Josephus and other contemporaries on Jesus

[The Grand Nudger]

If we can definitively prove that the gospels were nothing more than extrapolations of a Greek myth based on Jewish scriptures, then it has huge ramifications indeed. The issue is we don't have enough information to definitively prove this.

But I don't think that's what you're saying either. You are saying that, based on your analysis of the texts, you have come to a conclusion that it is most likely a myth, correct?

Correct  I;m only showing you how we establish that the parable of the loaves and fishes was an intentional and explicit theological construction.  A myth....though I can;t take credit for the analysis. That was done, mostly..by the religious.  This is true regardless of whether or not there was a hypothetical jesus.  The character in that story is a construct, not a legend based on a man...but a myth based on theological necessity.  While a True Believer™ might accept the analysis of the story and then contend "but it;s twoo, it;s twoo, it;s twoo" this would be irrellevent to anyone who doesn;t believe in fairies..and only shuffle responsibility for the intentional mythologizing of a legendary or historical jesus onto god himself.

Someone else can look at the same text and come to a different conclusion regarding the likelyhood of a historical Jesus (and I mean outside of religious biases and all that. Just looking at the text itself.)

A historical jesus is irrelevant to that particular story.  That;s why I picked it, lol.  Its completely devoid of any actual person or event either in fact or in the narrative..while bursting to the seams with religious just-so. The mundane details vary in predictable ways based upon the inherent biases of the authors and their evolving christology, but every author is faithful to the underlying theology of the story.

This is not, in my mind...a weakness of the story. It;s a strength. It;s the reason for it;s inclusion in all four and it;s a very competent piece of literature for it;s intent, brevity, and clever use of metaphor.

[RoadRunner79]

I think that sometimes the numerology things can be abused. It’s like when a pastor prooftexts a scripture, and makes a message out of it, which is completly out of context. I think it makes me leery and resistive sometimes. 

Im unsure in this case; however, even if the correct, it seems the conclusion and reasoning is that it was designed to have those numbers which have a greater meaning than just face value. I don’t think that this goes against the traditional Christian view, or meanness that it wasn’t a myth.

[Amarok]

More excuses

[The Grand Nudger]

The "traditional christian view" is that the parable so closely dovetails with mythology that it proves hes god...that its twoo..twoo...twoo.

Understand, however, that this view is actually agreeing with a mythicist reading of the text - and then adding their silly beliefs as sauce. You believe in the myths. That doesn;t mean that they arent mythological. You simply resent their accurate classification as you feel that it endangers those beliefs. Not all christians are handicapped in this way. I;m not a believer, so I dont have those hangups..and see one of the best stories about the christian god in the whole of the NT, realizing that it doesn;t have to be an ap news report from the gallilean front. Thats not important to the faith...or to the narrative itself.

No more important than there actually being a man upon which all of this was based, or an event..because the story is about god and what he can and will do..not a man and what he did.

[RoadRunner79]

The "traditional christian view" is that the parable so closely dovetails with mythology that it proves hes god...that its twoo..twoo...twoo.

Understand, however, that this view is actually agreeing with a mythicist reading of the text - and then adding their silly beliefs as sauce. You believe in the myths. That doesn;t mean that they arent mythological. You simply resent their accurate classification as you feel that it endangers those beliefs. Not all christians are handicapped in this way. I;m not a believer, so I dont have those hangups..and see one of the best stories about the christian god in the whole of the NT, realizing that it doesn;t have to be an ap news report from the gallilean front. Thats not important to the faith...or to the narrative itself.

No more important than there actually being a man upon which all of this was based, or an event..because the story is about god and what he can and will do..not a man and what he did.

I think that you misunderstood what I said. At most your reasoning brings you to it was designed to be that way, and that doesn’t necessarily support the mythicist view. If you think that it is numerologically significant, the you are going to think that it was by design, either by God or by man.

Also I think your latest trolling efforts of your twoo...twoo...twoo (whatever that is) is in conflict with your alluding to being an objective judge of things.

[The Grand Nudger]

I think that you misunderstood what I said.  At most your reasoning brings you to it was designed to be that way, and that doesn’t necessarily support the mythicist view. If you think that it is numerologically significant, the you are going to think that it was by design, either by God or by man.

What do you want me to call something designed to be a myth? To me, "myth" seems like an appropriate term for something like that.

OFC it was by mans design. Men write myths, not gods. Not even the looniest christian nitwit thinks that god was sitting around the ane with pen in hand wondering how to write a true war story.

Not a fan of blazing saddles, lol? In this case I don;t have to be the objective judge..because, as I;ve mentioned over and over, I;m simply conveying the work of christian scholarship to know nothing literalists.

[Succubus]

The question regarding the NT isn;t whether or not it;s true..we know that it isn;t.

How do you know that?

RoadRunner, do you believe a three day old purifying corpse was reanimated?

[RoadRunner79]

How do you know that?

RoadRunner, do you believe a three day old purifying corpse was reanimated?

What do my beliefs have to do with his/your evidence and reasons for saying this is true?

[The Grand Nudger]

Your beliefs are the only thing you have...so...its relevant, lol.

[Succubus]

Bear in mind, while we both agree there is a clear theological message there,

What is this 'theological message' of which you speak? And on whose authority do theologians speak?

we part ways beyond that point to our conclusions.

What and or whose conclusions?

In other words I do not take that as proof of fabrication of a story, but rather a very specific lesson and example in something I believe to have actually taken place that I should take heed of in my own faith as such situations might apply today.

Is this a not so subtle rewording of 'you can't disprove it therefore it must be true?'

---

Or it could be totally made up by non witnesses based itself on stories that someone made up and that's why the details don't match.

Bingo! We have a winner.