oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
So you cannot show any more examples, Joel?
The ones I dismissed are ones that you had already dismissed.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Would Jesus put up with the very wealthy and very poor?
- Thread starter oldbadger
- Start date
So you cannot show any more examples, Joel?
The ones I dismissed are ones that you had already dismissed.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Richard Carrier stapled parts of the gospels to the writings of Paul and also to ancient mythology.
But sadly for Carrier Apostle Paul did not know anything about what Jesus actually did or said (apart from during his last 36 hours) which rather throws much of Carrier's borrowed works in to touch.
Very good........ I've started to teach you something, it seems?
joelr
Well-Known Member
Whoopsy. Did you not think I've read all those authors?
Crossan believes in a historical Jesus. Meaning a man, who was a Rabbi. He believes the resurrection is a mythical story that has an inner meaning that society needs to be resurrected and born again to a more spiritual lifestyle.
He believes the demigod stories are myth and they used Jesus (who was a man) as the character. Like Mark Hamill played Luke Skywal;ker.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
But I recognise that the author of Mark was a partial witness, and definitely a witness at the arrest of Jesus.
Sometimes it's best to put down your cherry-picked scholars and do some work for yourself, Joel
joelr
Well-Known Member
You didn't dismiss. You just said "junk". Dismissing them means you have to demonstrate why they were not being copied verbatim or explain why Mark used OT lines verbatim even though the story is true. Provide sources and examples.
You did nothing. So you cannot deal with the evidence. Interesting that you continue to employ fantasies. Now besides having fantasy beliefs not supported in Christian scholarship you have fantasies that you "debunked" examples? This is pure delusion?
There are pages and pages of examples, if you think writing "
junk" means anything you are as loopy as you sound. I don'tcare how delusional you are, I just want information. Clearly you cannot provide me any so why would I waste my time? You can remain in fantasy world.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Excellent!
So you do accept that Jesus was a real person.
Ergo, so you do accept that some of the stories about Jesus are based upon fact.
You're learning.
So Jesus was a real person, with a real campaign, but the resurrection is junk.
You see?
.....junk......... I think that bit is junk. Do I have to teach you why I think it's junk, or can we just agree about that bit?
Your poor analogies don't really work, Joel
joelr
Well-Known Member
Wow, are you ok? You didn't read any Carrier that's for sure. Carrier knows Paul only mentions visions and revelations. Mark does use Pauls letters when crafting earthly narratives. Carrier gives evidence of tha. Evidence isn't sometyhing you are familiar with so never mind that.
sorry, no, I understood John the Baptist was a historical figure.
joelr
Well-Known Member
And look - no evidence, just fantasy.
"For example, that Mark emulates stories and lifts ideas from the Psalms, Deuteronomy, the Kings literature, and so on, is well established and not rationally deniable. That he likewise lifts from and riffs on Paul’s Epistles is, as you can now see, fairly hard to deny. By contrast, we have exactly no evidence whatever that anything in Mark came to him by oral tradition. It is thus curious that anyone still assumes some of it did. That Mark’s sources and methods were literary is well proved. That any of his sources or methods were oral in character is, by contrast, a baseless presumption. "
Carrier
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
No Joel........... I don't need to prove to you that I agree with you about those particular verses.
I don't need to wave a scholar flag for any of those verses...... My studies of the gospels show me that those events did not happen.
So you can't offer any more verses for appraisal, which means that the vast majority of verses and reports had some truth in them, bago down there?
sed upon the balance of probabilities.
I asked you to pick any verses that I did not junk for a brief explanation by me as to why they might be real, but you failed to do that.
Can I ask you, do you think that the story of the night run across the Lake to the Gadarenes was pure fiction? It's very probably true, Joel.
What fish could be caught in the Lake?
What fish could be eaten by Jews?
Who lived down along the Gadarenes?
What did those folks eat? Who were they?
Why would boatmen from Capernaum, Magdala etc go down there?
Why at night?
Ask your scholars, maybe?
joelr
Well-Known Member
Bigger facepalm. Crossan believes there was a man. He also believes the myth about a resurrection means it's a metaphor about society. No historian agrees with that.
Carrier and many current scholars are now backing the full mythicist position.
It doesn't matter. The consensus is that the gospels are a myth. A human Jesus or wholecloth myth, doesn't matter.
Carriers' recent book gives plenty of evidence that even Jesus is a mythical character. Many scholars have switched to his position.
Nothing Jesus was preaching wasn't already in Jewish theology.
Hillel the Elder - Wikipedia
Demonstrate one poor analogy and explain why it's poor. If you cannot provide evidence your saying nothing.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
There, so you can forget about the idea of Carrier destroying the whole account about Jesus, who was probably a true historical figure.
Excellent. Joel admits that John the Baptist was a real person!
It's nice when you win, even little bits and pieces.
Now......... do you understand that Jesus was an historical figure?
joelr
Well-Known Member
You just said "junk", now you claim you agree these were actually copied by Mark from OT sources. So I was correct.
I told you why.
I will tell you a verse in Mark that is made up, the last supper. It's a riff off Pauls letters. There is a chiasmus in Mark 12 that has no possibility of happening in real life.
Carrier details endless examples of Mark using Paul's letters and crafting earthly narratives.
I do not care about lake stories. I care about savior demigods and all the supernatural claims being shown to be borrowed myth.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
No........ we've already agreed that the Baptist was a real person offering cleansing in the Jordan for nothing, (thus cutting off the Temple's income, as well as the income's of the service providers around the city). Carrier must not junk the whole gospel just because he can see that parts of the story were lifted from the Epistles of Paul, but since Paul never wrote anything about Jesus or his campaign (apart from the last hours) ...so Carrier's suggestions cannot destroy the whole work.
What does Carrier say about the arrest in Gethsemane? I know you don't have any position on it, so you had better quote Carrier.
joelr
Well-Known Member
Another monumentally incorrect statement. You simply don't vale truth. Carrier analyzes all 20,000 words in the authentic Epistles.
YOur delusions are getting a bit concerning. I already said I knew he was a historical figure. Why you keep patting yourself on the back for a fiction is getting creepy?
Now that you have presented zero evidence and failed to counter any single piece of evidence. Except for the evidence that you ended up finally saying you agree with?
Jesus is most likely a myth.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Yes.... we both junked that story.
Joel got one right.
So dump it! It is junk!
I don't think that the last supper happened.
So what else have you got to junk? You've got a whole lot of gospel left, Joel.
Ah ha! So you haven't got any education about the fishermen of the lake, fishing, weather, inhabitants, net types, taxation on and off the lake, probable scams, etc.........
So the lake story will be left alone by you because you cannot disprove it. Good.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Ah ah! Naughty! You showed that you accept Dominic Crosson's work, so you surely accept that Jesus was a real historical figure.
Sorted.
joelr
Well-Known Member
Mark takes narratives from Paul, older fiction and the OT as well as obvious Hellenism.
You seem vastly uneducated on Marks use of Paul.
Many exmples from Carriers book on Marks use of Paul are detailed here:
Mark's Use of Paul's Epistles • Richard Carrier
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Your occasional use of film stories like Star Wars characters cannot help you with a debate about the historical Jesus, Joel.
I notice that weak debaters often use analogies because they haven't got any sound evidence to offer.
I suggest you drop that type of approach, is all.
joelr
Well-Known Member
What has been demonstrated is that Mark wrote the gospel using older fiction, Pauls letters and based on other evidence Jesus is a made up character.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
I asked you 'What does Carrier say about the arrest in Gethsemane'!
I asked for a reason. I think much of that account is real and that it was witnessed by the author of G-Mark.