Christians- How do you know Jesus and the Bible are true?

[Brian2]

Here Peter is responding to something. People were accusing Jesus to be a myth and this is a response to that.





ALso the theology is Greek and already happened several times.
The stories in Mark are re-writes of several older sources, OT, Epistles, Greek poetry.
Mark uses a fictive style of literature, never used in historical writing.

But besides all that your argument is the same special pleading that you have been using all along. The skeptical writers are "biased".
Uh, no, there isn't any reason to not find this to be mythology. But the real question is if this is using Greek and Persian theology (it is), Justin Martyr admitted this to be the case, and it does seem to re-write several older stories why would you expect this to get a pass?
And why would ALL supernatural stories also not get a pass? So you have to assume the Quran is true. Bahai as well. He said straight out he is a messenger of God. So did Muhammad. So you get to have a supernatural bias with everything else except the stories you already believe?

Mormonism, got messages. Jehovas Witness, new messages. Why would you have a supernatural bias and not believe these stories but believe the one story that looks the most to be a myth?

Peter was reminding people that what he was telling them was the truth and that he had been a witness.
Why do you deny the church history of Mark being a person who got his information from Peter?
Why are you so willing to believe that any story might be the source for what Mark wrote and not Peter. I guess when you say that Peter is responding to accusations that Jesus was a myth, what you mean is that Peter was lying.
And no, I don't have to believe all supernatural stories in all religions are true,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, but do believe that Satan the deceiver is real and does deceive people into thinking they are messengers of God,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and of course I also believe some people just make up stuff or misinterpret the Bible.

 

[Brian2]

There is no evidence of supernatural. You seem to think scholars should turn a blind eye to the massive evidence staring them in the face, just because you want this story to be true.
Mark is massively mythic. Everything in it is written as fiction. You seem to think a prophecy should be taken as evidence while pages and pages of purposeful mythwriting should be ignored? And you blame scholars for that? As if they SHOULD be that blind? If they took that approach with the Quran and announced the Quran has been proven to be true and Islam is definitely real you would probably be beside yourself. Yet you want the same with Mark?

Everything in Mark is fiction. The Barabbas story is an obvious literary device. First no Roman magistrate, especially the ruthless Pilate, would let a murder rebel go free. No such Roman ceremony has ever been attested to have existed, nor is it plausible. The ceremony clearly emulates the Jewish ritual at Yom Kippur of the scapegoat and atonement (in a story about atonement), it's status as an allegorical myth is clear. Mark has merged the sacrifices of Passover and Yom Kippur by having Jesus be a Yom Kippur sacrifice performed during passover.

Barabbas means "Son of the Father", which was also Jesus. So we have two sons of the father, one released into the wild mob containing th esins of Israel, murder and rebellion, the other is sacrificed so his blood may atone for the sins of Israel. The one who is released bears the sins literally, the other figuratively. This is the Yom Kippur ceremony of Leviticus - 2 identical goats were chosen, one released into the wild containing the sins of Israel, the others blood was shed to atone for the sins.
Hebrews already said Jesus' death was the ultimate Yom Kippur atonement sacrifice. Mark is telling us with a parable to reject the sins of the Jews and embrace eternal salvation of atonement in Christ.
As history this is incredibly implausible. As a myth it makes perfect sense.
There is clear evidence Mark was using the Greek version of the OT.
The sea narrative has so much complicated ring structure with cycles, phases, done similar to the Greek literature he is borrowing that it's definitely made up. Every unit of each narrative has the same literary purpose, a message about faith and the gospels. This and much more is evidence that it is a literary creation, which you would have scholars ignore??

"When you look at what Mark has to do to force the narrative to fit this elegant structure so perfectly, and the central role of unbelievable events or behaviors in nearly every one of his scenes, it is no longer possible to believe Mark is recording memory or even re-crafting historical lore. He is inventing all of this, each scene his own parable, usually with Jesus cast as the central character, illustrating symbolically something the reader needs to understand about the gospel. This is an artful literary creation, start to finish.

Dr Carrier

There is no mass of evidence for the supernatural except witness reports, and yes a blind eye is turned on those reports and they are assumed to be lies.
Dr Carrier has a good imagination and an obvious bias against the truth of anything supernatural.
Mark condenses a few years of Jesus teaching, miracles etc into a pretty short text. Is it any wonder that there are special things on every page?

Luke is not a historian. HE tries to present as a historian but is terrible at it. He presents details that Paul or no other gospel writers knew so he was definitely making things up. But as a historian he is awful compared to actual historians of the time. Luke is redacting Mark and Matthew.
Again, the Synoptic Problem is not disputed.

The Synoptic Problem | Bible.org

Any serious discussion of the Synoptic Gospels must, sooner or later, involve a discussion of the literary interrelationships among Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This is essential in order to see how an author used his sources (both for reliability’s sake as well as for redactional criticism), as...

bible.org

Luke is called a historian simply because he gets all his historical facts about the times correct, and even the census cannot be called definitely wrong.
Luke goes to the best sources he has on the life of Jesus, witnesses and those who had been there from the beginning. This it seems included the gospel of Mark (or a previously written work that both Mark and Luke quote).
Acts seems to have been a post gospel work of Luke and Acts does not include the destruction of the Temple etc or even what happened to Paul. The presumption that Acts was written before these events seems justified, as is the logical inference that the Lukan gospel was also written before these events.

Unreasonable people want to allow a supernatural claim to be true when no evidence supports it.

I just gave you evidence with the writings of Luke,,,,,,,,,,,, written before the fulfillment of the Temple destruction prophecy.

You might be reasonable but a belief in the Bible as true is not reasonable. You are not "waiting for further evidence", you have decided you want it to be true and have closed your mind off. You use one re-cycled argument which holds no weight and you ignore a massive amount of scholarship giving some nonsense reason and don't even listen to what they are saying to actually find out if it makes sense.

This is typical of fundamentalists, they don't even study biblical scholarship. When you have read experts in the field and can present a reasonable reason why Lataster is wrong about the Greek origins of Christs divinity, Ehrman, Carrier, whomever. You are not actually trying to get new information. At least be honest?

I read enough of their ideas on this forum. I have not time for more.

If you think that anecdotal argument is valid what about the testimony of Krishna?

I believe the testimony of those who saw Jesus and witness to His fulfilling OT prophecies and rising from the dead etc.
If you are referring to religious experiences in other religions, they happen and I do not deny that they happen. I don't base my faith on those experiences.

Because you haven't even read 1 book by a scholar. You see no reason because you don't even look? Why this game?

I have read books by scholars. I do see biases where you do not however and I get enough anti Bible, anti God stuff on this forum and don't want to keep filling my head with it when I have more important things to fill my head with and don't even find the time to do that.

 

[Brian2]

You are arguing against an idea of a fictional scholarship that exists in your mind.

There are many reasons why dating is what it is. But precognition as a factor is still considered on some level.


"

The Dating Game VI: Was Mark written after 70?​

In the previous post in this series, we concluded by looking briefly at James Crossley’s commendable effort to rethink the dating of Mark. If that attempt is unsuccessful, it is nevertheless worth asking how secure the standard scholarly dating is. One of the values of challenges to the consensus is that they can send us scurrying back to the texts to think again about the issues and to reexamine our reasons for coming to particular views. My own thinking on the subject has been strongly influenced by three recent studies which successfully reinforce the grounds for locating Mark in the aftermath of 70, Brian Incigneri’s The Gospel to the Romans, H. M. Roskam’s The Purpose of the Gospel of Mark in its Historical and Social Context and John Kloppenborg’s article “Evocatio Deorum and the Date of Mark”. Although these three disagree with one another on the details (e.g. the precise referent of Mark 13.14), all agree on the significance of the key text:

For many, so blatant a prediction of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem settles the question of Mark’s date – it is written in full knowledge of the disastrous events of 70. For Kloppenborg,

For Roskam,

Objections to this view are ably discussed by Incigneri (Chapter 3, "No stone Upon another"), who stresses Mark’s “over-arching concentration on the Temple” (154), the destruction of which is so important in his narrative that it is implausible that it was still standing when Mark wrote.

One of the standard arguments against the idea that Mark shows knowledge of the destruction of Jerusalem is the reassertion of the text’s own character here as prediction. To take one example among many, David A. DeSilva, in his Introduction to the New Testament, suggests that

But this kind of appeal, while popular, tends not to take seriously the literary function of predictions in narrative texts like Mark. Successful predictions play a major role in the narrative, reinforcing the authority of the one making the prediction and confirming the accuracy of the text’s theological view. It is like reading Jeremiah. It works because the reader knows that the prophecies of doom turned out to be correct. It is about “when prophecy succeeds”.

The text makes sense as Mark’s attempt to signal, in a post-70 context, that the event familiar to his readers was anticipated by Jesus, in word (13.2, 13.14) and deed (11.12-21) and in the symbolism of his death, when the veil of the temple was torn in two (15.38). The framing of the narrative requires knowledge of the destruction of the temple for its literary impact to be felt. Ken Olson has alerted me (especially in a paper read at the BNTC three years ago) to the importance of Mark 15.29-30 in this context. It is the first of the taunts levelled when Jesus is crucifie:

For the irony to work, the reader has to understand that the Temple has been destroyed; the mockers look foolish from the privileged perspective of the post-70 reader, who now sees that Jesus’ death is the moment when the temple was proleptically destroyed, the deity departing as the curtain is torn, the event of destruction interpreted through Gospel narrative and prophecy.

The point that is generally missed in the literature, especially that which comes from a fairly conservative perspective, relates to the attempt to understand the literary function of the predictions of destruction in Mark's narrative. John Kloppenborg is one of the few scholars who sees the importance of the literary function of the predictions, noting the role played by the literary motif of "evocation deorum" echoed here in Mark, e.g.

Discussions about whether the historical Jesus was or was not prescient may be interesting, but in this context they miss the point. The theme of the destruction of the temple is repeated and pervasive in Mark's narrative, and it becomes steadily more intense as the narrative unfolds. Jesus' prophecies in Mark attain their potency because "the reader understands" their reference.





"Moreover, where there are clear signs of Marcan redaction, they point away from Crossley’s thesis (for early Mark dating). In the key passage about hand-washing in Mark 7, the narrator’s framing of the material explains that hand-washing before eating food is something practised by “the Pharisees and all the Jews” (καὶ πάντες οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι). This does not set up the debate as an intra-Jewish one of the kind that Crossley’s thesis requires. The practice of hand-washing is established as something that all Jews do, and which Jesus’ disciples do not do (7.2, 5), setting up a contrast that Jesus’ words then speak into, a contrast that makes good sense on classic form-critical grounds. For Crossley, the reference here to “all the Jews” is a Marcan exaggeration, but this concedes the ground about the accuracy and precision of Mark’s knowledge of Judaism that is a major and necessary element in his case."



more parts at

NT Blog

Mark Goodacre's academic blog. Professor of New Testament and Christian Origins at Duke University, in the Religious Studies Department. Visit my <a href="http://markgoodacre.org">homepage</a>, follow me on <a href="https://twitter.com/goodacre">twitter</a>, or contact me by <a...

ntweblog.blogspot.com

Sounds like scholarly sounding reasons to say the prophecy about the Temple is a lie.

 

[joelr]

When you say it's well established, what you are really saying is that skeptic and atheist scholars assume that the stories in the gospels are not true and inspired by earlier stories.

No. There are no "skeptic" scholars. Not all Biblical historians were atheist either. Bart Ehrman was a fundamentalist Christian.

Historians look at evidence. They don't start with an assumption and then go from there, that is what apologists and fundamentalists do. Fundamentalists also seem to be the ones informing you of how they think scholarship works.

I mean, I gave you a link no? To educate yourself. Not for you?
They study the original text. Find evidence. In a very lengthy and detailed process, then write papers and get peer-review.

Percentage-wise, 97% of Mark’s Gospel is duplicated in Matthew; and 88% is found in Luke. Here is just the first argument and the rest are just outlined.

"It is quite impossible to hold that the three synoptic gospels were completely independent from each other. In the least, they had to have shared a common oral tradition. But the vast bulk of NT scholars today would argue for much more than that.3 There are four crucial arguments which virtually prove literary interdependence.

1. AGREEMENT IN WORDING​

The remarkable verbal agreement between the gospels suggests some kind of interdependence. It is popular today among laymen to think in terms of independence—and to suggest either that the writers simply recorded what happened and therefore agree, or that they were guided by the Holy Spirit into writing the same things. This explanation falls short on several fronts.

A. HISTORICAL NAIVETÉ​

This approach is historically naive for the following reasons.

First, it cannot explain the differences among the writers—unless it is assumed that verbal differences indicate different events. In that case, one would have to say that Jesus was tempted by the devil twice, that the Lord’s Supper was offered twice, and that Peter denied the Lord six to nine times! In fact, one might have to say that Christ was raised from the dead more than once if this were pressed!

Second, if Jesus spoke and taught in Aramaic (at least sometimes, if not usually), then why are these verbal agreements preserved for us in Greek? It is doubtful that each writer would have translated Jesus’ sayings in exactly the same way so often.

Third, even if Jesus spoke in Greek exclusively, how is it that not only his words but his deeds are recorded in verbal identity? There is a material difference between remembering the verbiage of what one heard and recording what one saw in identical verbiage.

Fourth, when one compares the synoptic materials with John’s Gospel, why are there so few verbal similarities? On an independent hypothesis, either John or the synoptics are wrong, or else John does not record the same events at all in the life of Jesus.

2. AGREEMENT IN ORDER.....​

3. AGREEMENT IN PARENTHETICAL MATERIAL.....​

4. LUKE’S PREFACE​

Stein puts forth eight categories of reasons why Mark ought to be considered the first gospel. Though not all of his arguments are of equal weight, both the cumulative evidence and several specific arguments are quite persuasive.

1. MARK’S SHORTNESS: THE ARGUMENT FROM LENGTH​

2. MARK’S POORER WRITING STYLE: THE ARGUMENT FROM GRAMMAR21​

A. COLLOQUIALISMS AND INCORRECT GRAMMAR22​

B. ARAMAIC EXPRESSIONS​

C. REDUNDANCY​

3. MARK’S HARDER READINGS​

4. THE LACK OF MATTHEW-LUKE AGREEMENTS AGAINST MARK:​

5. THE LACK OF MATTHEW-LUKE AGREEMENTS AGAINST MARK: THE ARGUMENT FROM ORDER​

6. LITERARY AGREEMENTS​

7. THE ARGUMENT FROM REDACTION​

A. MATTHEAN REDACTIONAL EMPHASES COMPARED WITH MARK AND LUKE​

B. MARKAN STYLISTIC FEATURES COMPARED WITH MATTHEW​

8. MARK’S MORE PRIMITIVE THEOLOGY​

9. CONCLUSION​

To sum up reasons for Markan priority, the following eight arguments have been given.

(1) The argument from length. Although Mark’s Gospel is shorter, it is not an abridgment, nor a gospel built exclusively on Matthew-Luke agreement. In fact, where its pericopae parallel Matthew and/or Luke, Mark’s story is usually the longest. The rich material left out of his gospel is inexplicable on the Griesbach hypothesis.

(2) The argument from grammar. Matthew and especially Luke use better grammar and literary style than Mark, suggesting that they used Mark, but improved on it.

(3) The argument from harder readings. On the analogy of early scribal habits, Luke and Matthew apparently removed difficulties from Mark’s Gospel in making their own. If Matthean priority is assumed, then what is inexplicable is why Mark would have introduced such difficulties.

(4) The argument from verbal agreement. There are fewer Matthew-Luke verbal agreements than any other two-gospel verbal agreements. This is difficult to explain on the Griesbach hypothesis, much easier on the Lachmann/Streeter hypothesis.

(5) The argument from agreement in order. Not only do Luke and Matthew never agree with each other when they depart from Mark’s order, but the reasons for this on the assumption of Markan priority are readily available while on Matthean priority they are not.

(6) The argument from literary agreements. Very close to the redactional argument, this point stresses that on literary analysis, it is easier to see Matthew’s use of Mark than vice versa.

(7) The argument from redaction. The redactional emphases in Mark, especially in his stylistic minutiae, are only inconsistently found in Matthew and Luke, while the opposite is not true. In other words, Mark’s style is quite consistent, while Luke and Matthew are inconsistent—when they parallel Mark, there is consistency; when they diverge, they depart from such. This suggests that Mark was the source for both Matthew and Luke.

(8) The argument from Mark’s more primitive theology. On many fronts Mark seems to display a more primitive theology than either Luke or Matthew. This suggests that Matthew and Luke used Mark, altering the text to suit their purposes.

The Synoptic Problem | Bible.org

Any serious discussion of the Synoptic Gospels must, sooner or later, involve a discussion of the literary interrelationships among Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This is essential in order to see how an author used his sources (both for reliability’s sake as well as for redactional criticism), as...

bible.org

Now Mark as the source also has strong arguments beyond this in the leading experts work Mark Goodacre


Mark itself can be shown to be using the OT, Epistles and other sources of fiction. Leaving no room for oral tradition at all.

 

[joelr]

Peter was reminding people that what he was telling them was the truth and that he had been a witness.
Why do you deny the church history of Mark being a person who got his information from Peter?

Peter was clearly responding to accusations that Jesus was a myth.

As to Mark, all of his Gospel can be broken down, he uses the OT narratives in several places, the Epistles over and over, Homer, Romulus, Greek poetry, to create narratives on Earth for Jesus. He is writing fiction. This involves many papers to demonstrate examples for each topic.


Dr Carrier on Peter,
"1 and 2 Peter are regarded as forgeries. 2 Peter most definitely was not written by the same author as 1 Peter, they are far too divergent stylistically, and therefore we can certainly place 2 Peter with all the other forgeries (in fact it's author certainly knew the Gospels and was therefore not writing independently of them), so we must therefore draw the same conclusions regarding it's value as evidence. However Peter 1 could be authentic, and if so should be included with the authentic Pauline letters, because it would be roughly the same date, and by the very man who may have founded the entire Christian religion (having received the 1st revelation if we are to trust 1 Cor 15.5).
Few scholars would agree with this position, but I personally believe it has more merit than is supposed. For the only reason given to assume it's a forgery is that Peter was an illiterate fisherman, but that is information only the Gospels produce, and they have every reason to invent or exaggerate the humble origins of the cult's founder (so as to make their appeal to the masses and the subsequent brilliance look all the more miraculous), whereas based on every precedent in history, prior probability heavily favors any religious leader and founder of the period being educated (whatever stories he then told his congregation later)...........the same trend may be evident in the treatment of Peter (as a poor person like Muhammad), especially if the Gospel authors wanted to reify the "least shall be first" doctrine of the Gospel by embodying it in the apostles themselves. It's otherwise quite unlikely that the highly educated Paul would defer to the authority of an illiterate Peter (Galations 1-2) or never mention the disparity of their educations and knowledge of scripture, in their disputes over who should be in charge.
Accordingly, I think assuming Peter was an "illiterate fisherman" requires considerable gullibility......so the evidence of Peter 1 is uncertain.

Why are you so willing to believe that any story might be the source for what Mark wrote and not Peter. I guess when you say that Peter is responding to accusations that Jesus was a myth, what you mean is that Peter was lying.

No that Peter heard people saying Jesus was a myth because savior deity stories were all over Greek religion and now a sect of Judaism had one and it is a made-up story. So people were saying this. Peter was responding to these people by saying "no, it's real".

Justin Martyr also says something similar.

I'm not willing to believe "any story" is the source for Mark. I need good evidence.
Like his use of Psalms,

Only a few verses later, we read about the rest of the crucifixion narrative and find a link (a literary source) with the Book of Psalms in the Old Testament (OT):

Mark 15.24: “They part his garments among them, casting lots upon them.”

Psalm 22:18: “They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon them.”

Mark 15.29-31: “And those who passed by blasphemed him, shaking their heads and saying, ‘…Save yourself…’ and mocked him, saying ‘He who saved others cannot save himself!’ ”

Psalm 22.7-8: “All those who see me mock me and give me lip, shaking their head, saying ‘He expected the lord to protect him, so let the lord save him if he likes.’ ”

Mark 15.34: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

Psalm 22.1: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

And no, I don't have to believe all supernatural stories in all religions are true,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Well then you have supernatural bias. Which is weird because you say this is the problem with scholars. Why don't you believe Muhammad was visited by Gabrielle and given updated messages on Judaism and Christianity? Millions believe, they have miracle stories, apologetics and so on. Theologians with PhD in Islamic theology who say it's true. Why the bias?

but do believe that Satan the deceiver is real and does deceive people into thinking they are messengers of God,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and of course I also believe some people just make up stuff or misinterpret the Bible.

Satan is the Angel of Yahweh in the OT.

So you mean the NT version, which looks exactly like the Persian devil. Even with the Revelation story and everything? The Persians who occupied Israel for 3 centuries before the Gospels were written and had a huge impact on theology. There is clear evidence of where they got the new ideas from and you still find it real?

 

[joelr]

There is no mass of evidence for the supernatural except witness reports, and yes a blind eye is turned on those reports and they are assumed to be lies.

Uh, no. No "blind eye" is turned? There are millions of people who want to PROVE supernatural things are real. Desperately. Dr Dean Radin and Lynn McTaggart (2 random authors I thought of now) write popular books on experiments and are trying very hard to demonstrate the supernatural.
James Randi offered 1 million dollars to anyone who could demonstrate anything supernatural?

No one can show it's real. Faith healers try like crazy. They give people adreneline surges which helps pain. They also kill children with cancer because they are frauds like all supernatural practicioners, enough that the American Cancer Society had to write a paper on it. Which is here:

Faith Healing

Faith healing is founded on the belief that certain people or places have the ability to cure and heal—that someone or something can eliminate disease or heal injuries through a close connection to a higher power.

web.archive.org

Dr Carrier has a good imagination and an obvious bias against the truth of anything supernatural.

No he demonstrates evidence. You are making a claim about Dr Carrier, let me ask before I make a massive criticism, which books by Dr Carrier have you read? Since you are in a position to make this statement?

Mark condenses a few years of Jesus teaching, miracles etc into a pretty short text. Is it any wonder that there are special things on every page?

HE combines the Epistles, the OT, Greek poetry, mythic language and Greek savior theology combined with Judaism.
That is it.

Luke is called a historian simply because he gets all his historical facts about the times correct, and even the census cannot be called definitely wrong.
Luke goes to the best sources he has on the life of Jesus, witnesses and those who had been there from the beginning. This it seems included the gospel of Mark (or a previously written work that both Mark and Luke quote).
Acts seems to have been a post gospel work of Luke and Acts does not include the destruction of the Temple etc or even what happened to Paul. The presumption that Acts was written before these events seems justified, as is the logical inference that the Lukan gospel was also written before these events.

Luke is the first gospel to overtly represent itself as history. He adds superficial details as local color, attempts to date some events and includes a vague preface. He creates a resurrection narrative engineered to answer skeptics of Matthew's account, a tactic that "requires" his story to be true. This count is known to be a fabrication. No prior Gospel, or Paul, had ever heard of the peculiar and convenient details that suddenly make their first appearance in Luke, such as that Peter double-checked the womans claim that the tomb was empty and handled the burial shroud, or that Jesus showed disciples his wouonds and made sure the disciples touched him and fed him food to prove he wasn't a ghost, or that resurrected Jesus actually hung out and partied with dozens of his followers for over a month before flying into the clouds of heaven.
So we know Luke is making things up to sell a fake history, for purposes of winning an argument against doubters (both with and within Christianity, as his opponents included, for example, Christians with very different ideas about the nature of the resurrection).

Despite pretense at being a historian, preface and all, Luke's methods are demonstrably nonhistorical: he is not doing research, weighing facts, checking them against independent sources, and writing down what he thinks most likely happened. He is simply producing an expanded and redacted literary hybird of a couple of previous religious novels, each itself even more obviously constructed according to literary conventions rather than historiographical. Unlike other historians from Luke's era, he never names sources, explains why we are to trust them, or how he chose what he chose to include or exclude. In fact Luke does not even declare any critical method at all, but rather insists he slavishly followed what was handed to him - yet another claim we know to be a lie (since we have 2 of his sources and can confirm he freely altered them to suit his own agenda).

I just gave you evidence with the writings of Luke,,,,,,,,,,,, written before the fulfillment of the Temple destruction prophecy.

Luke is a re-write of Mark and Matthew. See link to Synoptic problem. This has been studies by scholarship for decades by top Biblical scholars. Fundamentalists with their ears and eyes blocked who just claim an english translation "seems" consistent and is therefore all true is engaging in a delusion.

I read enough of their ideas on this forum. I have not time for more.

The truth is not for everyone.

I believe the testimony of those who saw Jesus and witness to His fulfilling OT prophecies and rising from the dead etc.
If you are referring to religious experiences in other religions, they happen and I do not deny that they happen. I don't base my faith on those experiences.

There is no testimony, there is a story by a Greek fiction writer and several redacted versions. 36 of those didn't make the cut and are considered "heretical". So 36 people wrote Gospels that were fictive. Hmmm, could Mark also be fictive? The gospel using Greek /Persian theology, written using only fictive language, intentionally using all the mythic structure? Who borrows his material from other stories ONLY?

I have read books by scholars. I do see biases where you do not however and I get enough anti Bible, anti God stuff on this forum and don't want to keep filling my head with it when I have more important things to fill my head with and don't even find the time to do that.

Name one book and name one bias. The "anti-supernatural bias" is fiction. There has to be evidence for something supernatural.
I have given reason after reason about Mark being fiction, to which you have no answer. You seem to expect all of that be swept away and what looks exactly like a myth be thought of as a prophecy because a clearly fictional character makes a prediction?

If in a scripture Zeus predicted an event and it happened a few years after his prediction would scholars say "well we thought Zeus was a myth and we thought the book came out after the prediction, BUT maybe Zeus really made the prediction, therefore he is a real God. Yeah, that's good enough, Zeus must be real and we should worship him. Forget all the other issues, like it's known mythology"

 

[joelr]

Sounds like scholarly sounding reasons to say the prophecy about the Temple is a lie.

Am I arguing with a wall?

What it sounds like is they are acknowledging the prediction but saying - literary function of predictions in narrative texts like Mark, have a clear purpose and role. It's part of the style and MAKES SENSE as a literary device. Which means it's far more probable that Mark is inventing a character and uses predictions as part of the characters arc.
What about this is hard to understand?

"But this kind of appeal (your appeal to a prophecy), while popular, tends not to take seriously the literary function of predictions in narrative texts like Mark. Successful predictions play a major role in the narrative, reinforcing the authority of the one making the prediction and confirming the accuracy of the text’s theological view. It is like reading Jeremiah. It works because the reader knows that the prophecies of doom turned out to be correct. It is about “when prophecy succeeds”."

 

[joelr]

When you say it's well established, what you are really saying is that skeptic and atheist scholars assume that the stories in the gospels are not true and inspired by earlier stories.

They look to be inspired by earlier stories. The OT, Paul, Greek stories,
For example, Greek stories -


Odyssey 9 and 10 /Mark 5:1-20

O - Odysseus and his crew sailed to the land of the Cyclopes.
M - Jesus and his disciples sailed to the region of the Gerasenes.

O - On the mountains of the Cyclopes innumerable goats grazed
M - On the mountain a large herd of swine grazed

O - Odysseus and his crew disembarked.
M - Jesus and his disciples disembarked

O - Polyphemus usually was depicted nude.
M - The Demoniac was nude.

O - Circe recognized Odysseus and asked him not to harm her. The giant asked if Odysseus intended to harm him.
M - The demoniac recognized Jesus and asked him not to harm him

O - The giant asked Odysseus his name.
M - Jesus asked the demoniac his name.

O - Odysseus answered “nobody is my name”
M - The demoniac answered “Legion is my name”

O - Odysseus subdued the giant with violence and trickeryM - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.
M - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.

O - Polyphemus the Shepard called out to his neighbors.
M - The swineherds called on their neighbors.

O - The Cyclopes came to the site asking about Polyphemus’s stolen sheep
M - The Gerasenes came to the site to find out about their swine.

O - Odysseus and crew embarked.
M - Jesus and his disciples embarked.

O - Odysseus told the giant to proclaim that he had blinded him.
M - Jesus told the healed demoniac to proclaim what God had done for him.

O - The giant asked Odysseus, now aboard ship, to come back.
M - The demoniac asked Jesus, now aboard ship, if he could be with him.

O - Odysseus refused the request.
M - Jesus refused the request

O - Odysseus and crew sailed away.
M - Jesus and disciples sailed away.

O - Odysseus awoke during a tempest in the episode immediately following the story of the Cyclops.
M - Jesus awoke during a tempest and calmed the wind and sea just before exorcising the demoniac.


Mark/Odyssey 19



1)Odyssey - Telemachus was amazed at the great light that shone on the walls of his house. Odysseus interpreted the light as the presence of Athena.

Mark - One of Jesus’s disciples was amazed at the great buildings in the Jerusalem temple, Jesus predicted that these buildings will be destroyed.


2) Odyssey- Odysseus went to Penelope and sat

Mark - Jesus went to the Mount of Olives and sat.



3) Odyssey - Penelope, in private, questioned her husband in disguise.

Mark - Four of the disciples, in private, asked him about the destruction of the temple.



4) Odyssey - Odysseus gave her signs that he had seen her husband and that he would soon return.

Mark - Jesus gave the sign when he would return.



5) Odyssey - That very day Odysseus was consulting the oak sacred to Zeus at Dodona.

Mark - The disciples should consult the fig tree.



6)Odyssey - He is near

Mark - He is near



7)Odyssey - ”..all these things will come to pass”

Mark - “..until all these things take place.”



8) Odyssey - No one in Ithaca knew if or when Odysseus would return
Mark - It is like a man on a trip…Keep watch, because you do not know when the lord of the house is coming



9) Odyssey - The suitors were prepared to kill Telemachus and Odysseus.

Mark - The chili priests and scribes were seeking some deceitful way to arrest and kill him



10)Odyssey - The suitors feared harm from the people of Ithaca.

Mark - The authorities feared a popular uprising



11)Odyssey - After giving his prophecies to Penelope, Odysseus, disguised as a beggar, sat by himself.

Mark - After giving these prophecies to four disciples, Jesus sat at table in the humble home of a leper.





12) Odyssey - Eurycleia entered with a bowl of water to wash his feet; later she anointed him generously with oil.

Mark - A woman entered with an expensive stone jar of ointment and poured the contents on Jesus’s head.



13)Odyssey - When she recognized her master, she dropped his leg into the brass vessel, spilling the water.

Mark - She broke the jar to release the oil.



14)Odyssey - She alone recognized her king.

Mark - She alone recognized Jesus soon would die.



15) Odyssey - Melantho had objected to Penlope’s generosity to the poor, not showing hospitality to Odysseus the beggar was performing a monstrous act

Mark - People objected that the ointment could have been sold and the money given to the poor. Jesus told them she had performed a beautiful act.



16)Odyssey - Eurycleia means “renowned far and wide” Penelope told her that one who welcomes strangers will have fame far and wide.

Mark - Jesus said, “wherever the good news is proclaimed throughout the world, what this woman has done also will be spoken of in her memory”.



17)Odyssey - Odysseus and Eurycleia discussed the disloyalty of some of the slaves

Mark - Then Judas Iscariot…went to the chief priests for the purpose of betraying him.


Greek school of writing, literary imitation or Mimesis and syncresis.


Jesus is like Odysseus but better. He’s like Hector in his death but he comes back and so on.





From PhD Dennis McDonald

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

They look to be inspired by earlier stories. The OT, Paul, Greek stories,
For example, Greek stories -


Odyssey 9 and 10 /Mark 5:1-20

O - Odysseus and his crew sailed to the land of the Cyclopes.
M - Jesus and his disciples sailed to the region of the Gerasenes.

O - On the mountains of the Cyclopes innumerable goats grazed
M - On the mountain a large herd of swine grazed

O - Odysseus and his crew disembarked.
M - Jesus and his disciples disembarked

O - Polyphemus usually was depicted nude.
M - The Demoniac was nude.

O - Circe recognized Odysseus and asked him not to harm her. The giant asked if Odysseus intended to harm him.
M - The demoniac recognized Jesus and asked him not to harm him

O - The giant asked Odysseus his name.
M - Jesus asked the demoniac his name.

O - Odysseus answered “nobody is my name”
M - The demoniac answered “Legion is my name”

O - Odysseus subdued the giant with violence and trickeryM - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.
M - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.

O - Polyphemus the Shepard called out to his neighbors.
M - The swineherds called on their neighbors.

O - The Cyclopes came to the site asking about Polyphemus’s stolen sheep
M - The Gerasenes came to the site to find out about their swine.

O - Odysseus and crew embarked.
M - Jesus and his disciples embarked.

O - Odysseus told the giant to proclaim that he had blinded him.
M - Jesus told the healed demoniac to proclaim what God had done for him.

O - The giant asked Odysseus, now aboard ship, to come back.
M - The demoniac asked Jesus, now aboard ship, if he could be with him.

O - Odysseus refused the request.
M - Jesus refused the request

O - Odysseus and crew sailed away.
M - Jesus and disciples sailed away.

O - Odysseus awoke during a tempest in the episode immediately following the story of the Cyclops.
M - Jesus awoke during a tempest and calmed the wind and sea just before exorcising the demoniac.


Mark/Odyssey 19



1)Odyssey - Telemachus was amazed at the great light that shone on the walls of his house. Odysseus interpreted the light as the presence of Athena.

Mark - One of Jesus’s disciples was amazed at the great buildings in the Jerusalem temple, Jesus predicted that these buildings will be destroyed.


2) Odyssey- Odysseus went to Penelope and sat

Mark - Jesus went to the Mount of Olives and sat.



3) Odyssey - Penelope, in private, questioned her husband in disguise.

Mark - Four of the disciples, in private, asked him about the destruction of the temple.



4) Odyssey - Odysseus gave her signs that he had seen her husband and that he would soon return.

Mark - Jesus gave the sign when he would return.



5) Odyssey - That very day Odysseus was consulting the oak sacred to Zeus at Dodona.

Mark - The disciples should consult the fig tree.



6)Odyssey - He is near

Mark - He is near



7)Odyssey - ”..all these things will come to pass”

Mark - “..until all these things take place.”



8) Odyssey - No one in Ithaca knew if or when Odysseus would return
Mark - It is like a man on a trip…Keep watch, because you do not know when the lord of the house is coming



9) Odyssey - The suitors were prepared to kill Telemachus and Odysseus.

Mark - The chili priests and scribes were seeking some deceitful way to arrest and kill him



10)Odyssey - The suitors feared harm from the people of Ithaca.

Mark - The authorities feared a popular uprising



11)Odyssey - After giving his prophecies to Penelope, Odysseus, disguised as a beggar, sat by himself.

Mark - After giving these prophecies to four disciples, Jesus sat at table in the humble home of a leper.





12) Odyssey - Eurycleia entered with a bowl of water to wash his feet; later she anointed him generously with oil.

Mark - A woman entered with an expensive stone jar of ointment and poured the contents on Jesus’s head.



13)Odyssey - When she recognized her master, she dropped his leg into the brass vessel, spilling the water.

Mark - She broke the jar to release the oil.



14)Odyssey - She alone recognized her king.

Mark - She alone recognized Jesus soon would die.



15) Odyssey - Melantho had objected to Penlope’s generosity to the poor, not showing hospitality to Odysseus the beggar was performing a monstrous act

Mark - People objected that the ointment could have been sold and the money given to the poor. Jesus told them she had performed a beautiful act.



16)Odyssey - Eurycleia means “renowned far and wide” Penelope told her that one who welcomes strangers will have fame far and wide.

Mark - Jesus said, “wherever the good news is proclaimed throughout the world, what this woman has done also will be spoken of in her memory”.



17)Odyssey - Odysseus and Eurycleia discussed the disloyalty of some of the slaves

Mark - Then Judas Iscariot…went to the chief priests for the purpose of betraying him.


Greek school of writing, literary imitation or Mimesis and syncresis.


Jesus is like Odysseus but better. He’s like Hector in his death but he comes back and so on.





From PhD Dennis McDonald

Lol, very imaginative...and dumb. McDonald must've found his alleged doctorate at the bottom of a cereal box.

 

[Brian2]

They look to be inspired by earlier stories. The OT, Paul, Greek stories,
For example, Greek stories -


Odyssey 9 and 10 /Mark 5:1-20

O - Odysseus and his crew sailed to the land of the Cyclopes.
M - Jesus and his disciples sailed to the region of the Gerasenes.

O - On the mountains of the Cyclopes innumerable goats grazed
M - On the mountain a large herd of swine grazed

O - Odysseus and his crew disembarked.
M - Jesus and his disciples disembarked

O - Polyphemus usually was depicted nude.
M - The Demoniac was nude.

O - Circe recognized Odysseus and asked him not to harm her. The giant asked if Odysseus intended to harm him.
M - The demoniac recognized Jesus and asked him not to harm him

O - The giant asked Odysseus his name.
M - Jesus asked the demoniac his name.

O - Odysseus answered “nobody is my name”
M - The demoniac answered “Legion is my name”

O - Odysseus subdued the giant with violence and trickeryM - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.
M - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.

O - Polyphemus the Shepard called out to his neighbors.
M - The swineherds called on their neighbors.

O - The Cyclopes came to the site asking about Polyphemus’s stolen sheep
M - The Gerasenes came to the site to find out about their swine.

O - Odysseus and crew embarked.
M - Jesus and his disciples embarked.

O - Odysseus told the giant to proclaim that he had blinded him.
M - Jesus told the healed demoniac to proclaim what God had done for him.

O - The giant asked Odysseus, now aboard ship, to come back.
M - The demoniac asked Jesus, now aboard ship, if he could be with him.

O - Odysseus refused the request.
M - Jesus refused the request

O - Odysseus and crew sailed away.
M - Jesus and disciples sailed away.

O - Odysseus awoke during a tempest in the episode immediately following the story of the Cyclops.
M - Jesus awoke during a tempest and calmed the wind and sea just before exorcising the demoniac.

If you compare the stories in the links below they are nothing alike and Dennis Mc Donald seems to have made changes to the stories to get them to look more alike.

The Odyssey Book 9 Summary & Analysis | SparkNotes

A summary of Book 9 in Homer's The Odyssey. Learn exactly what happened in this chapter, scene, or section of The Odyssey and what it means. Perfect for acing essays, tests, and quizzes, as well as for writing lesson plans.

www.sparknotes.com

Bible Gateway passage: Mark 5:1-20 - New International Version

Jesus Restores a Demon-Possessed Man - They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an impure spirit came from the tombs to meet him. This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain. For he had often...

www.biblegateway.com

Mark/Odyssey 19



1)Odyssey - Telemachus was amazed at the great light that shone on the walls of his house. Odysseus interpreted the light as the presence of Athena.

Mark - One of Jesus’s disciples was amazed at the great buildings in the Jerusalem temple, Jesus predicted that these buildings will be destroyed.


2) Odyssey- Odysseus went to Penelope and sat

Mark - Jesus went to the Mount of Olives and sat.



3) Odyssey - Penelope, in private, questioned her husband in disguise.

Mark - Four of the disciples, in private, asked him about the destruction of the temple.



4) Odyssey - Odysseus gave her signs that he had seen her husband and that he would soon return.

Mark - Jesus gave the sign when he would return.



5) Odyssey - That very day Odysseus was consulting the oak sacred to Zeus at Dodona.

Mark - The disciples should consult the fig tree.



6)Odyssey - He is near

Mark - He is near



7)Odyssey - ”..all these things will come to pass”

Mark - “..until all these things take place.”



8) Odyssey - No one in Ithaca knew if or when Odysseus would return
Mark - It is like a man on a trip…Keep watch, because you do not know when the lord of the house is coming



9) Odyssey - The suitors were prepared to kill Telemachus and Odysseus.

Mark - The chili priests and scribes were seeking some deceitful way to arrest and kill him



10)Odyssey - The suitors feared harm from the people of Ithaca.

Mark - The authorities feared a popular uprising



11)Odyssey - After giving his prophecies to Penelope, Odysseus, disguised as a beggar, sat by himself.

Mark - After giving these prophecies to four disciples, Jesus sat at table in the humble home of a leper.





12) Odyssey - Eurycleia entered with a bowl of water to wash his feet; later she anointed him generously with oil.

Mark - A woman entered with an expensive stone jar of ointment and poured the contents on Jesus’s head.



13)Odyssey - When she recognized her master, she dropped his leg into the brass vessel, spilling the water.

Mark - She broke the jar to release the oil.



14)Odyssey - She alone recognized her king.

Mark - She alone recognized Jesus soon would die.



15) Odyssey - Melantho had objected to Penlope’s generosity to the poor, not showing hospitality to Odysseus the beggar was performing a monstrous act

Mark - People objected that the ointment could have been sold and the money given to the poor. Jesus told them she had performed a beautiful act.



16)Odyssey - Eurycleia means “renowned far and wide” Penelope told her that one who welcomes strangers will have fame far and wide.

Mark - Jesus said, “wherever the good news is proclaimed throughout the world, what this woman has done also will be spoken of in her memory”.



17)Odyssey - Odysseus and Eurycleia discussed the disloyalty of some of the slaves

Mark - Then Judas Iscariot…went to the chief priests for the purpose of betraying him.


Greek school of writing, literary imitation or Mimesis and syncresis.


Jesus is like Odysseus but better. He’s like Hector in his death but he comes back and so on.


From PhD Dennis McDonald

Again if you compare the stories there is no resemblance at all.

The Odyssey Book 19 Summary & Analysis | LitCharts

Need help with Book 19 in Homer's The Odyssey? Check out our revolutionary side-by-side summary and analysis.

www.litcharts.com

Bible Gateway passage: Mark 13 - New International Version

The Destruction of the Temple and Signs of the End Times - As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!” “Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another...

www.biblegateway.com

With both of your comparisons McDonald should get a prize for creativity.

 

[PearlSeeker]

They look to be inspired by earlier stories. The OT, Paul, Greek stories,
For example, Greek stories -


Odyssey 9 and 10 /Mark 5:1-20

O - Odysseus and his crew sailed to the land of the Cyclopes.
M - Jesus and his disciples sailed to the region of the Gerasenes.

O - On the mountains of the Cyclopes innumerable goats grazed
M - On the mountain a large herd of swine grazed

O - Odysseus and his crew disembarked.
M - Jesus and his disciples disembarked

O - Polyphemus usually was depicted nude.
M - The Demoniac was nude.

O - Circe recognized Odysseus and asked him not to harm her. The giant asked if Odysseus intended to harm him.
M - The demoniac recognized Jesus and asked him not to harm him

O - The giant asked Odysseus his name.
M - Jesus asked the demoniac his name.

O - Odysseus answered “nobody is my name”
M - The demoniac answered “Legion is my name”

O - Odysseus subdued the giant with violence and trickeryM - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.
M - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.

O - Polyphemus the Shepard called out to his neighbors.
M - The swineherds called on their neighbors.

O - The Cyclopes came to the site asking about Polyphemus’s stolen sheep
M - The Gerasenes came to the site to find out about their swine.

O - Odysseus and crew embarked.
M - Jesus and his disciples embarked.

O - Odysseus told the giant to proclaim that he had blinded him.
M - Jesus told the healed demoniac to proclaim what God had done for him.

O - The giant asked Odysseus, now aboard ship, to come back.
M - The demoniac asked Jesus, now aboard ship, if he could be with him.

O - Odysseus refused the request.
M - Jesus refused the request

O - Odysseus and crew sailed away.
M - Jesus and disciples sailed away.

O - Odysseus awoke during a tempest in the episode immediately following the story of the Cyclops.
M - Jesus awoke during a tempest and calmed the wind and sea just before exorcising the demoniac.


Mark/Odyssey 19



1)Odyssey - Telemachus was amazed at the great light that shone on the walls of his house. Odysseus interpreted the light as the presence of Athena.

Mark - One of Jesus’s disciples was amazed at the great buildings in the Jerusalem temple, Jesus predicted that these buildings will be destroyed.


2) Odyssey- Odysseus went to Penelope and sat

Mark - Jesus went to the Mount of Olives and sat.



3) Odyssey - Penelope, in private, questioned her husband in disguise.

Mark - Four of the disciples, in private, asked him about the destruction of the temple.



4) Odyssey - Odysseus gave her signs that he had seen her husband and that he would soon return.

Mark - Jesus gave the sign when he would return.



5) Odyssey - That very day Odysseus was consulting the oak sacred to Zeus at Dodona.

Mark - The disciples should consult the fig tree.



6)Odyssey - He is near

Mark - He is near



7)Odyssey - ”..all these things will come to pass”

Mark - “..until all these things take place.”



8) Odyssey - No one in Ithaca knew if or when Odysseus would return
Mark - It is like a man on a trip…Keep watch, because you do not know when the lord of the house is coming



9) Odyssey - The suitors were prepared to kill Telemachus and Odysseus.

Mark - The chili priests and scribes were seeking some deceitful way to arrest and kill him



10)Odyssey - The suitors feared harm from the people of Ithaca.

Mark - The authorities feared a popular uprising



11)Odyssey - After giving his prophecies to Penelope, Odysseus, disguised as a beggar, sat by himself.

Mark - After giving these prophecies to four disciples, Jesus sat at table in the humble home of a leper.





12) Odyssey - Eurycleia entered with a bowl of water to wash his feet; later she anointed him generously with oil.

Mark - A woman entered with an expensive stone jar of ointment and poured the contents on Jesus’s head.



13)Odyssey - When she recognized her master, she dropped his leg into the brass vessel, spilling the water.

Mark - She broke the jar to release the oil.



14)Odyssey - She alone recognized her king.

Mark - She alone recognized Jesus soon would die.



15) Odyssey - Melantho had objected to Penlope’s generosity to the poor, not showing hospitality to Odysseus the beggar was performing a monstrous act

Mark - People objected that the ointment could have been sold and the money given to the poor. Jesus told them she had performed a beautiful act.



16)Odyssey - Eurycleia means “renowned far and wide” Penelope told her that one who welcomes strangers will have fame far and wide.

Mark - Jesus said, “wherever the good news is proclaimed throughout the world, what this woman has done also will be spoken of in her memory”.



17)Odyssey - Odysseus and Eurycleia discussed the disloyalty of some of the slaves

Mark - Then Judas Iscariot…went to the chief priests for the purpose of betraying him.


Greek school of writing, literary imitation or Mimesis and syncresis.


Jesus is like Odysseus but better. He’s like Hector in his death but he comes back and so on.





From PhD Dennis McDonald

This reminds me of the crazy theory that Pink Floyd's The Dark Side of the Moon was designed to play (as alternate soundtrack) synchronously with The Wizard of Oz from start to finish.

 

[joelr]

Lol, very imaginative...and dumb. McDonald must've found his alleged doctorate at the bottom of a cereal box.

Your comment is "dumb"? And you comment on the imagination of McDonald?

Maybe explain why you disagree? Mark is known in scholarship to be using the Epistles and OT to create narratives, there are many papers in journals about this. As well as mythical language (ring structure, chiasmus, and several more) and Jesus scores an almost perfect score on the Rank- Ragalin mythotype score. So this isn't history but myth making. So a Greek writer using Greek stories isn't far fetched and they do contain similarities.
You didn't object, you just said "dumb". What is dumb, that more people don't see the connections? That it's obvious myths are going to borrow from other myths?

Dr Carrier disagrees with McDonald on some points, they have a written debate here:

Is Jesus Wholly or Only Partly a Myth? The Carrier-MacDonald Exchangehttps://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/16580​

McDonald has several books on the subject,

https://www.amazon.com/Gospels-Homer-Imitations-Luke-Acts-Literature/dp/1442230525/ref=sr_1_4?qid=1680770210&refinements=p_27%3ADennis+R.+MacDonald&s=books&sr=1-4&ufe=app_do%3Aamzn1.fos.006c50ae-5d4c-4777-9bc0-4513d670b6bc

If you find his PhD to be comparable to a cereal prize could you explain what about his methodology you find incorrect? To make such a comment you must have read at least one of his books, you cannot make a judgment based on 2 short lists of comparisons?

He was on a podcast with another scholar and they went over some of the material. Maybe you can point out what you find to be in error there?

 

[joelr]

If you compare the stories in the links below they are nothing alike and Dennis Mc Donald seems to have made changes to the stories to get them to look more alike.

The Odyssey Book 9 Summary & Analysis | SparkNotes

A summary of Book 9 in Homer's The Odyssey. Learn exactly what happened in this chapter, scene, or section of The Odyssey and what it means. Perfect for acing essays, tests, and quizzes, as well as for writing lesson plans.

www.sparknotes.com

Bible Gateway passage: Mark 5:1-20 - New International Version

Jesus Restores a Demon-Possessed Man - They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an impure spirit came from the tombs to meet him. This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain. For he had often...

www.biblegateway.com

What are you talking about? You linked to Mark 5:1-20


O - Odysseus subdued the giant with violence and trickeryM -
M - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.

That is exactly what Jesus did?
"He gave them permission, and the impure spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned."

In the Odysseus story Circe's magic turned Odysseus's soldiers into swine.
Don't read the cliff-notes version?

They discuss McDonalds work here"

these parallels are real?

Again if you compare the stories there is no resemblance at all.

The Odyssey Book 19 Summary & Analysis | LitCharts

Need help with Book 19 in Homer's The Odyssey? Check out our revolutionary side-by-side summary and analysis.

www.litcharts.com

Bible Gateway passage: Mark 13 - New International Version

The Destruction of the Temple and Signs of the End Times - As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!” “Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another...

www.biblegateway.com

With both of your comparisons McDonald should get a prize for creativity.

The creativity prize should go to the person thinking cliff-notes are the story?
2 scholars who understand the Greek works go over these similarities, at 45:53 they cover Mark 5:1-20 and Odyssey 9 and 10.

It's in the actual story, in the original Greek and probably the English translation. You think 2 scholars don't know how to read the Odyssey?

Why would you read the cliff-notes?

 

[joelr]

This reminds me of the crazy theory that Pink Floyd's The Dark Side of the Moon was designed to play (as alternate soundtrack) synchronously with The Wizard of Oz from start to finish.

Dennis McDonald's work is not completely accepted. What is accepted is that Mark used a variety of sources and fictive literary structure to construct his Gospel.
Much of the sources are re-workings of OT narratives - Kings, Elijah, Psalms,
explained here, taken from Dr Carriers work and other journal papers:

The Gospels as Allegorical Myth, Part I of 4: Mark

Previously, I’ve written about the historicity of Jesus, and mentioned how the most recent analysis, in Richard Carrier’s On the Historicity of Jesus (the first comprehensive, academica…

lagevondissen.wordpress.com

and Mark's extensive use of the Epistles to create Earthly narratives for Jesus:

Mark's Use of Paul's Epistles • Richard Carrier Blogs

Many studies have argued the Gospel that came to be labeled “according to Mark” based some of its content on the Epistles of Paul. Here I’ll discuss this scholarship and its evidence. “Mark” is of course the earliest Gospel we have any surviving text or even any real evidence of. It was then...

www.richardcarrier.info

here Carrier is sourcing other historians who specialize in this -
The principal works to consult on this (all of which from peer reviewed academic presses) are:

• Michael Bird & Joel Willitts, Paul and the Gospels: Christologies, Conflicts and Convergences (T&T Clark 2011)
• David Oliver Smith, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul: The Influence of the Epistles on the Synoptic Gospels (Resource 2011)
• Tom Dykstra, Mark: Canonizer of Paul (OCABS 2012)
• Oda Wischmeyer & David Sim, eds., Paul and Mark: Two Authors at the Beginnings of Christianity (de Gruyter 2014)
• Eve-Marie Becker et al., Mark and Paul: For and Against Pauline Influence on Mark (de Gruyter 2014)
• Thomas Nelligan, The Quest for Mark’s Sources: An Exploration of the Case for Mark’s Use of First Corinthians (Pickwick 2015)

But McDonalds parallels are legit, those listed were just 2 small lists covered on this podcast with another scholar

He did a written debate with Carrier on aspects they disagree with as well.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Furthermore, all the evidence was there for everyone to investigate. Legends take root in foreign lands or centuries after the event. Discrediting such legends is difficult since the facts are hard to verify

How old are you? You are from the US, right?

I ask because you seem completely unaware of how the "Elvis is alive" legend sprang up and took hold immediately after his death.

 

[Brian2]

What are you talking about? You linked to Mark 5:1-20


O - Odysseus subdued the giant with violence and trickeryM -
M - Jesus subdued about 2000 demons with divine power and sent them into the swine and then drove the swine into the lake.

That is exactly what Jesus did?
"He gave them permission, and the impure spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned."

In the Odysseus story Circe's magic turned Odysseus's soldiers into swine.
Don't read the cliff-notes version?

They discuss McDonalds work here"

these parallels are real?

I missed out on book 10 and notice it is nothing like the story in Mark's Gospel either.

The Odyssey Books 10 & 11 Summary & Analysis | SparkNotes

A summary of Books 10 & 11 in Homer's The Odyssey. Learn exactly what happened in this chapter, scene, or section of The Odyssey and what it means. Perfect for acing essays, tests, and quizzes, as well as for writing lesson plans.

www.sparknotes.com

Is the full story similar to the story in Mark's Gospel and the condensed version is not?

The creativity prize should go to the person thinking cliff-notes are the story?
2 scholars who understand the Greek works go over these similarities, at 45:53 they cover Mark 5:1-20 and Odyssey 9 and 10.

It's in the actual story, in the original Greek and probably the English translation. You think 2 scholars don't know how to read the Odyssey?

Why would you read the cliff-notes?

I read the short version to find out the story without spending hours doing it.
McDonald and Carrier are obviously more talented than I am at seeing similarities between stories and concluding that the Gospel of Mark was copied from Greek myths, and you must also be more talented. But you have to remember that I am biased about the source of Mark's work and that probably blinds me to what you are saying. To me the bits and pieces that are picked out of the stories and paralleled with Mark might do that to an extent but the overall stories don't resemble Mark at all so it is cherry picking, like those people who saw that Paul had died in the Sgt Pepper's album cover.

 

[Brian2]

How old are you? You are from the US, right?

I ask because you seem completely unaware of how the "Elvis is alive" legend sprang up and took hold immediately after his death.

The parallel is not there between Elvis and Jesus. You have long conversations with the risen Jesus to explain for a start.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The parallel is not there between Elvis and Jesus. You have long conversations with the risen Jesus to explain for a start.

You think there are no stories of the risen Elvis having long conversations with people?

 

[Brian2]

Am I arguing with a wall?

What it sounds like is they are acknowledging the prediction but saying - literary function of predictions in narrative texts like Mark, have a clear purpose and role. It's part of the style and MAKES SENSE as a literary device. Which means it's far more probable that Mark is inventing a character and uses predictions as part of the characters arc.
What about this is hard to understand?

"But this kind of appeal (your appeal to a prophecy), while popular, tends not to take seriously the literary function of predictions in narrative texts like Mark. Successful predictions play a major role in the narrative, reinforcing the authority of the one making the prediction and confirming the accuracy of the text’s theological view. It is like reading Jeremiah. It works because the reader knows that the prophecies of doom turned out to be correct. It is about “when prophecy succeeds”."

Sounds like you believe any scholarship which is supposed to show that the Gospels are made up.
We have something in common. I tend to not believe that sort of scholarship.
And as you pointed out, you believe the same about any prophecy in the Bible, they were made up after the event.
Scholarship like that does not show that prophecies were made up after the event however, all it does is make that skeptical idea sound scholarly.
Why would people make up a prophecy after the event? To make it look as if the prophet is a real prophet. Wow, never would have guessed it. That's the same thing I have been hearing for many years and now it is the scholarly pov.
There are many scholarly pov about what is in the Bible which are wrong imo. I don't believe them just because they are the opinion of scholars.

 

[Brian2]

You think there are no stories of the risen Elvis having long conversations with people?

With groups of people?
I don't know, are there?