RE: Interpreting Mark 15:34--'eloi 'eloi lama sabachthani
December 22, 2012 at 6:40 am
(This post was last modified: December 22, 2012 at 6:53 am by Jesus.of.Nazareth.)
(December 28, 2011 at 6:04 am)Zen Badger Wrote: No, because jesus was a fictional character.
Do I win a pony?
You have made an unsupported, worthless assertion.
(December 28, 2011 at 7:53 am)Welsh cake Wrote:(December 28, 2011 at 6:01 am)Barre Wrote: The question of debate: Does Mark 15:34 probably contain the words of a historical Jesus?There is no historical evidence that Jesus, his life, death, crucifixion and/or resurrection ever occurred. Not a single shred.
As a pantheist why do you care in any case?
No shred. You unsupported and uniformed assertion is worthless.
You overlook Gal 1:19 and 1 Cor 9:15.
You overlook the evidence that Jesus was crucified.
The arbitary distinction between Christian and non-Christian sources is fallacious. Data is data. There is no warrant to think that Chrisitian compositions "don't count" as historical data. All writings contain a bias and a Christian bias does not "automatically" rule it out as a source of historical information.
There is not a shred of evidence for numerous people that lived in the 1st century.
(December 28, 2011 at 8:11 am)Erinome Wrote: Barre! Again? The bible is ancient trash fiction!
Your unsupported assertion is worthless.
(December 28, 2011 at 8:15 am)5thHorseman Wrote: Troll.
What is a "troll?"
(December 28, 2011 at 8:16 am)KichigaiNeko Wrote: The whole point is...
A historical Jesus died as a disappointed messianic pretender. The author of the Passion Narrative (Mark 14:1-15:39*) portrayed the historical Jesus as an Aristoelian tragic hero.
WHO GIVES A TINKERS TOSS about some fairy story...now Gandalf falling in Moria!! oi vey!!
Your unsupported assertion is worthless.
