Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that show Jesus never existed

[The Big Dog]

It is Finished--just give up the Ghost.

John 19:30 KJV

if you believe so.

 

[dejudge]

It is Finished--just give up the Ghost.

if you believe so.

Jesus was a Ghost story from conception to ascension. It is documented in hundreds of manuscripts, Codices and Apologetic writings.

I will argue that Jesus was the product of a Holy Ghost until NEW evidence surfaces.

Ignatius' Ephesians

For our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost.

 

[Stone]

You may need to re-read my post: I addressed Josephus and Tacitus.

On the contrary, YOU NEED TO REREAD MINE.

=============>
[Stone] The four Morton Paulines are typical of arguably the earliest written documentation we have on Jesus the teacher. At the same time, your examples of Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 (the account of James becoming a pulp) are probably the most disinterested. From both sets of documents emerge an historic human figure.

[Proudfootz] If by a 'human figure' we mean an angel disguised as a human.

===========

[Stone] Fiddlesticks. Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 do NOT reference an angel in any way, shape, or form.

I tell you what. Instead of continuing your cute (NOT) evasion game, why don't you address what I'm really addressing for a change: What DO Paul, Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 all have in common?

Hint: it's not an angel.

Stone

============>

So addressing Josephus and Tacitus is NOT the assignment; addressing Josephus and Tacitus AND THE FOUR MORTON PAULINES is.

Stop evading the question: In the details of their different descriptions of Jesus the human rabbi, what do Josephus and Tacitus AND THE FOUR MORTON PAULINES all have in common?

And no, this time I'm not letting up. You will answer this question or show yourself up as interested only in evasion and hand-waving.

Stone

 

[The Big Dog]

Jesus was a Ghost story from conception to ascension. It is documented in hundreds of manuscripts, Codices and Apologetic writings.

I will argue that Jesus was the product of a Holy Ghost until NEW evidence surfaces.

Ignatius' Ephesians

 

[dejudge]

Stop evading the question: In the details of their different descriptions of Jesus the human rabbi, what do Josephus and Tacitus AND THE FOUR MORTON PAULINES all have in common?

Your HJ is not common to Tacitus, Josephus and the Pauline Epistles.

Your HJ was an assumed obscure criminal who was executed after he caused a disturbance at the Jewish Temple.

You don't even know his real name.

You don't even know when he was killed.

You don't have any actual pre 70 CE evidence.

Your HJ is unknown.

Many Christian Scholars REJECT your HJ.

Your un-evidenced HJ is not plausible.

 

[Brainache]

Your HJ is not common to Tacitus, Josephus and the Pauline Epistles.

Your HJ was an assumed obscure criminal who was executed after he caused a disturbance at the Jewish Temple.

You don't even know his real name.

You don't even know when he was killed.

You don't have any actual pre 70 CE evidence.

Your HJ is unknown.

Many Christian Scholars REJECT your HJ.

Your un-evidenced HJ is not plausible.

Have you read the Dead Sea Scrolls?

 

[dejudge]

Have you read the Dead Sea Scrolls?

The Dead Sea Scrolls do NOT mention Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of the tribe of Benjamin, the Pharisee.

 

[Stone]

Your HJ is not common to Tacitus, Josephus and the Pauline Epistles.

Your HJ was an assumed obscure criminal who was executed after he caused a disturbance at the Jewish Temple.

You don't even know his real name.

You don't even know when he was killed.

You don't have any actual pre 70 CE evidence.

Your HJ is unknown.

Many Christian Scholars REJECT your HJ.

Your un-evidenced HJ is not plausible.

You're getting hysterical.

Stone

 

[Stone]

Answer this question, please. ===========>

On the contrary, YOU NEED TO REREAD MINE.

=============>
[Stone] The four Morton Paulines are typical of arguably the earliest written documentation we have on Jesus the teacher. At the same time, your examples of Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 (the account of James becoming a pulp) are probably the most disinterested. From both sets of documents emerge an historic human figure.

[Proudfootz] If by a 'human figure' we mean an angel disguised as a human.

===========

[Stone] Fiddlesticks. Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 do NOT reference an angel in any way, shape, or form.

I tell you what. Instead of continuing your cute (NOT) evasion game, why don't you address what I'm really addressing for a change: What DO Paul, Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 all have in common?

Hint: it's not an angel.

Stone

============>

So addressing Josephus and Tacitus is NOT the assignment; addressing Josephus and Tacitus AND THE FOUR MORTON PAULINES is.

Stop evading the question: In the details of their different descriptions of Jesus the human rabbi, what do Josephus and Tacitus AND THE FOUR MORTON PAULINES all have in common?

And no, this time I'm not letting up. You will answer this question or show yourself up as interested only in evasion and hand-waving.

Stone

Thank you,

Stone

 

[proudfootz]

On the contrary, YOU NEED TO REREAD MINE.

[Stone] The four Morton Paulines are typical of arguably the earliest written documentation we have on Jesus the teacher. At the same time, your examples of Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 (the account of James becoming a pulp) are probably the most disinterested. From both sets of documents emerge an historic human figure.

[Proudfootz] If by a 'human figure' we mean an angel disguised as a human.

So the Paul supposed to have written Galatians, Romans, Corinthians 1, Corinthians 2 believed in a different sort of Jesus than the other letters? Is that the gist of what you're trying to say?

Let's start with this picture of the 'very human teacher'.

Galatians:

1 Paul, an apostle—sent not from men nor by a man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—

2 and all the brothers and sisters with me,

Questions:

1) Paul is not sent by a man but by Jesus and God - does this not refute this Jesus being a man as Paul specifically says he was sent by Jesus and not by a man?

2) Does this not imply his Jesus is alive at the time? While the putative 'historical Jesus' should be dead an rotting in a mass grave at this point?

3) Paul mentions 'brothers and sisters' - are these the blood kin of Jesus?

We can hardly get two verses into you 'very human teacher' story without running into big, big trouble.

[Stone] Fiddlesticks. Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 do NOT reference an angel in any way, shape, or form.

But as I have already pointed out, there are good reasons to doubt the independence of the Tacitus and Josephus mentions. So why bring this debunked garbage up again?

I tell you what. Instead of continuing your cute (NOT) evasion game, why don't you address what I'm really addressing for a change: What DO Paul, Tacitus and Antiqs. 20 all have in common?

Not a whole hell of a lot.

Sure, with rewriting all three you can force them into some kind of agreement.

Hint: it's not an angel.

In Paul and Josephus they are more alike in the angel department. Tacitus doesn't say much of anything.

So addressing Josephus and Tacitus is NOT the assignment;

If you don't want Tacitus and Josephus debunked yet again, drop them. If you cite them in your argument they are fair game.

addressing Josephus and Tacitus AND THE FOUR MORTON PAULINES is.

Wait a minute - didn't you say you're not making claims based on Tacitus and Josephus and they need not be addressed?

Can you make up your mind?

Stop evading the question: In the details of their different descriptions of Jesus the human rabbi, what do Josephus and Tacitus AND THE FOUR MORTON PAULINES all have in common?

Not much.

Or if you need help reading this THEY DO NOT HAVE VERY MUCH IN COMMON AT ALL.

Next stop, giant red letters...

And no, this time I'm not letting up. You will answer this question or show yourself up as interested only in evasion and hand-waving.

Speaking of hand waving - your claim that there is a substantially identical character represented in these sources is lacking in detail and specifics.

Can you, without rewriting Paul (Mortonesque or otherwise), Josephus, and Tacitus demonstrate there is anything to your argument than bold-faced assertions?

Remember, you assignment is to show how the Jesus who as a spirit revealed by the Scriptures in visions who sends Paul around is substantially identical to the cipher in Tacitus and the magician depicted in Josephus.

 

[proudfootz]

The Dead Sea Scrolls do NOT mention Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of the tribe of Benjamin, the Pharisee.

Not yet - some would-be 'historians' are very keen to rewrite ancient texts to make them evidence of their beliefs.

 

[proudfootz]

What an absurd argument!! You continue to confirm that you have no idea that the re-construction of the past REQUIRES EVIDENCE--Not Universities.

Apparently only the authority of a professor is required, whatever the man might believe, without argument or evidence even offered.

Next up, the Star of Bethlehem is an historic event, because every year at Christmastime some astronomer offers us yet another comet or planetary alignment as 'proof'...

 

[Stone]

Stop evading the question: In the details of their different descriptions of Jesus the human rabbi, what do Josephus and Tacitus AND THE FOUR MORTON PAULINES all have in common?

Not much.

Or if you need help reading this THEY DO NOT HAVE VERY MUCH IN COMMON AT ALL.

I see: They do not have VERY MUCH in common. O.K.: So what DO they have in common?

Stone

 

[Fellow Traveler]

I wonder. If Genesis and Adam and Eve can be an allegory, why not Jesus? Could not an allegorical man die for the allegorical original sin of humanity?

I have a big problem with the original sin idea. That Jesus died for sins I had not lived to commit, all without my knowledge. Those poor disciples died horrible deaths such as crucifixion some worse than Jesus' (Peter upside down) and these schmucks could not die to save humanity because Jesus beat them to it.

 

[proudfootz]

I see: They do not have VERY MUCH in common. O.K.: So what DO they have in common?

Stone

Josephus thinks Jesus was the messiah and doubts he was a man.

Paul thought Jesus was an angel who once disguised himself as a man to fool some demons.

Tacitus heard from some cultists they believed Pilate was involved in the death of some savior or other.

Oh, and all three are thought by scholars to have been tampered with by christian scribes.

 

[The Big Dog]

Tacitus heard from some cultists they believed Pilate was involved in the death of some savior or other.

Oh, and all three are thought by scholars to have been tampered with by christian scribes.

"thought by a tiny minority of scholars" you mean.

 

[proudfootz]

"thought by a tiny minority of scholars" you mean.

Not for Josephus and Paul.

But nice try at confusing the issue!

 

[Craig B]

"thought by a tiny minority of scholars" you mean.

No. Most scholars think it has an authentic core, but has been added to by Christian copyists. Here is a typical view.

Craig Blomberg states that if the three elements "lawful to call him a man", "he was the Christ" and the reference to the resurrection are removed from the Testimonium the rest of the passage flows smoothly within the context, fits the style of Josephus and is likely to be authentic. Blomberg adds that after the removal of these three elements (which are likely interpolations) from the Greek versions the remaining passage fits well with the Arabic version and supports the authenticity of the reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate.

My own view is that the passage is entirely interpolated, and is a much later fabrication. It breaks the continuity of the text in which it is embedded, and the chapter reads much more naturally if it is removed.

 

[dejudge]

Tacitus heard from some cultists they believed Pilate was involved in the death of some savior or other.

Oh, and all three are thought by scholars to have been tampered with by christian scribes.

"thought by a tiny minority of scholars" you mean.

What an absurd claim!!

It is highly illogical to put forward the idea that 'popularity' is evidence.

History has shown consistently that ideas which are now popular may have been rejected earlier.

 

[proudfootz]

No. Most scholars think it has an authentic core, but has been added to by Christian copyists. Here is a typical view.

"Craig Blomberg states that if the three elements "lawful to call him a man", "he was the Christ" and the reference to the resurrection are removed from the Testimonium the rest of the passage flows smoothly within the context, fits the style of Josephus and is likely to be authentic. Blomberg adds that after the removal of these three elements (which are likely interpolations) from the Greek versions the remaining passage fits well with the Arabic version and supports the authenticity of the reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate."

My own view is that the passage is entirely interpolated, and is a much later fabrication. It breaks the continuity of the text in which it is embedded, and the chapter reads much more naturally if it is removed.

We are in agreement here on the Testimonium.