If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paul was talking about Jesus being God around 50 AD, 20 years after Jesus’ death. In response to the claim above that somebody this up around 300AD.

So if Jesus is God, then when he says in Mark "Father why hast thou forsaken me?" he's talking to himself?

Jesus was quoting verbatim from Psalm 22 (look it up) which his listeners would have recognized as a lament about man’s condition. Jews at the time memorized long passages of the Bible.

And with that I’m done here. The thread topic has been answered. There was a thread about Jesus’ divinity just a week or two ago, and you undoubtedly participated heavily on it. What with bebopping from Jesus’ new covenant to a failed attempt to start a discussion on what it means for Jesus to “fulfill” the law and the prophets (also the subject of a very recent thread you undoubtedly participated on), it’s clear you want to waste our time.

Bye. You won’t be missed and your YAGE falls flat.

So your latest gotcha question was a fail and now you’re onto ad hominems. No wonder people don’t want to engage with you.

I thought you were leaving!

I'm a DP, I just hate YAGEs, like anyone cares. Stay and have a discussion or go do something else, your ego is so big that you think it will matter if you announce your departure? "Oh noes, we better change our ways or 09/22/2022 18:58 will leave, how will this discussion survive without them!"

Get over yourself.

People must YAGE on you a lot. No mystery why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gone so far off the rails. Seems like the like the people who want to debate Jesus’ divinity or what “fulfill the law” means need to start their own threads.

Yup.

There is zero evidence of his divinity.

There is some evidence that he “most likely” existed in history.

I just don't see how the two issues can be separated. If the OP asks where did Christian theology come from? it has to assume the historical figure was divine or there wouldn't be any "theology." No one builds a religion about some itinerant preacher who spoke in nice parables and beatitudes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paul was talking about Jesus being God around 50 AD, 20 years after Jesus’ death. In response to the claim above that somebody this up around 300AD.

So if Jesus is God, then when he says in Mark "Father why hast thou forsaken me?" he's talking to himself?

Jesus was quoting verbatim from Psalm 22 (look it up) which his listeners would have recognized as a lament about man’s condition. Jews at the time memorized long passages of the Bible.

And with that I’m done here. The thread topic has been answered. There was a thread about Jesus’ divinity just a week or two ago, and you undoubtedly participated heavily on it. What with bebopping from Jesus’ new covenant to a failed attempt to start a discussion on what it means for Jesus to “fulfill” the law and the prophets (also the subject of a very recent thread you undoubtedly participated on), it’s clear you want to waste our time.

Bye. You won’t be missed and your YAGE falls flat.

So your latest gotcha question was a fail and now you’re onto ad hominems. No wonder people don’t want to engage with you.

I thought you were leaving!

I'm a DP, I just hate YAGEs, like anyone cares. Stay and have a discussion or go do something else, your ego is so big that you think it will matter if you announce your departure? "Oh noes, we better change our ways or 09/22/2022 18:58 will leave, how will this discussion survive without them!"

Get over yourself.

People must YAGE on you a lot. No mystery why.

Lol you are funny. This isn't a private conversation, a person YAGEs on a forum, not on an individual person. And you can't even keep to the word of your YAGE promise! I think that smoke you smell is the burn...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paul was talking about Jesus being God around 50 AD, 20 years after Jesus’ death. In response to the claim above that somebody this up around 300AD.

So if Jesus is God, then when he says in Mark "Father why hast thou forsaken me?" he's talking to himself?

Jesus was quoting verbatim from Psalm 22 (look it up) which his listeners would have recognized as a lament about man’s condition. Jews at the time memorized long passages of the Bible.

And with that I’m done here. The thread topic has been answered. There was a thread about Jesus’ divinity just a week or two ago, and you undoubtedly participated heavily on it. What with bebopping from Jesus’ new covenant to a failed attempt to start a discussion on what it means for Jesus to “fulfill” the law and the prophets (also the subject of a very recent thread you undoubtedly participated on), it’s clear you want to waste our time.

But why? The fact he was quoting Psalm 22 doesn't begin to answer the question of why he would quote that on the cross -- unless he was asking his Father why are you forsaking me? I think he was questioning if the kingdom of God was really at hand after all. It is an indication he never believed he was God, and that was all invented afterwards by some of his followers. Let's be clear: Judaism is a monotheistic religion and the Jewish Christian followers couldn't have two gods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gone so far off the rails. Seems like the like the people who want to debate Jesus’ divinity or what “fulfill the law” means need to start their own threads.

Yup.

There is zero evidence of his divinity.

There is some evidence that he “most likely” existed in history.

I just don't see how the two issues can be separated. If the OP asks where did Christian theology come from? it has to assume the historical figure was divine or there wouldn't be any "theology." No one builds a religion about some itinerant preacher who spoke in nice parables and beatitudes.

You mean, like Joseph Smith?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gone so far off the rails. Seems like the like the people who want to debate Jesus’ divinity or what “fulfill the law” means need to start their own threads.

Yup.

There is zero evidence of his divinity.

There is some evidence that he “most likely” existed in history.

I just don't see how the two issues can be separated. If the OP asks where did Christian theology come from? it has to assume the historical figure was divine or there wouldn't be any "theology." No one builds a religion about some itinerant preacher who spoke in nice parables and beatitudes.

You mean, like Joseph Smith?

explain please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paul was talking about Jesus being God around 50 AD, 20 years after Jesus’ death. In response to the claim above that somebody this up around 300AD.

So if Jesus is God, then when he says in Mark "Father why hast thou forsaken me?" he's talking to himself?

Jesus was quoting verbatim from Psalm 22 (look it up) which his listeners would have recognized as a lament about man’s condition. Jews at the time memorized long passages of the Bible.

And with that I’m done here. The thread topic has been answered. There was a thread about Jesus’ divinity just a week or two ago, and you undoubtedly participated heavily on it. What with bebopping from Jesus’ new covenant to a failed attempt to start a discussion on what it means for Jesus to “fulfill” the law and the prophets (also the subject of a very recent thread you undoubtedly participated on), it’s clear you want to waste our time.

Bye. You won’t be missed and your YAGE falls flat.

So your latest gotcha question was a fail and now you’re onto ad hominems. No wonder people don’t want to engage with you.

I thought you were leaving!

I'm a DP, I just hate YAGEs, like anyone cares. Stay and have a discussion or go do something else, your ego is so big that you think it will matter if you announce your departure? "Oh noes, we better change our ways or 09/22/2022 18:58 will leave, how will this discussion survive without them!"

Get over yourself.

People must YAGE on you a lot. No mystery why.

Lol you are funny. This isn't a private conversation, a person YAGEs on a forum, not on an individual person. And you can't even keep to the word of your YAGE promise! I think that smoke you smell is the burn...

Haha. I’m a different poster. That’s your own smoke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gone so far off the rails. Seems like the like the people who want to debate Jesus’ divinity or what “fulfill the law” means need to start their own threads.

Yup.

There is zero evidence of his divinity.

There is some evidence that he “most likely” existed in history.

I just don't see how the two issues can be separated. If the OP asks where did Christian theology come from? it has to assume the historical figure was divine or there wouldn't be any "theology." No one builds a religion about some itinerant preacher who spoke in nice parables and beatitudes.

You mean, like Joseph Smith?

DP - Joseph Smith started Mormonism, supposedly from looking into a hat and divining the updated word of god

explain please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Certainly Paul was be-bopping all over Ancient Rome writing letters and starting churches within 50 years of his death. And his writings and behavior are much too organized to believe he was schizophrenic. So, where did this theology come from? Was there some group of crazy people who made it all up, including a central figure who never existed?

Did someone say he was schizophrenic? I think some people liked the message, and wanted to belong to the various church communities (like today), but the Christians were a minor and inconsequential sect for 300 years until the emperor Constantine converted. Read A.N. Wilson's biography of Paul as to why he did it (he was convinced the Christian god could deliver military victories which, of course, included booty for him and his men).. That was Christianity's big break.

Yeah -- the stuff you don't learn in sunday school!

you must be protestant.. i certainly learned this in 9th grade church history, or maybe even 8th grade. constantine had a dream or wife/ or mother, helen had a dream about fishes and greek letters.. etc and its called "pauline" christianity bc PAUL came up with it. Im pretty sure pauline christianity, a summary was the title of one of our textbooks. Did you drop out of sunday school in 5th grade?? And one of the major histories written about Augustus' reign does mention a messiah in Judea who caused all sorts of trouble .. most people think this was Jesus (pubh) he lived like all teh prophets lived and then died, like they did. Evangelical atheist are so tiresome.

Yep. As a product of catholic schools I learned about all this. And even deeper at my Jesuit university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Paul was talking about Jesus being God around 50 AD, 20 years after Jesus’ death. In response to the claim above that somebody this up around 300AD.

So if Jesus is God, then when he says in Mark "Father why hast thou forsaken me?" he's talking to himself?

Jesus was quoting verbatim from Psalm 22 (look it up) which his listeners would have recognized as a lament about man’s condition. Jews at the time memorized long passages of the Bible.

And with that I’m done here. The thread topic has been answered. There was a thread about Jesus’ divinity just a week or two ago, and you undoubtedly participated heavily on it. What with bebopping from Jesus’ new covenant to a failed attempt to start a discussion on what it means for Jesus to “fulfill” the law and the prophets (also the subject of a very recent thread you undoubtedly participated on), it’s clear you want to waste our time.

Bye. You won’t be missed and your YAGE falls flat.

So your latest gotcha question was a fail and now you’re onto ad hominems. No wonder people don’t want to engage with you.

I thought you were leaving!

I'm a DP, I just hate YAGEs, like anyone cares. Stay and have a discussion or go do something else, your ego is so big that you think it will matter if you announce your departure? "Oh noes, we better change our ways or 09/22/2022 18:58 will leave, how will this discussion survive without them!"

Get over yourself.

People must YAGE on you a lot. No mystery why.

Lol you are funny. This isn't a private conversation, a person YAGEs on a forum, not on an individual person. And you can't even keep to the word of your YAGE promise! I think that smoke you smell is the burn...

Haha. I’m a different poster. That’s your own smoke.

A different poster? Really? Well aren't you all white-knightey!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gone so far off the rails. Seems like the like the people who want to debate Jesus’ divinity or what “fulfill the law” means need to start their own threads.

Yup.

There is zero evidence of his divinity.

There is some evidence that he “most likely” existed in history.

I just don't see how the two issues can be separated. If the OP asks where did Christian theology come from? it has to assume the historical figure was divine or there wouldn't be any "theology." No one builds a religion about some itinerant preacher who spoke in nice parables and beatitudes.

You mean, like Joseph Smith?

explain please?

He’s an itinerant preacher who told tales. They formed a whole religion around him.

Does the fact that he now has millions of follows make his tales true?

Trump has millions of followers. Does that make his lies true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Certainly Paul was be-bopping all over Ancient Rome writing letters and starting churches within 50 years of his death. And his writings and behavior are much too organized to believe he was schizophrenic. So, where did this theology come from? Was there some group of crazy people who made it all up, including a central figure who never existed?

Did someone say he was schizophrenic? I think some people liked the message, and wanted to belong to the various church communities (like today), but the Christians were a minor and inconsequential sect for 300 years until the emperor Constantine converted. Read A.N. Wilson's biography of Paul as to why he did it (he was convinced the Christian god could deliver military victories which, of course, included booty for him and his men).. That was Christianity's big break.

Yeah -- the stuff you don't learn in sunday school!

you must be protestant.. i certainly learned this in 9th grade church history, or maybe even 8th grade. constantine had a dream or wife/ or mother, helen had a dream about fishes and greek letters.. etc and its called "pauline" christianity bc PAUL came up with it. Im pretty sure pauline christianity, a summary was the title of one of our textbooks. Did you drop out of sunday school in 5th grade?? And one of the major histories written about Augustus' reign does mention a messiah in Judea who caused all sorts of trouble .. most people think this was Jesus (pubh) he lived like all teh prophets lived and then died, like they did. Evangelical atheist are so tiresome.

Yep. As a product of catholic schools I learned about all this. And even deeper at my Jesuit university.

This Protestant learned all about it in adult Sunday School.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gone so far off the rails. Seems like the like the people who want to debate Jesus’ divinity or what “fulfill the law” means need to start their own threads.

Yup.

There is zero evidence of his divinity.

There is some evidence that he “most likely” existed in history.

I just don't see how the two issues can be separated. If the OP asks where did Christian theology come from? it has to assume the historical figure was divine or there wouldn't be any "theology." No one builds a religion about some itinerant preacher who spoke in nice parables and beatitudes.

You mean, like Joseph Smith?

explain please?

He’s an itinerant preacher who told tales. They formed a whole religion around him.

Does the fact that he now has millions of follows make his tales true?

Trump has millions of followers. Does that make his lies true?

? Christianity is based on the life and teaching (and alleged divinity) of Jesus Christ. The mormons don't worship Joseph Smith and their religion it's not called Joseph Smith-ism or Smithianity. Your comparison is apples and oranges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gone so far off the rails. Seems like the like the people who want to debate Jesus’ divinity or what “fulfill the law” means need to start their own threads.

Yup.

There is zero evidence of his divinity.

There is some evidence that he “most likely” existed in history.

I just don't see how the two issues can be separated. If the OP asks where did Christian theology come from? it has to assume the historical figure was divine or there wouldn't be any "theology." No one builds a religion about some itinerant preacher who spoke in nice parables and beatitudes.

You mean, like Joseph Smith?

explain please?

He’s an itinerant preacher who told tales. They formed a whole religion around him.

Does the fact that he now has millions of follows make his tales true?

Trump has millions of followers. Does that make his lies true?

? Christianity is based on the life and teaching (and alleged divinity) of Jesus Christ. The mormons don't worship Joseph Smith and their religion it's not called Joseph Smith-ism or Smithianity. Your comparison is apples and oranges.

They are called Mormons or members of the Church of Latter Day Saints. The Mormons are a branch of Christianity just as Catholics or Methodists are

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gone so far off the rails. Seems like the like the people who want to debate Jesus’ divinity or what “fulfill the law” means need to start their own threads.

Yup.

There is zero evidence of his divinity.

There is some evidence that he “most likely” existed in history.

I just don't see how the two issues can be separated. If the OP asks where did Christian theology come from? it has to assume the historical figure was divine or there wouldn't be any "theology." No one builds a religion about some itinerant preacher who spoke in nice parables and beatitudes.

You mean, like Joseph Smith?

explain please?

He’s an itinerant preacher who told tales. They formed a whole religion around him.

Does the fact that he now has millions of follows make his tales true?

Trump has millions of followers. Does that make his lies true?

? Christianity is based on the life and teaching (and alleged divinity) of Jesus Christ. The mormons don't worship Joseph Smith and their religion it's not called Joseph Smith-ism or Smithianity. Your comparison is apples and oranges.

They didn’t worship him but, like I said, they formed a whole religion around him and his tales.

Does the fact that he now has millions of followers make his tales true?

Is that the case for all religions? They are all true because some people believe the stories?