad.

Please, no more sad stories!!!

You write established fiction.

I made reference to writings attributed to the Church writer called Augustine of Hippo.

The Church's version states that. I have no version of this doctrine. The Church's version states that. I have no version of this doctrine.

Again, you write fiction. This is an excerpt of the doctrine of the Trinity You posted.

"The Father is God"
"The Son is God"
"The Holy Spirit is God"

"God is the Father"
"God is the Son"
"God is the Holy Spirit".......

Your post states:

1. the Son, Holy Spirit and the Father are God.

2. God is the FATHER, Son and Holy Spirit.

The Church states the TRINITY is God.

The Church states the TRINITY is Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit.

But it also states, and I have quoted this, dejudge: that the Father is not the Son; the Father is not the Holy Spirit; the Son is not the Father; the Son is not the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is not the Father; the Holy Spirit is not the Son. But each one of the three is not either of the others. It's quite simple really. Though not anything like simple enough for your heretical views. Woo!

You do not understand the doctrine of the TRINITY.

The doctrine of the TRINITY teaches that Jesus, the Son, the Holy Ghost and the FATHER are ONE GOD.

Please, just go and get familiar with the teachings of the Church regarding the TRINITY.

Examine "On the Trinity" attributed to Gregory Thaumaturgus

But the Word of God is substantial, endowed with an exalted and enduring nature, and is eternal with Himself, and is inseparable from Him, and can never fall away, but shall remain in an everlasting union.

This Word created heaven and earth, and in Him were all things made. He is the arm and the power of God, never to be separated from the Father, in virtue of an indivisible nature, and, together with the Father, He is without beginning.

This Word took our substance of the Virgin Mary; and in so far as He is spiritual indeed, He is indivisibly equal with the Father; but in so far as He is corporeal, He is in like manner inseparably equal with us. And, again, in so far as He is spiritual, He supplies in the same equality (aequiparat) the Holy Spirit, inseparably and without limit.

Jesus is in EVERLASTING Union with God and the Holy Ghost.

Jesus, God and the Holy Ghost are INDIVISIBLE--Never to be separated.

Jesus of Nazareth was ALWAYS a Myth character from the beginning.

Jesus of Nazareth NEVER had any history up to at least the 5th century.

 

[Craig B]

1. the Son, Holy Spirit and the Father are God.

2. God is the FATHER, Son and Holy Spirit.

The Church states the TRINITY is God.

And it states

"The Father is not the Son"
"The Father is not the Holy Spirit"
"The Son is not the Father"
"The Son is not the Holy Spirit"
"The Holy Spirit is not the Father"
"The Holy Spirit is not the Son"

The Church states the TRINITY is Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit.

That is a Crapocratian heresy dejudge!! You can't be serious!! How can the Trinity be "Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit" when you've just told us that God is the Father, Son, and HOLY Spirit; and THESE are one AND indivisible, and you've just divided THEM by saying there's God - but also Jesus and THE Holy Spirit. I don't THINK you understand the Trinity, dejudge.

 

[IanS]

Are you really offering us an anonymously written copy of Luke, written centuries after the claimed lifetime of Jesus, where the author had certainly never met anyone called Jesus, as reliable evidence that Jesus existed?

When was Mark written, in your opinion?

Could we get an answer to the above before we start changing the subject to something about g-Mark (which I had not mentioned at all)?

 

[Marras]

Are you really offering us an anonymously written copy of Luke, written centuries after the claimed lifetime of Jesus, where the author had certainly never met anyone called Jesus, as reliable evidence that Jesus existed?

I've been following this thread on and off for some time. Mostly off, as it has offered few surprises whenever I've opened it.

But this here is a strikingly good example on how the thread is proceeding. Because this particular line of discussion happened like this (paraphrased, obviously):

dejudge: Everything in the gospels says that Jesus was a ghost.

Craig B: Here's a bit from Luke that explicitly denies that Jesus was a ghost.

IanS: Luke was written centuries after Jesus's supposed life so it can't be used as evidence for Jesus.

That's such a complete non sequitur that it boggles my mind. Surely, the text of Luke is evidence on what the text of Luke says about Jesus? Whether Luke is reliable or not has no relevance on discussion about what the words of the text say.

What comes to the actual subject of the thread, I'm an atheist that thinks that Jesus probably existed. Purely mythical Jesus causes more problems than it solves, in my opinion. I don't bother posting my full reasoning because just about everything has been already posted here many times and there's no good reason to take yet another ride on the merry-go-round.

Except for one thing. I may have posted this previously or I may have only thought about posting it, I can't remember.

Most people who argue that there is no reason to believe that historical Jesus existed have one thing in common. They say that when the only evidence for a religious leader with supernatural powers comes from his followers and is written decades or centuries later, then that's a reason to discard his historicity completely. But they all still somehow believe in historical Pythagoras.

 

[Craig B]

Could we get an answer to the above before we start changing the subject to something about g-Mark (which I had not mentioned at all)?

Then answer my post #3169.

 

[dejudge]

And it states That is a Crapocratian heresy dejudge!!

You write fiction.

Why are you disrupting the thread with known fiction stories?

Why can't you stop mis-representing yourself?


I quoted writings attributed to Augustine of Hippo and Gregory Thaumaturgus.


Your own post states the Son is God and God is the Holy Spirit.

You can't be serious!! How can the Trinity be "Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit" when you've just told us that God is the Father, Son, and HOLY Spirit; and THESE are one AND indivisible, and you've just divided THEM by saying there's God - but also Jesus and THE Holy Spirit. I don't THINK you understand the Trinity, dejudge.

Again, you show a most bizarre lack of understanding of your OWN Post.

"The Father is God"
"The Son is God"
"The Holy Spirit is God"

"God is the Father"
"God is the Son"
"God is the Holy Spirit".

Jesus, the Son, the Holy Spirit, and the Father are God.

The teaching of the Trinity is confirmed in writings attributed to Church writers.

1. Augustine of Hippo "On the Holy Trinity

...therefore they are not three Gods, but one God.

2. Thaumaturgus "On the Trinity"

All (the persons) are one nature, one essence, one will, and are called the Holy Trinity..

3. Gregory of Nyssa "On the Holy Trinity

the identity of operation in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit shows plainly the undistinguishable character of their substance.

Jesus is an INDIVISIBLE Myth character.

Jesus can NEVER be separated from Mythology.

Jesus, God and the Holy Ghost are ONE and the same Myth.

 

[IanS]

Then answer my post #3169.

You did not ask me any question in post #3169. And in that post of yours, it was you who was talking about g-Mark ... but I had not asked you anything there about g-Mark!

I am asking you about your own claims about g-Luke! ...

The claimed evidence of Jesus is the whole central issue of this subject, and I am asking you if you are indeed claiming g-Luke is a credible source of evidence for a human Jesus known to anyone?