MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)

[abaris]

A poll: All those who remain unconvinced say

Some poor sod up to the task of counting the he used instead of presenting an argument?

[Minimalist]

You'll be sure to let us know when the creatard institute creates life from dirt, won't you?

I'm sure the asswipes are working on the problem night and day!

I stopped reading HM's long winded posts about 20 pages ago. Can anyone tell me if he's said anything worthy of consideration?

Surely you jest, D-P.

[robvalue]

He said he was going to stop, that was good. But then he didn't.

[Minimalist]

They can't stop. It's a personality flaw.

They're inveterate shitheads.

[Jenny A]

[Natachan]

I am very tempted to use my free time after finals to come up with an actual argument for the existence of an actual historical progenitor for the cult that Paul used. The library should be open for a few days during winter break.

Or I could, you know, spend time getting drunk with my friends. Hang out with my fiancé. Stuff like that.

[robvalue]

Let's see if I got this right now...

I think in the non forged parts, Paul only refers to a celestial Jesus (carrier). It's another mythology that got shoe horned in and that's part of the reason they had to be sewn together into the ludicrous trinity.

Trinity of mythologies is all it is. Angry God, pious doogooder man with familiar qualities, and floating sky creature thing doing astral battle.

I think they later tried to make out the sky creature was actually the man, if I'm following the trail of bullshit correctly. But they forgot to tipex out the astral thingy so he's now the spirit. I think!?

For fucks sake, who would believe any of this? It's got more ridiculous than when I first looked into it. And it was pretty ridiculous then.

(Apologies if I screwed up parts of that, but I think I got the gist right. Anyone who knows their shit is free to correct me)

[Mudhammam]

Let's see if I got this right now...

I think in the non forged parts, Paul only refers to a celestial Jesus (carrier). It's another mythology that got shoe horned in and that's part of the reason they had to be sewn together into the ludicrous trinity.

Well, the mythicist case largely seems to rely on interpreting Paul's frequent saying "according to the flesh" to mean something else than what would appear obvious, and his references to Jesus being born of a woman and one under the law (a Jew) as being little more than something like spiritual qualities. Eh. I'm also skeptical about dismissing any passage that contradicts one's theory as a forgery, or as Bart Ehrman calls it, invoking the "principle of convenience."

[YahwehIsTheWay]

Nope, I assume. I have stopped reading his diatribe at the same time you have. But I'm pretty sure he hasn't. At least going by the amount of

Proof that he isn't a True Christian ™. True Christians ™ don't use emotocons to emphasize a point. EVERYONE KNOWS WE LIKE TO ABUSE THE ALL CAPS BUTTON AND PUT LOTS OF EXCLAMATION POINTS AT THE END OF OUR SENTENCES!!!!!!!!!!

[Minimalist]