Is the "crcifixion" just a metaphor?

[oldbadger]

You have no idea where this source is coming from.


Ill give you a small hint, Israel.

You took it word for word from wiki.

Don't give me the run around with Harris lines, when you did not eve know about them. The archeologist and scholars behind this claim it was from starvation.

Post it up...... Let's see their reports.

You don't get to discount professors because you feel like it.

But you do...... you dismiss them whebever it suits.

Post up the archaeologists' and scholars' findings and reports upon the skeletons found in their excavations, where they were found, what time period Carbon dating places them within, the lot. Let's see what you've got.

I must go to work.......

 

[oldbadger]

Galilean Fishing Economy

is a start.

Already got all of that.......
But thanks anyway...

 

[oldbadger]

What I have learned about older people [too old] is that they are stubborn and set in their ways, and in this field, one needs to be open to change as new findings can have drastic changes on conclusions.


I cant stand debating old people, because there is no debate, no matter how well the empirical evidence may be, if one is set in his ways, there is no to little reasoning that will take place. Old people who are YEC are about the worst and make a great example of closed minds.


I do like learning from old people who have the right attitude, but I am finding less and less of these kinds.


Don't take it personal its not directed at you, but I need to vent from frustration. You did bring it up.

..... so you refer to them as 'Boy'....?

So how old are you? I will guess that you are in your early fifties.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Think so? Perhaps you'd be so kind to demonstrate what you've understood of me.

I'd rather talk about the crucifixion, and I'm tired of the ad hominems.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I would like to ask you about the crucifixion.
Is the "crucifixion" just a metaphor?
Is Jesus' story in the Gospels just a metaphor?

I think the crucifixion is a major element in a theology which already existed when Mark backwrote the 30CE Jerusalem story.

 

[Prophet]

I'd rather talk about the crucifixion, and I'm tired of the ad hominems.

You say you're tired of the ad hominem attacks, but further examination reveals that you really don't have a problem with ad hominem attacks... you just have a problem with attacks made against you. When you are the one accused of issuing ad hominem, you thoughtlessly excuse your slander. When you are asked for support that would make your attacks legitimate, you'd rather get back to the original subject.

You called me a slanderer. Either support your own attack upon me, or you are both a slanderer and a hypocrite.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

You say you're tired of the ad hominem attacks, but further examination reveals that you really don't have a problem with ad hominem attacks... you just have a problem with attacks made against you. When you are the one accused of issuing ad hominem, you thoughtlessly excuse your slander. When you are asked for support that would make your attacks legitimate, you'd rather get back to the original subject.

You called me a slanderer. Either support your own attack upon me, or you are both a slanderer and a hypocrite.

So do you want to talk about the crucifixion or not?

I'll be happy to do that if you'd like.

 

[oldbadger]

I think the crucifixion is a major element in a theology which already existed when Mark backwrote the 30CE Jerusalem story.

So you deny that Jesus was crucified as described in the Gospels?
I think you deny that Jesus existed as described in the gospels.....

I can live with your beliefs, that's much easier than reading the waffle that you surround your views with.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

So you deny that Jesus was crucified as described in the Gospels?
I think you deny that Jesus existed as described in the gospels.....

You apparently claim to have read my 2 HJ threads in the One-on-One forum, and you still don't have any grip on my view of the historical Jesus?

We are people with hypotheses about the HJ, oldbadger. I can recite at least the broad outlines of your hypothesis. I wish you could remember mine.

Yours: A healer about whom much of gMark is historically accurate. Yes?

 

[outhouse]

You took it word for word from wiki.

....

That was just the definition of Harris lines, because I figured you did not know about them.

I knew you did not know about the peasant children all having them. These are from first century villages similar to Nazareth.

Not Sepphoris and Tiberius that do not show these lines from the upper class Hellenistic children.

 

[Prophet]

So do you want to talk about the crucifixion or not?

I'll be happy to do that if you'd like.

I was discussing the crucifixion and then was accused of ad hominem because you were unhappy with how I characterized the defense you use for your theory. While fantome and oldbadger bring up piece after piece of evidence which bring the probability of your theory being correct down, I've not seen you demonstrate any ability on your part to damage their theories. Your packaged response seems to be to show why your case is still possible. An effective response would be to show why your case is PROBABLE. Do you know the difference? "Possible" is not relevant to a debate about ancient history. "Probable" is.

Is it any wonder I have no desire to seek out your one-on-ones?

 

[Prophet]

I think the crucifixion is a major element in a theology which already existed when Mark backwrote the 30CE Jerusalem story.

I think baseless speculation is of little worth.

 

[Desert Snake]

I think baseless speculation is of little worth.

Yeah, agreed. And all the narrative points to Jesus either surviving the cross or resurrection, otherwise it's speculation.

 

[oldbadger]

You apparently claim to have read my 2 HJ threads in the One-on-One forum, and you still don't have any grip on my view of the historical Jesus?

We are people with hypotheses about the HJ, oldbadger. I can recite at least the broad outlines of your hypothesis. I wish you could remember mine.

Yours: A healer about whom much of gMark is historically accurate. Yes?

Your one-on-one threads were a total defeat for you...... embarrassing, really.

I can outline yours. ..... Jesus of Nazareth, his baptism and his mission are fictional. Gosh..... that was easy.

 

[oldbadger]

That was just the definition of Harris lines, because I figured you did not know about them.

I knew you did not know about the peasant children all having them. These are from first century villages similar to Nazareth.

Where? Where? You did not mention.... where?

 

[oldbadger]

Is it any wonder I have no desire to seek out your one-on-ones?

A certain member got slaughtered and gave them up.

 

[oldbadger]

You apparently claim to have read my 2 HJ threads in the One-on-One forum,

I took part in one.........! Your case was pathetic.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I took part in one.........! Your case was pathetic.

You took part in my one-on-one thread? Really? How did you do that without me noticing you?

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

Your one-on-one threads were a total defeat for you...... embarrassing, really.

Apparently you're confused about one-on-one threads -- thinking that you partipated in them -- so I doubt that you actually read them.

Especially since you also seem so confused about who defeated whom.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I was discussing the crucifixion and then was accused of ad hominem...

No, that's not true. You were sidetracked into ad hominem and still can't seem to find your way back to the actual issue.

So are you ready to engage a discussion of the crucifixion?