Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Not to study texts written in the late 1st and early 2nd century AD.
Na, und?
No, the cumulative evidence is strong. There is no big if. Even your link supports this.
Someone or some people wrote the works attributed to Homer, and it is those works that Mark would have used.
And no, you are using tradition invented by people known to invent things (like 40 gospels). I am using evidence we have no reason to doubt. I am not doing what you are doing.
No, you need to a time machine to know if the authors of the gospels used oral tradition. Otherwise you have no evidence they did. Whereas we do have the evidence Mark use the OT. All those alleged prophecies is also the evidence gospel Jesus was invented out of the OT. The more prophecies you claim to have, the more invented your Jesus becomes.
Ugg, ug and King Tut are STILL irrelevant to the source for the gospels.
Err, no. People copied texts and then sent them all across the Roman empire. We even have 2nd century AD Christians complaining about these texts being changed as they were copied.
Also applies to YOUR ARGUMENTS, so we can dismiss everything you say. Also, the fact that you had to quote PART of what I wrote is dishonest.
Again, ' that governments lie is irrelevant to many things, including what I had for my midday meal, and the source the unknown author of mark used for his fictional allegory of Paul's teachings'. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Not to study texts written in the late 1st and early 2nd century AD.
|
To make a comparison? Which you said "to compare them is to learn Koine Greek".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Na, und?
|
Centuries of oral traditions prior to and during the evolution of language spoken, then written.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Someone or some people wrote the works attributed to Homer, and it is those works that Mark would have used.
And no, you are using tradition invented by people known to invent things (like 40 gospels). I am using evidence we have no reason to doubt. I am not doing what you are doing.
|
Correlation does not imply causation. [per that i placed in bold of your post]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
No, you need to a time machine to know if the authors of the gospels used oral tradition. Otherwise you have no evidence they did. Whereas we do have the evidence Mark use the OT. All those alleged prophecies is also the evidence gospel Jesus was invented out of the OT. The more prophecies you claim to have, the more invented your Jesus becomes.
Ugg, ug and King Tut are STILL irrelevant to the source for the gospels.
|
Wasted effort by anthropologist I see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Also applies to YOUR ARGUMENTS, so we can dismiss everything you say. Also, the fact that you had to quote PART of what I wrote is dishonest.
Again, 'that governments lie is irrelevant to many things, including what I had for my midday meal, and the source the unknown author of mark used for his fictional allegory of Paul's teachings'.
|
Your midday meal was irrelevant and you use of your midday meal was irrelevant and I replied to the part that was --- calling me dishonest is a way to not properly address what I wrote. Mark's use of Paul's teachings? Some people's opinions agree with you while others do not. Again, correlation does not imply causation, which is the same as what you are telling me about oral traditions and the gospels and that one doesn't mean the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
You said 'Constantine established freedom of religion, which was a first'. This is false, the Romans and Greeks also had freedom of religion.
|
Constantine I was a Roman emperor in 312 and the sole Roman emperor in 324 and he established freedom of religion during his reign. If he was not the first to do so, then who was?
Christ was the first advocate for the separation of church and state, 'give to Caesar that which is Caesar; give to God that which is God's'. The Church was running the government in the creation of laws used to govern the citizens. imo, if you take Him out of the story of our beginnings, then you take out the separation of church and state, which didn't happen until centuries later and for some countries, it still hasn't happened yet.