@fmf saidOk, so the early Christians picked a random man who was crucified on a cross to be the Messiah to fit all the prophesies, and then suffer endless persecution for it.
If the bit about him being crucified is true, then it was not for blasphemy, not if the bit about the Romans executing him is true. The Romans executed countless thousands of people for sedition. The 'fulfilling of prophesy' thing doesn't hold any water with me.
Understood.
@fmf saidActs was not written by Paul.
Paul's 'vision' is "corroborated"? Says who?
So for the record, someone made up the story of Paul, someone who persecuted Christians but had a dramatic turn around on the road to Damascus who later became the author of most of the NT.
So both Jesus and Paul were contrived? I'm thinking you at least believe Paul preached the gospel because someone had to have written it.
@whodey saidSo it would seem. The human condition, religious zealotry especially, is a fascinating phenomenon. I am sure every Christian who suffered was sincere in their beliefs. But their sincerity about events that took place decades or even centuries before they were born, is not really strong evidence of anything except their state of mind.
Ok, so the early Christians picked a random man who was crucified on a cross to be the Messiah to fit all the prophesies, and then suffer endless persecution for it.
@whodey saidI suggest you read Creating Christ by James S. Valliant and C. W. Fahy, an interesting scholarly work.
So for the record, someone made up the story of Paul, someone who persecuted Christians but had a dramatic turn around on the road to Damascus who later became the author of most of the NT.
@fmf saidSo any evidence of the 12 disciples all being martyred, except 1 because the attempt to kill him failed, is not evidence that they really believed what they purported to believe?
So it would seem. The human condition, religious zealotry especially, is a fascinating phenomenon. I am sure every Christian who suffered was sincere in their beliefs. But their sincerity about events that took place decades or even centuries before they were born, is not really strong evidence of anything except their state of mind.
In fact, Paul suffered the same fate.
Why? What motivation?
@fmf saidThere are but 3 possibilities
Do you really think the "author of the gospel of Luke" was on the road to Damascus with Paul?
1. He was a witness
2. He heard it from someone who was a witness
3. He made the whole thing up to promote Paul.
Which do you adhere to?
@whodey saidWell, actually, the four NT gospels were written after the time of Paul. Not only that, but some of what Paul preached seemed different to what is in the gospels as we now know them. Paul alludes to others who were teaching different things than him. The creation of the new religion was in flux.
I'm thinking you at least believe Paul preached the gospel because someone had to have written it.
@fmf saidIf you compare Revelation to Daniel, you will find something interesting. They both seem to be saying many of the same things regarding such things as "the Beast".
My point exactly. Ditto for Paul's supernatural "vision". Ditto for the writer/writers of Revelation's supernatural "vision".
So Daniel is not what many claim it to be, which is a book that has no relation to the Bible in any way. How you accept or reject it is up to you.
@fmf saidDo you believe Paul was martyred for his faith?
Well, actually, the four NT gospels were written after the time of Paul. Not only that, but some of what Paul preached seemed different to what is in the gospels as we now know them. Paul alludes to others who were teaching different things than him. The creation of the new religion was in flux.
@whodey saidIt was inserted into the NT along with 22 books written by a man whose only connection to "Jesus Christ" was an uncorroborated "vision" 20 years after "Jesus Christ" had been executed.
There are but 3 possibilities
1. He was a witness
2. He heard it from someone who was a witness
3. He made the whole thing up to promote Paul.
Which do you adhere to?
@fmf saidAs I have pointed out, many scholars seem to think that the author of Luke was the same person who wrote Acts.
It was inserted into the NT along with 22 books written by a man whose only connection to "Jesus Christ" was an uncorroborated "vision" 20 years after "Jesus Christ" had been executed.