Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-05-2015, 03:51 PM (This post was last modified: 15-05-2015 03:58 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-05-2015 01:41 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Thank you for your acknowledgment of my own knowledge. I mean that sincerely.

Quote:Most of the original versions of letters in the new Testament were probably first written late in the first century.

And you would have to say so, knowing as we do that:

Clement of Rome circa 96-98 CE:

quotes Matthew 18:6 (also Mark 9:42) as by the Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Clement ch.46 p.17-18

quotes Mark 7:6 1 (Also Matthew 15:8; Isaiah 29:13) 1 Clement ch.15 vol.1 p.9

quotes 1/4 of Acts 20:35f (5 words out of 26 words) 1 Clement vol.1 ch.2 p.

quotes Romans 1:32b 1 Clement ch.35 p.14

quotes 1 Corinthians 2:9 1 Clement ch.34 p.14

quotes half of Titus 3:1b “Ye never grudged any act of kindness, being ‘ready to every good work.’ (6 out of 13 words) 1 Clement ch.2 vol.1 p.5

quotes Heb 1:4. “’who being the brightness of His majesty, is by so much greater than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.’ For it is thus written, ‘Who maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire.’ But concerning His Son the Lord spoke thus: ‘thou are my Son, to-day have I begotten Thee. As of Me, and I will give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession.’ And again He said to Him, ‘site thou at Mu right hand, until I make Thine enemies thy footstool.’” 1 Clement ch.36 vol.1 p.15

quotes half of Heb 3:2b 1 Clement ch.17 vol.1 p.10

quotes three-fourths of Heb 10:37 1 Clement ch.23 vol.1 p.11

quotes James 4:6 (same as 1 Peter 5:5b; Proverbs 3:34) 1 Clement ch.30 vol.1 p.13

quotes: Revelation 22:12 p.14 (This is also the same as Isaiah 40:10; 62:11) 1 Clement ch.34 vol.1 p.14

Some thought he was even a disciple of Paul and so on accordingly. Now the 64-dollar question, if the NT was written by say, 90 AD, could it have been written by eyewitnesses? And would they really forget stuff Jesus said after repeating it to their disciples 100 times round campfires, having also seen Him rise from the grave?

Q, here are some more factors to consider about your $64 question...

Yeshua’s Words?

There is no evidence that there were chroniclers writing down Yeshua’s comments as he spoke. Yet Jesus’ very words are quoted in long passages in all the Gospels. For example, there is a monologue that goes on barely uninterrupted for almost ten pages in John 13–18, and there are similar lengthy lectures in Matthew. They are clearly fictitious. People in those days could not record the words of speakers in real time, as we are able to do today. Papyrus, the ancient equivalent of paper, was expensive and hard to get hold of, as was ink. People did not know that Yeshua would have a premature demise, so they had no pressing need to document his words. Yeshua’s colleagues were itinerant, poor, had to watch their backs, and would probably have been too concerned with day-to-day survival to be bothered with jotting down his remarks.

Roughly nineteen hundred years ago, educational standards were comparatively poor. It is estimated that only twenty percent of people in the Roman Empire could read at all and less than ten percent could read well, and Jews in Palestine were even less literate. The author Meir Bar-Ilan claims that less than three percent of Israel’s population could read, and less than that in rural areas.

If you grew up Jewish outside a city, you were unschooled. It is highly unlikely that Yeshua or his disciples could read or write.

Interestingly, the authors of the Catholic encyclopedia disagree with Meir Bar-Ilan’s general assertion:

“We may suppose that the Apostles, at least most of them, read and spoke Greek as well as Aramaic, from their childhood.”

They “may suppose” that “most” of the apostles were bilingual, and were literate in two languages, but they cannot prove it, and the burden of proof for an outlandish claim lies with whoever makes it. It appears that the authors of the encyclopedia would have their readers believe that the apostles wrote the Gospels, (in Greek) yet authors elsewhere in the same publication claim they did not. One wonders whether carefully worded commentary is deliberately creating a false impression in parts of the Catholic encyclopedia.

The so-called “oral tradition” idea, said to be how Jesus’ supporters remembered what he said, and then later documented it, is very implausible. People have trouble remembering words from conversations five minutes ago, and their memories are very prone to suggestion, exaggeration, and confabulation. People forget, alter, and embroider details. Why would poorly educated peasants two thousand years ago perform any better?

Some of the ancient Jews are said to have been very good at remembering and reciting Scripture. Yet that was written Scripture, which would have been repeated many times, not what their colleagues said the day before.

Jewish peasants did not walk around with pen and papyrus in hand recording what people said.

Consider a modern analogy. Imagine a politician gave some speeches in a distant country forty years ago, and one year later was assassinated. A publisher asks you to write an interesting, detailed short story about the life of this character, who spoke a foreign language, whom you had never met, nor had anyone you talked to. You’re told he was someone special, and the publisher wants you to quote him. You can’t use the telephone, Internet, newspapers or a car. You would have to make sense of multiple disparate poorly remembered facts and rumors. Inevitably, most of your story would be made up. Imagine your report was handed on to the publisher’s marketing people, who tied up some loose ends and inconsistencies and added some details of their own. They had it translated into another language, it was promoted through a chain of bookstores, and it became a best seller. The end product wouldn’t be accurate history!

The job the original authors of Mark’s Gospel had would have been even more difficult. They were writing anything from, at the minimum, 40 years after Jesus’ death. A war had devastated Jewish society in the interim. In reality, any verbal tales they heard about Jesus would have been second hand at best and more likely have had almost no relation to an actual historical figure.

The Gospels do not contain Yeshua’s words.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2015, 08:21 PM (This post was last modified: 16-05-2015 01:20 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
I don't know if anyone is still reading this post, but just in case someone is interested...

I just reread Clement's first letter. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...tfoot.html

That's an hour of my life gone that I'll never get back. What a load of drivel!

No mention of an historical Jesus. No miracles, no speeches, no Nazareth, no Jerusalem, no Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, no Pontius Pilate, no Herod, no James or John the Baptist. Just a dying and resurrected Jesus, a mythical son of God, as per Paul.

"Clement" was quite obviously no eyewitness of anything real, nor did he talk to any eye witnesses of any truthful historical events. "He" was just another brainwashed fanatic.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
18-05-2015, 10:35 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-05-2015 08:21 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I don't know if anyone is still reading this post, but just in case someone is interested...

I just reread Clement's first letter. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...tfoot.html

That's an hour of my life gone that I'll never get back. What a load of drivel!

No mention of an historical Jesus. No miracles, no speeches, no Nazareth, no Jerusalem, no Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, no Pontius Pilate, no Herod, no James or John the Baptist. Just a dying and resurrected Jesus, a mythical son of God, as per Paul.

"Clement" was quite obviously no eyewitness of anything real, nor did he talk to any eye witnesses of any truthful historical events. "He" was just another brainwashed fanatic.

I never said Clement I was an eyewitness of Christ. I pointed out merely that the dates of his authorship, established and quoting the NT, confer with your own statement that the NT documents were written before the first century had ended (or at least most of them, you might say).

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2015, 10:43 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(15-05-2015 03:51 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(15-05-2015 01:41 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Thank you for your acknowledgment of my own knowledge. I mean that sincerely.


And you would have to say so, knowing as we do that:

Clement of Rome circa 96-98 CE:

quotes Matthew 18:6 (also Mark 9:42) as by the Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Clement ch.46 p.17-18

quotes Mark 7:6 1 (Also Matthew 15:8; Isaiah 29:13) 1 Clement ch.15 vol.1 p.9

quotes 1/4 of Acts 20:35f (5 words out of 26 words) 1 Clement vol.1 ch.2 p.

quotes Romans 1:32b 1 Clement ch.35 p.14

quotes 1 Corinthians 2:9 1 Clement ch.34 p.14

quotes half of Titus 3:1b “Ye never grudged any act of kindness, being ‘ready to every good work.’ (6 out of 13 words) 1 Clement ch.2 vol.1 p.5

quotes Heb 1:4. “’who being the brightness of His majesty, is by so much greater than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.’ For it is thus written, ‘Who maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire.’ But concerning His Son the Lord spoke thus: ‘thou are my Son, to-day have I begotten Thee. As of Me, and I will give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession.’ And again He said to Him, ‘site thou at Mu right hand, until I make Thine enemies thy footstool.’” 1 Clement ch.36 vol.1 p.15

quotes half of Heb 3:2b 1 Clement ch.17 vol.1 p.10

quotes three-fourths of Heb 10:37 1 Clement ch.23 vol.1 p.11

quotes James 4:6 (same as 1 Peter 5:5b; Proverbs 3:34) 1 Clement ch.30 vol.1 p.13

quotes: Revelation 22:12 p.14 (This is also the same as Isaiah 40:10; 62:11) 1 Clement ch.34 vol.1 p.14

Some thought he was even a disciple of Paul and so on accordingly. Now the 64-dollar question, if the NT was written by say, 90 AD, could it have been written by eyewitnesses? And would they really forget stuff Jesus said after repeating it to their disciples 100 times round campfires, having also seen Him rise from the grave?

Q, here are some more factors to consider about your $64 question...

Yeshua’s Words?

There is no evidence that there were chroniclers writing down Yeshua’s comments as he spoke. Yet Jesus’ very words are quoted in long passages in all the Gospels. For example, there is a monologue that goes on barely uninterrupted for almost ten pages in John 13–18, and there are similar lengthy lectures in Matthew. They are clearly fictitious. People in those days could not record the words of speakers in real time, as we are able to do today. Papyrus, the ancient equivalent of paper, was expensive and hard to get hold of, as was ink. People did not know that Yeshua would have a premature demise, so they had no pressing need to document his words. Yeshua’s colleagues were itinerant, poor, had to watch their backs, and would probably have been too concerned with day-to-day survival to be bothered with jotting down his remarks.

Roughly nineteen hundred years ago, educational standards were comparatively poor. It is estimated that only twenty percent of people in the Roman Empire could read at all and less than ten percent could read well, and Jews in Palestine were even less literate. The author Meir Bar-Ilan claims that less than three percent of Israel’s population could read, and less than that in rural areas.

If you grew up Jewish outside a city, you were unschooled. It is highly unlikely that Yeshua or his disciples could read or write.

Interestingly, the authors of the Catholic encyclopedia disagree with Meir Bar-Ilan’s general assertion:

“We may suppose that the Apostles, at least most of them, read and spoke Greek as well as Aramaic, from their childhood.”

They “may suppose” that “most” of the apostles were bilingual, and were literate in two languages, but they cannot prove it, and the burden of proof for an outlandish claim lies with whoever makes it. It appears that the authors of the encyclopedia would have their readers believe that the apostles wrote the Gospels, (in Greek) yet authors elsewhere in the same publication claim they did not. One wonders whether carefully worded commentary is deliberately creating a false impression in parts of the Catholic encyclopedia.

The so-called “oral tradition” idea, said to be how Jesus’ supporters remembered what he said, and then later documented it, is very implausible. People have trouble remembering words from conversations five minutes ago, and their memories are very prone to suggestion, exaggeration, and confabulation. People forget, alter, and embroider details. Why would poorly educated peasants two thousand years ago perform any better?

Some of the ancient Jews are said to have been very good at remembering and reciting Scripture. Yet that was written Scripture, which would have been repeated many times, not what their colleagues said the day before.

Jewish peasants did not walk around with pen and papyrus in hand recording what people said.

Consider a modern analogy. Imagine a politician gave some speeches in a distant country forty years ago, and one year later was assassinated. A publisher asks you to write an interesting, detailed short story about the life of this character, who spoke a foreign language, whom you had never met, nor had anyone you talked to. You’re told he was someone special, and the publisher wants you to quote him. You can’t use the telephone, Internet, newspapers or a car. You would have to make sense of multiple disparate poorly remembered facts and rumors. Inevitably, most of your story would be made up. Imagine your report was handed on to the publisher’s marketing people, who tied up some loose ends and inconsistencies and added some details of their own. They had it translated into another language, it was promoted through a chain of bookstores, and it became a best seller. The end product wouldn’t be accurate history!

The job the original authors of Mark’s Gospel had would have been even more difficult. They were writing anything from, at the minimum, 40 years after Jesus’ death. A war had devastated Jewish society in the interim. In reality, any verbal tales they heard about Jesus would have been second hand at best and more likely have had almost no relation to an actual historical figure.

The Gospels do not contain Yeshua’s words.

Repeating: If I saw Jesus rise from the dead and do other miracles, I would a) tell everyone I met everything I could remember Him saying, hundreds of times, to all sizes of audience and b) find me a "scribe" sometime.

Not repeating: There were Jewish people walking about, papyrus in hand. In the English Bible, they are called "scribes" or "doctors of the Law" and further, EVERY Rabbi was known to be remarkable for memorizing scripture and oral Talmud.

I guess it's par for the course that you would assault the scriptures, Mark, but it's perhaps disingenuous or perhaps some kind of mental block that you keep saying other things like "There's no way the NT was copied accurately" and "There's no way these idiots would remember supposed sayings of Jesus accurately". The Masoretic, received text of the OT is called such because of the persons who SUPER-DUPER (yeah, that's a theology word, I think) copied and copied whatever they thunk (another theology word for what believers thought in past tense/time Smile) was scripture. You know, but seem to have forgotten, that making one mistake in a scroll meant the whole scroll went up in flames, and I mean literally. Do you really think masora who thought Jesus was the Jewish Messiah couldn't remember or write down what He said and did? Really?

And since science forces us to admit that the NT documents are around the close of the first century at the latest, do you REALLY think there was no one in the ENTIRE ROMAN EMPIRE who wasn't around in Jesus's or Paul's day to refute their sayings? There are DOZENS of wide-flung places where Paul preached. Why didn't someone say, "Roman myth! We've been in Ephesus 20 generations and there was no riot here when X was proconsul," etc.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2015, 03:24 AM (This post was last modified: 19-05-2015 03:49 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(18-05-2015 10:43 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(15-05-2015 03:51 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Q, here are some more factors to consider about your $64 question...

Yeshua’s Words?

There is no evidence that there were chroniclers writing down Yeshua’s comments as he spoke. Yet Jesus’ very words are quoted in long passages in all the Gospels. For example, there is a monologue that goes on barely uninterrupted for almost ten pages in John 13–18, and there are similar lengthy lectures in Matthew. They are clearly fictitious. People in those days could not record the words of speakers in real time, as we are able to do today. Papyrus, the ancient equivalent of paper, was expensive and hard to get hold of, as was ink. People did not know that Yeshua would have a premature demise, so they had no pressing need to document his words. Yeshua’s colleagues were itinerant, poor, had to watch their backs, and would probably have been too concerned with day-to-day survival to be bothered with jotting down his remarks.

Roughly nineteen hundred years ago, educational standards were comparatively poor. It is estimated that only twenty percent of people in the Roman Empire could read at all and less than ten percent could read well, and Jews in Palestine were even less literate. The author Meir Bar-Ilan claims that less than three percent of Israel’s population could read, and less than that in rural areas.

If you grew up Jewish outside a city, you were unschooled. It is highly unlikely that Yeshua or his disciples could read or write.

Interestingly, the authors of the Catholic encyclopedia disagree with Meir Bar-Ilan’s general assertion:

“We may suppose that the Apostles, at least most of them, read and spoke Greek as well as Aramaic, from their childhood.”

They “may suppose” that “most” of the apostles were bilingual, and were literate in two languages, but they cannot prove it, and the burden of proof for an outlandish claim lies with whoever makes it. It appears that the authors of the encyclopedia would have their readers believe that the apostles wrote the Gospels, (in Greek) yet authors elsewhere in the same publication claim they did not. One wonders whether carefully worded commentary is deliberately creating a false impression in parts of the Catholic encyclopedia.

The so-called “oral tradition” idea, said to be how Jesus’ supporters remembered what he said, and then later documented it, is very implausible. People have trouble remembering words from conversations five minutes ago, and their memories are very prone to suggestion, exaggeration, and confabulation. People forget, alter, and embroider details. Why would poorly educated peasants two thousand years ago perform any better?

Some of the ancient Jews are said to have been very good at remembering and reciting Scripture. Yet that was written Scripture, which would have been repeated many times, not what their colleagues said the day before.

Jewish peasants did not walk around with pen and papyrus in hand recording what people said.

Consider a modern analogy. Imagine a politician gave some speeches in a distant country forty years ago, and one year later was assassinated. A publisher asks you to write an interesting, detailed short story about the life of this character, who spoke a foreign language, whom you had never met, nor had anyone you talked to. You’re told he was someone special, and the publisher wants you to quote him. You can’t use the telephone, Internet, newspapers or a car. You would have to make sense of multiple disparate poorly remembered facts and rumors. Inevitably, most of your story would be made up. Imagine your report was handed on to the publisher’s marketing people, who tied up some loose ends and inconsistencies and added some details of their own. They had it translated into another language, it was promoted through a chain of bookstores, and it became a best seller. The end product wouldn’t be accurate history!

The job the original authors of Mark’s Gospel had would have been even more difficult. They were writing anything from, at the minimum, 40 years after Jesus’ death. A war had devastated Jewish society in the interim. In reality, any verbal tales they heard about Jesus would have been second hand at best and more likely have had almost no relation to an actual historical figure.

The Gospels do not contain Yeshua’s words.

Repeating: If I saw Jesus rise from the dead and do other miracles, I would a) tell everyone I met everything I could remember Him saying, hundreds of times, to all sizes of audience and b) find me a "scribe" sometime.

Not repeating: There were Jewish people walking about, papyrus in hand. In the English Bible, they are called "scribes" or "doctors of the Law" and further, EVERY Rabbi was known to be remarkable for memorizing scripture and oral Talmud.

I guess it's par for the course that you would assault the scriptures, Mark, but it's perhaps disingenuous or perhaps some kind of mental block that you keep saying other things like "There's no way the NT was copied accurately" and "There's no way these idiots would remember supposed sayings of Jesus accurately". The Masoretic, received text of the OT is called such because of the persons who SUPER-DUPER (yeah, that's a theology word, I think) copied and copied whatever they thunk (another theology word for what believers thought in past tense/time Smile) was scripture. You know, but seem to have forgotten, that making one mistake in a scroll meant the whole scroll went up in flames, and I mean literally. Do you really think masora who thought Jesus was the Jewish Messiah couldn't remember or write down what He said and did? Really?

And since science forces us to admit that the NT documents are around the close of the first century at the latest, do you REALLY think there was no one in the ENTIRE ROMAN EMPIRE who wasn't around in Jesus's or Paul's day to refute their sayings? There are DOZENS of wide-flung places where Paul preached. Why didn't someone say, "Roman myth! We've been in Ephesus 20 generations and there was no riot here when X was proconsul," etc.

"Repeating: If I saw Jesus rise from the dead and do other miracles, I would a) tell everyone I met everything I could remember Him saying, hundreds of times, to all sizes of audience and b) find me a "scribe" sometime."

Okay. Please explain why James, Jesus' brother, says nothing of this.

"I guess it's par for the course that you would assault the scriptures, Mark,"

Your language reveals that you are incapable of examining the topic objectively.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Mark Fulton's post
19-05-2015, 03:47 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(18-05-2015 10:43 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(15-05-2015 03:51 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Q, here are some more factors to consider about your $64 question...

Yeshua’s Words?

There is no evidence that there were chroniclers writing down Yeshua’s comments as he spoke. Yet Jesus’ very words are quoted in long passages in all the Gospels. For example, there is a monologue that goes on barely uninterrupted for almost ten pages in John 13–18, and there are similar lengthy lectures in Matthew. They are clearly fictitious. People in those days could not record the words of speakers in real time, as we are able to do today. Papyrus, the ancient equivalent of paper, was expensive and hard to get hold of, as was ink. People did not know that Yeshua would have a premature demise, so they had no pressing need to document his words. Yeshua’s colleagues were itinerant, poor, had to watch their backs, and would probably have been too concerned with day-to-day survival to be bothered with jotting down his remarks.

Roughly nineteen hundred years ago, educational standards were comparatively poor. It is estimated that only twenty percent of people in the Roman Empire could read at all and less than ten percent could read well, and Jews in Palestine were even less literate. The author Meir Bar-Ilan claims that less than three percent of Israel’s population could read, and less than that in rural areas.

If you grew up Jewish outside a city, you were unschooled. It is highly unlikely that Yeshua or his disciples could read or write.

Interestingly, the authors of the Catholic encyclopedia disagree with Meir Bar-Ilan’s general assertion:

“We may suppose that the Apostles, at least most of them, read and spoke Greek as well as Aramaic, from their childhood.”

They “may suppose” that “most” of the apostles were bilingual, and were literate in two languages, but they cannot prove it, and the burden of proof for an outlandish claim lies with whoever makes it. It appears that the authors of the encyclopedia would have their readers believe that the apostles wrote the Gospels, (in Greek) yet authors elsewhere in the same publication claim they did not. One wonders whether carefully worded commentary is deliberately creating a false impression in parts of the Catholic encyclopedia.

The so-called “oral tradition” idea, said to be how Jesus’ supporters remembered what he said, and then later documented it, is very implausible. People have trouble remembering words from conversations five minutes ago, and their memories are very prone to suggestion, exaggeration, and confabulation. People forget, alter, and embroider details. Why would poorly educated peasants two thousand years ago perform any better?

Some of the ancient Jews are said to have been very good at remembering and reciting Scripture. Yet that was written Scripture, which would have been repeated many times, not what their colleagues said the day before.

Jewish peasants did not walk around with pen and papyrus in hand recording what people said.

Consider a modern analogy. Imagine a politician gave some speeches in a distant country forty years ago, and one year later was assassinated. A publisher asks you to write an interesting, detailed short story about the life of this character, who spoke a foreign language, whom you had never met, nor had anyone you talked to. You’re told he was someone special, and the publisher wants you to quote him. You can’t use the telephone, Internet, newspapers or a car. You would have to make sense of multiple disparate poorly remembered facts and rumors. Inevitably, most of your story would be made up. Imagine your report was handed on to the publisher’s marketing people, who tied up some loose ends and inconsistencies and added some details of their own. They had it translated into another language, it was promoted through a chain of bookstores, and it became a best seller. The end product wouldn’t be accurate history!

The job the original authors of Mark’s Gospel had would have been even more difficult. They were writing anything from, at the minimum, 40 years after Jesus’ death. A war had devastated Jewish society in the interim. In reality, any verbal tales they heard about Jesus would have been second hand at best and more likely have had almost no relation to an actual historical figure.

The Gospels do not contain Yeshua’s words.

Repeating: If I saw Jesus rise from the dead and do other miracles, I would a) tell everyone I met everything I could remember Him saying, hundreds of times, to all sizes of audience and b) find me a "scribe" sometime.

Not repeating: There were Jewish people walking about, papyrus in hand. In the English Bible, they are called "scribes" or "doctors of the Law" and further, EVERY Rabbi was known to be remarkable for memorizing scripture and oral Talmud.

I guess it's par for the course that you would assault the scriptures, Mark, but it's perhaps disingenuous or perhaps some kind of mental block that you keep saying other things like "There's no way the NT was copied accurately" and "There's no way these idiots would remember supposed sayings of Jesus accurately". The Masoretic, received text of the OT is called such because of the persons who SUPER-DUPER (yeah, that's a theology word, I think) copied and copied whatever they thunk (another theology word for what believers thought in past tense/time Smile) was scripture. You know, but seem to have forgotten, that making one mistake in a scroll meant the whole scroll went up in flames, and I mean literally. Do you really think masora who thought Jesus was the Jewish Messiah couldn't remember or write down what He said and did? Really?

And since science forces us to admit that the NT documents are around the close of the first century at the latest, do you REALLY think there was no one in the ENTIRE ROMAN EMPIRE who wasn't around in Jesus's or Paul's day to refute their sayings? There are DOZENS of wide-flung places where Paul preached. Why didn't someone say, "Roman myth! We've been in Ephesus 20 generations and there was no riot here when X was proconsul," etc.

"There [i]were Jewish people walking about, papyrus in hand."[/i]

You live in fantasy land. There were no scribes tramping around Galilee hoping for a scoop. Jeebus was a deluded grubby little insurrectionist hoping to start a war. Read that again.

"Do you really think masora who thought Jesus was the Jewish Messiah couldn't remember or write down what He said and did? Really?"

You don't know who wrote the gospels. You have no evidence of a genuine link between the authors and an historical Jesus. The gospels were obviously written by gentiles, or at best, in some parts, by Jews under gentile supervision. It happened 40+ years after Jesus died.

"science forces us to admit"
Your attitude is all wrong. Science is beautiful and should be embraced.

"do you REALLY think there was no one in the ENTIRE ROMAN EMPIRE who wasn't around in Jesus' or Paul's day to refute their sayings?"
Of course not. There were the Nazarenes, who were the original family and followers of Jesus. They were marginalised and almost removed from the pages of history. You need to learn about them. You also need to develop an appreciation of how propaganda works; how the Roman government controlled what people thought.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Mark Fulton's post
19-05-2015, 04:13 AM (This post was last modified: 19-05-2015 04:28 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(19-05-2015 03:47 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "do you REALLY think there was no one in the ENTIRE ROMAN EMPIRE who wasn't around in Jesus' or Paul's day to refute their sayings?"
Of course not. There were the Nazarenes, who were the original family and followers of Jesus. They were marginalised and almost removed from the pages of history. You need to learn about them. You also need to develop an appreciation of how propaganda works; how the Roman government controlled what people thought.

Also, contemporary criticism has failed to snuff out Mormonism, Scientology, cargo cults, the Moonies, Heaven's Gate, psychic healing, astral projection, the Roswell 'landings', or ancient aliens.

So I guess all of that shit will be de facto truth in a few centuries or so, right Q? Nobody can prove that aliens didn't land in 1940's Roswell, New Mexico. So you'll be right on board with their cult, right?

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
19-05-2015, 04:29 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(19-05-2015 03:24 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "I guess it's par for the course that you would assault the scriptures, Mark,"

Your language reveals that you are incapable of examining the topic objectively.

You have just realized this? Shocking

I am disappoint. Weeping

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
19-05-2015, 04:34 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
Also...

[Image: 44989295-375x270.jpg]

/Q

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
19-05-2015, 10:13 AM
RE: Jesus Christ, A Pointless Sacrifice
(19-05-2015 03:24 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(18-05-2015 10:43 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Repeating: If I saw Jesus rise from the dead and do other miracles, I would a) tell everyone I met everything I could remember Him saying, hundreds of times, to all sizes of audience and b) find me a "scribe" sometime.

Not repeating: There were Jewish people walking about, papyrus in hand. In the English Bible, they are called "scribes" or "doctors of the Law" and further, EVERY Rabbi was known to be remarkable for memorizing scripture and oral Talmud.

I guess it's par for the course that you would assault the scriptures, Mark, but it's perhaps disingenuous or perhaps some kind of mental block that you keep saying other things like "There's no way the NT was copied accurately" and "There's no way these idiots would remember supposed sayings of Jesus accurately". The Masoretic, received text of the OT is called such because of the persons who SUPER-DUPER (yeah, that's a theology word, I think) copied and copied whatever they thunk (another theology word for what believers thought in past tense/time Smile) was scripture. You know, but seem to have forgotten, that making one mistake in a scroll meant the whole scroll went up in flames, and I mean literally. Do you really think masora who thought Jesus was the Jewish Messiah couldn't remember or write down what He said and did? Really?

And since science forces us to admit that the NT documents are around the close of the first century at the latest, do you REALLY think there was no one in the ENTIRE ROMAN EMPIRE who wasn't around in Jesus's or Paul's day to refute their sayings? There are DOZENS of wide-flung places where Paul preached. Why didn't someone say, "Roman myth! We've been in Ephesus 20 generations and there was no riot here when X was proconsul," etc.

"Repeating: If I saw Jesus rise from the dead and do other miracles, I would a) tell everyone I met everything I could remember Him saying, hundreds of times, to all sizes of audience and b) find me a "scribe" sometime."

Okay. Please explain why James, Jesus' brother, says nothing of this.

"I guess it's par for the course that you would assault the scriptures, Mark,"

Your language reveals that you are incapable of examining the topic objectively.

James, Jesus's brother, says nothing of what? He wrote an epistle about how to express faith in Jesus, practically and in a relevant manner. James and John "Boanerges" were eyewitness apostles. Are you saying James was an apostle? An eyewitness? On what basis(es)?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: