For Kapyong: Defending a historical Jesus

[dejudge]

Letters under the name of Paul claim Jesus never had any physical existence? Why have you not told me that, which would still least be relevant to your current argument, instead of being a murky cloud of verbal garbage designed to accomplish your escape from the consequences of uttering balderdash.

You cannot answer your own questions.

All manuscripts with stories of Jesus and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

In letters under the name of Paul Angels, God the Creator, a Ghost and Satan physically existed.

In the verbal garbage called Pauline Epistles, Jesus was the FIRSTBORN of the dead in the writings under the name of Paul.

Colossians 1:18

And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Letters under the name of Paul are dated to the second century or later? No they are not. Surviving manuscripts are thus datable, but Paul mentions a living John.

Is that from the second century or later?

You cannot answer your own questions.

All manuscripts with stories of Jesus and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

All persons called John only lived in the 1st century???

Which living John is mentioned in the letters? John FRUM Nowhere???

John in the fiction called Gospels and Acts??

A writer called Paul mentions a living Holy Ghost.

Which century did the Holy Ghost live??

Paul mentions a living James. Is that from the second century or later?

You cannot answer your own questions.

All manuscripts with stories of Jesus and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

All person named James only lived in first century???

Which James is mentioned in letters under the name of Paul???

A writer called Paul mentions a living Satan.

Which century did Satan live???

Paul mentions living Apostles. Is that from the second century or later?

You cannot answer your own questions.

All manuscripts with stories of Jesus and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

Apostles can only live in the 1st century???

No-one has ever fabricated stories about Apostles??

A writer called mentions a living God.

In which century did God live???

Paul mentions an extant Temple. Is that from the second century or later?

A writer called Paul mentions an extant HEAVEN.


2 Corinthians 12:2

I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth) such an one caught up to the third heaven

A writer called Paul saw things which he could not have been seen.

A writer called Paul saw Jesus ALIVE after he was supposed to be dead.


1 Corinthians 15:8[/quote] And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.[/quote]


1 Corinthians 15:15

Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

The writers called Paul are inventors of fiction

You see what drivel you are uttering?

You see the hopeless falacious presumptive arguments you make!!!

You have zero historical evidence for your Jesus and Paul.

You have zero manuscripts dated to the 1st century with stories of Jesus.

All you have are implausbile fiction stories of Gods, Ghosts, Satan, Angels, Jesus and Paul.

 

[Craig B]

Posted in error.

 

[Craig B]

All manuscripts with stories of Jesus and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

All persons called John only lived in the 1st century???

Which living John is mentioned in the letters? John FRUM Nowhere???

You are stating that Paul's letters were written in c1942, but they must be fictitious because John Frum didn't exist?

A writer called Paul mentions an extant HEAVEN.

Do historians inform us that Heaven was sacked and burned by the Emperor Vespasian in 70 AD?

 

[dejudge]

.....All manuscripts with stories of Jesus and Paul are dated to the 2nd century or later.

All persons called John only lived in the 1st century???

Which living John is mentioned in the letters? John FRUM Nowhere???

You are stating that Paul's letters were written in c1942, but they must be fictitious because John Frum didn't exist?

I have asked you questions which you cannot and will never be able to answer.

Which living John is mentioned in the letters????

I have not stated anywhere at anytime that letters under of Paul were written in c 1942.

A writer called Paul mentions an extant HEAVEN.

Do historians inform us that Heaven was sacked and burned by the Emperor Vespasian in 70 AD?

You claimed Paul mentioned an extant Temple but seem to have forgotten that letters under the name of Paul mention an extant heaven, an extant Satan, an extant God, extant Ghosts, extant Angels and an extant firstborn of the dead called Jesus.

You appear to have forgotten that the supposed Paul even CONFERRED with those who were extant WITHOUT Flesh and blood.

Historians of antiquity have mentioned the belief in "extant" fiction characters like Gods, Ghosts, Devils and Angels in the Roman Empire.

See Plutarch Romulus--Josephus Antiquities of the Jews--Tacitus Histories.

Contemporary historians and writers mentioned the myth/fiction characters of the Jews, Romans, Greeks, Egyptians and many others but never Jesus of Nazareth or PAUL of Tarsus.

Jesus are Paul were fiction characters and their fabrications completely unknown until the 2nd century or later.

 

[Craig B]

You claimed Paul mentioned an extant Temple but seem to have forgotten that letters under the name of Paul mention an extant heaven, an extant Satan, an extant God, extant Ghosts, extant Angels and an extant firstborn of the dead called Jesus.

Paul doesn't tell us the Temple was in Heaven, occupied by Ghosts. The remains of the Western Wall of the
Temple are in Jerusalem today, and pious Jews say prayers there.

Is the Western Wall of Heaven a place where ghosts and angels pray in modern Jerusalem?

Contemporary historians and writers mentioned the myth/fiction characters of the Jews, Romans, Greeks, Egyptians and many others but never Jesus of Nazareth or PAUL of Tarsus.

They mention Jesus, by name in one case, but don't say he came from Nazareth, I agree. Why should they? They mention the Temple, don't they?

Jesus are Paul were fiction characters and their fabrications completely unknown until the 2nd century or later.

Or later? "Later" certainly, if "John" is John Frum, son of Roosefel King of America.

 

[dejudge]

Paul doesn't tell us the Temple was in Heaven, occupied by Ghosts. The remains of the Western Wall of the
Temple are in Jerusalem today, and pious Jews say prayers there.

Letters under the name of Paul tell us that his Jesus was from heaven, was God Creator and the firstborn of the dead.

Jesus is complete fiction in the so-called Pauline Epistles dated no earlier than the mid 2nd century.

In addition, the writer called Paul was a liar--a false witness. The author called Paul claimed he was a witness that God raised Jesus from the dead and that he CONFERRED with those WITHOUT Flesh and blood.

The resurrection of Jesus and conference with fleshless bloodless entities did not and could not have happened .

There was never ever any person called Paul in the history of mankind who witnessed the resurrection of the Firstborn of the dead/God Creator.

Jesus and Paul were fiction characters invented no earlier than the 2nd century.


Colossians 1:18--- And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

1 Corinthians 15:15 ----Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

Colossians 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him.

Galatians 1.15--- But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood.

The letters under the name of Paul are effectively a pack of lies unknown to historians and contemporary writers of antiquity.

 

[Craig B]

There was never ever any person called Paul in the history of mankind who witnessed the resurrection of the Firstborn of the dead/God Creator.

Very true; but there was a person called Paul, who believed in it. That's what your next citation means.

we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.​

The letters under the name of Paul are effectively a pack of lies unknown to historians and contemporary writers of antiquity.

I'm not sure that they are "lies" though they may be. But people do honestly believe incorrect things, as I'm sure you know.

 

[dejudge]

There was never ever any person called Paul in the history of mankind who witnessed the resurrection of the Firstborn of the dead/God Creator.

Very true; but there was a person called Paul, who believed in it. That's what your next citation means.

we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.​

Not true!!! The passage mentions WITNESSES.

The writer under the name of Paul claimed he was one of the WITNESSES that God raised Jesus from the dead.

No person named Paul living in any century was a WITNESS that God raised Jesus from the dead.

1 Corinthians 15:15

Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not

Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus the Pharisee are fiction characters and the letters under the name of Paul are fiction, forgeries/false attribution fabricated after the Dead Sea Scrolls and after writings attributed to Philo, Pliny the Elder, Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius or no earlier than the 2nd century.

​

I'm not sure that they are "lies" though they may be. But people do honestly believe incorrect things, as I'm sure you know.

You mean your Paul believed he was a WITNESS of the non-historical resurrection?

Your Paul believed he was living at a time when he was not??

The author of letters under the name of Paul was a monstrous liar.


http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/macarius_apocriticus.htm

The Apocritus

But he who said, "I am a Jew," and "I am a Roman," is neither thing, although he attaches himself to both. For he who plays the hypocrite and speaks of what he is not, lays the foundation of his deeds in guile, and by putting round him a mask of deceit, he cheats the clear issue and steals the truth, laying siege in different ways to the soul's understanding, and enslaving by the juggler's art those who are easily influenced..............................We conclude then that he is a liar and manifestly brought up in an atmosphere of lying.

 

[Craig B]

Not true!!! The passage mentions WITNESSES.

The writer under the name of Paul claimed he was one of the WITNESSES that God raised Jesus from the dead.

No person named Paul living in any century was a WITNESS that God raised Jesus from the dead ...

1 mean your Paul believed he was a WITNESS of the non-historical resurrection?

I don't think that Paul was claiming with his own physical eyes to have seen Jesus climbing out of the tomb.

 

[dejudge]

Not true!!! The passage mentions WITNESSES.

The writer under the name of Paul claimed he was one of the WITNESSES that God raised Jesus from the dead.

No person named Paul living in any century was a WITNESS that God raised Jesus from the dead ...

1 mean your Paul believed he was a WITNESS of the non-historical resurrection?

I don't think that Paul was claiming with his own physical eyes to have seen Jesus climbing out of the tomb.

The writer called Paul was claiming that he and over 500 persons saw his resurrected Jesus with their own physical eyes.

Who needs physical eyes to see a non-historical resurrection?

A Liar!!!

1 Corinthians 15

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time

I conclude that the writer under the name of Paul was a real physical liar [a false witness] and that the letters were products of fiction no earlier than the mid 2nd century.

 

[Craig B]

The writer called Paul was claiming that he and over 500 persons saw his resurrected Jesus with their own physical eyes.

Who needs physical eyes to see a non-historical resurrection?

A Liar!!!

1 Corinthians 15

I conclude that the writer under the name of Paul was a real physical liar [a false witness] and that the letters were products of fiction no earlier than the mid 2nd century.

That eccentric conclusion is not warrantted by any rational reading of the relevant texts. Look at this.

Rather, Paul quotes what appears to be an earlier creed (1 Cor. 15:3-7) about Jesus dying, being buried, “rising” from the dead, and then “appearing” to a number of persons. First off, it never says in this creed that Jesus rose on Earth, since the Greek ἐγήγερται (“rose” or “lifted up”) can also refer to being raised to Heaven, either in the same body as on Earth or spiritually and then being clothed in a new body. Nor does the creed claim that anyone physically saw the resurrected Jesus on Earth, since the Greek ὤφθη (“was seen” or “appeared to”) can also refer to visionary experiences or revelation. In fact, the Greek verb ὁράω (“to see”) from which the passive form ὤφθη (“was seen”) is derived, was often used in antiquity to describe visions of celestial beings, such as those of the god Asclepius, exactly as Jesus would be after being raised to Heaven. (In fact, ὤφθη is even used to describe the appearances of angels in the New Testament, such as in Luke 1:11.)​

 

[dejudge]

That eccentric conclusion is not warrantted by any rational reading of the relevant texts. Look at this.

Rather, Paul quotes what appears to be an earlier creed (1 Cor. 15:3-7) about Jesus dying, being buried, “rising” from the dead, and then “appearing” to a number of persons. First off, it never says in this creed that Jesus rose on Earth, since the Greek ἐγήγερται (“rose” or “lifted up”) can also refer to being raised to Heaven, either in the same body as on Earth or spiritually and then being clothed in a new body. Nor does the creed claim that anyone physically saw the resurrected Jesus on Earth, since the Greek ὤφθη (“was seen” or “appeared to”) can also refer to visionary experiences or revelation. In fact, the Greek verb ὁράω (“to see”) from which the passive form ὤφθη (“was seen”) is derived, was often used in antiquity to describe visions of celestial beings, such as those of the god Asclepius, exactly as Jesus would be after being raised to Heaven. (In fact, ὤφθη is even used to describe the appearances of angels in the New Testament, such as in Luke 1:11.)​

Your statement is irrelevant or hopelessly flawed.

The writer called Paul was declared to be a liar since at least the 4th century in multiple writings.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim that he was a WITNESS that God raised Jesus from the dead if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim that Jesus was the firstborn of the dead if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim Jesus would never die again if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim Jesus was the Creator if all he had was a vision.


The letters under the name of Paul would still have zero historical value if all he had were visions of his Jesus.

Based on your absurdities, your Paul could have visions that he himself lived at a time when he did not.

Based on your absurdities your Paul could have visions that Jesus lived when he did not.

Based on your absurdities your Paul could have visions of a Temple when there was none.

It should have been obvious to you that your claim of visions has zero historical value to support arguments for an HJ or Paul.

Everything about Jesus would still be fiction if they were dreamt up by the writers called Paul.

Everything about Jesus would still be fiction if they were derived from visions.

Jesus was a fiction character fabricated by a pack of lies/visions no earlier than the 2nd century.

 

[Craig B]

Your statement is irrelevant or hopelessly flawed.

The writer called Paul was declared to be a liar since at least the 4th century in multiple writings.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim that he was a WITNESS that God raised Jesus from the dead if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim that Jesus was the firstborn of the dead if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim Jesus would never die again if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim Jesus was the Creator if all he had was a vision.

"The writer under the name of Paul" had a vision too? What historical evidence tells you that piece of interesting news?

 

[dejudge]

Your statement is irrelevant or hopelessly flawed.

The writer called Paul was declared to be a liar since at least the 4th century in multiple writings.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim that he was a WITNESS that God raised Jesus from the dead if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim that Jesus was the firstborn of the dead if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim Jesus would never die again if all he had was a vision.

It would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim Jesus was the Creator if all he had was a vision.

"The writer under the name of Paul" had a vision too? What historical evidence tells you that piece of interesting news?

Look at what you wrote!!!

I don't think that Paul was claiming with his own physical eyes to have seen Jesus climbing out of the tomb.

What historical evidence do you have that there was an actual person called Jesus and that he was buried in a tomb.

Your Paul could not have seen a dead person coming out of a tomb whether or not he had physical eyes.

In any event, it would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim that he was a WITNESS that God raised Jesus from the dead IF all he had was a vision.

 

[Craig B]

Your Paul could not have seen a dead person coming out of a tomb whether or not he had physical eyes.

In any event, it would still be a pack of lies for the writer under the name of Paul to claim that he was a WITNESS that God raised Jesus from the dead IF all he had was a vision.

But if "the writer under the name of Paul" made the claim because Paul didn't really exist, then that writer must be the liar, because to tell lies you have to exist.

 

[dejudge]

But if "the writer under the name of Paul" made the claim because Paul didn't really exist, then that writer must be the liar, because to tell lies you have to exist.

The writer or writers of the letters under the name of Paul must have physically lied when it is claimed their Jesus was the FIRSTBORN of the dead, God Creator, the Last Adam--the Son of God from heaven.

The writer/writers must have physically lied when it is claimed they were WITNESSES that God raised Jesus from the dead and that they were seen by Jesus after the resurrection.

God and Jesus are fiction characters and there is no physical location called heaven.

No person named Paul ever lived/ever existed who was a witness that God raised Jesus from the dead.

God, Jesus and Paul were all fiction characters--they never ever existed.

 

[Craig B]

The writer or writers of the letters under the name of Paul must have physically lied when it is claimed their Jesus was the FIRSTBORN of the dead, God Creator, the Last Adam--the Son of God from heaven.

The writer/writers must have physically lied when it is claimed they were WITNESSES that God raised Jesus from the dead and that they were seen by Jesus after the resurrection.

God and Jesus are fiction characters and there is no physical location called heaven.

No person named Paul ever lived/ever existed who was a witness that God raised Jesus from the dead.

God, Jesus and Paul were all fiction characters--they never ever existed.

Then Paul can't have been a liar, because he never existed, according to you. The statements attributed to Paul are not mere lies, but complete forgeries. But the question still remains, what "wirness that God raised Jesus" mean? I don't think it means: I saw Jesus climbing out of his tomb. Nobody claims to have seen that, and we may be sure it didn't happen.

 

[dejudge]

Then Paul can't have been a liar, because he never existed, according to you.

So it must have been the writer/writers under the name of Paul who was/were the liars.

Writer/writers pretended that they were the character called Saul/Paul in the fiction called Acts of the Apostles.

Up to this very day people believe that the writers under the name of Paul in the NT was really Saul/Paul while admitting Acts of the Apostles is a compilation of fiction.

The statements attributed to Paul are not mere lies, but complete forgeries.

The writers under the name of Paul are liars because they made known false claims that they were WITNESSES that God raised Jesus from the dead.

God is a fiction character and the resurrection was a non-historical event.

But the question still remains, what "wirness that God raised Jesus" mean? I don't think it means: I saw Jesus climbing out of his tomb. Nobody claims to have seen that, and we may be sure it didn't happen.

You don't know what "WITNESS" means!!!!

The writers of the letters to the Corinthians did claim that a character called Paul and over five hundred persons saw the resurrected Jesus.

Christians writers of antiquity who used the letters under the name of Paul also argued that the character called Paul was a witness of the resurrected Jesus.

The letters under the name of Paul are essentially a pack of lies because they are based on a non-historical implausible event--[the resurrection of the FIRSTBORN of the dead].

KJV 1 Corinthians 15:17 ---And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

NIRV Romans 6.9---We know that Christ was raised from the dead and will never die again. Death doesn’t control him anymore.

What big lies!!!

Virtually every letter under the name of Paul contain the lie that their Jesus was raised from the dead.

The writers under the name of Paul were monstrous liars.

No person named Paul ever lived who saw Jesus [the FIRSTBORN of the dead] resurrect.


The writers of the letters under the name of Paul were liars--Jesus and Paul were fiction characters who never ever existed--fabricated no earlier than the 2nd century or later.

 

[Craig B]

@dejudge

I think you are unable to distinguish between "testimony" in the sense of public declaration of belief. And "testimony" in the sense of a description of an event related by a person present at that event, and observing it while in that place.

Which meaning was Paul asserting? You are saying the second, but that is so ludicrous as to defy belief that anyone can seriously entertain such a notion. If forged monstrous fiction Paul had seen dead monstrous fiction Jesus wakening up and climbing out of his tomb, the forgers writing fiction under monstrous fiction Paul's name would have told us about that in unambiguous terms. If I ever see dead people wakening up and walking about, I promise I will tell you, dejudge.

Now, forged monstrous fiction Paul calls monstrous fiction Jesus "firstborn of the dead". That means that following Jesus' resurrection, dead people will also rise and go to meet monstrous fiction Jesus in the clouds. Does that mean forged monstrous fiction Paul is claiming to have seen monstrous fiction Jesus coming out of his tomb? No, because he hasn't seen the other people coming out of their tombs either, but he is testifying to his belief that they will do so when monstrous fiction Jesus comes back to collect them. He can't have seen it, because it hasn't happened yet!

 

[Craig B]

Here are the meanings of the word "testimony".

1. a formal written or spoken statement, especially one given in a court of law.

2. a public recounting of a religious conversion or experience.​

Do you understand the Epistles now, dejudge?