JP wrote:"you again failed to address my actual analysis and argument of the late dating, and, if anything, only proven that you are willing to assent to non-mainstream views (mythical Jesus) just to satisfy your own bias."
JP you are basing yourself on earlier documents such as the gospel of Q and probably the gospel of Thomas as early sources that prove the existence of Jesus.Firstly Q is a collection of sayings with no context or lead ins and not surprisingly Jesus is not mentioned in Q1 ( the wisdom aphorisms) or Q2 (the apocalyptic teachings) the scholars have attributed a couple of sayings to a Q3 document but as stated earlier this is all hypothetical.Basing themselves on the many similarities almost verbatim in the accounts of Matthew and Luke although the sayings are placed in different context and stories they assume that they are both using this hypothetical Q document.The gospel of Thomas is yet another collection of sayings and it has lead ins that state "And Jesus said" etc. but most scholars agree that these were added later and not part of the original texts.
Basically you can't refute an hypothesis such as the Q document since there is not even a copy of it original or transcribed in existence.The synoptic gospels on the other hand do exist although they have been written and reworked over the years and corrupted by church scribes and copyists.I don't think that we could actually reconstruct a true copy of these gospels since they have passed through so many hands before they came to us.Atheist are not mainstream because we like to think outside the box,does that make us biased?Many of us atheist started out as believers in Christ in one form or another.Our life experiences and researches has led us to conclude that there is not physical,logical,or external evidence that validates the existence of christ. Although not all atheist agree that he did not exist they do agree that he was not a God incarnate and his legacy is based on myths years removed from his alleged death at Calvary.
JP you are basing yourself on earlier documents such as the gospel of Q and probably the gospel of Thomas as early sources that prove the existence of Jesus.Firstly Q is a collection of sayings with no context or lead ins and not surprisingly Jesus is not mentioned in Q1 ( the wisdom aphorisms) or Q2 (the apocalyptic teachings) the scholars have attributed a couple of sayings to a Q3 document but as stated earlier this is all hypothetical.Basing themselves on the many similarities almost verbatim in the accounts of Matthew and Luke although the sayings are placed in different context and stories they assume that they are both using this hypothetical Q document.The gospel of Thomas is yet another collection of sayings and it has lead ins that state "And Jesus said" etc. but most scholars agree that these were added later and not part of the original texts.
Basically you can't refute an hypothesis such as the Q document since there is not even a copy of it original or transcribed in existence.The synoptic gospels on the other hand do exist although they have been written and reworked over the years and corrupted by church scribes and copyists.I don't think that we could actually reconstruct a true copy of these gospels since they have passed through so many hands before they came to us.Atheist are not mainstream because we like to think outside the box,does that make us biased?Many of us atheist started out as believers in Christ in one form or another.Our life experiences and researches has led us to conclude that there is not physical,logical,or external evidence that validates the existence of christ. Although not all atheist agree that he did not exist they do agree that he was not a God incarnate and his legacy is based on myths years removed from his alleged death at Calvary.
There is nothing people will not maintain when they are slaves to superstition
http://chatpilot-godisamyth.blogspot.com/
http://chatpilot-godisamyth.blogspot.com/
