So after 2 milennia, 30 000+ denominations, millions of gallons of blood shed and ink spilled, you're telling me that the guy probably didn't even exist? All of this was caused by the hallucinations of Rabbi Cephas and Rabbi Paul?All I have to say is... Wow.
Cephas never existed either it was all PaulThe First Epistle of Peter has entire sections that are literally copypasta from the Pauline epistles
>>18113129I think 1 Peter might very well be authentic, but even if it isn't Paul wouldn't just make up the founder of the movement while he was still supposed to have been alive, that would have been easily seen through.
The majority of historians believe he existed.
>>18113129>>18113175Peter existed but he was a deluded Judaizer who never understood Christ's message. This guy knew Jesus was the Christ and denied him three times. After the Crucifixion he fled like a coward and went back to fishing. And then after he gets the Holy Spirit, he insists on maintaining Judaic Law and Paul has to come and set him straight?The trvke is that most of the Apostles were deluded and did not understand the truth. Only a few, like Thomas and John, understood. The Apostle Paul was given the revelation on the road to Damascus to deliver the truth to the Gentiles, and even he was still confused.
>>18113189The majority of historians believe the Holocaust happened.
>>18113245they're correct
>>18113116Meanwhile Mohammed is legit
>>18113189Let's be honest when they say he "existed" they barely mean the one most think about anyways.
>>18113250Proofs?
>>18113251If Jesus didn't exist then Mohammed was a fraud (assuming he existed).
>>18113116This is a fringe theory that is not taken seriously.The author is just a militant atheist.
>>18113116Wait until you find out how many people got killed over some neckbeard who came up with communism.
>>18113267t. Bart Ehrman
>>18113267>Fringe theories are... le bad >>18113269Marx was also a schizophrenic jew...
>>18113129>>18113175>>18113201>shows up in Acts of the Apostles just to validate Paul >completely vanishes after Acts 9 for Paul to take center stage >no one knows much about him and his supposed papacy except that he was crucified upside down>"but we have his bones bro"
>>18113292Paul names him in his letters as the first person Jesus appeared to, and as one of the 3 pillars (along with James the great and John). We also have 1 Clement talking about his death.
>>18113301And that's it
>>18113313He appeared in the Gospels and the early Christian writers mentioned him too.Why not say Paul didn't exist either?
>>18113327Paul wrote stuff
>>18113292Acts seems to be an attempt to revise Paul's letters and make him more palatable to the emerging Christian churches. Paul, or possibly one of his colleagues, says in 2 Timothy 1:15 that everyone hated his ass in Asia.Luke also gives off the impression that he wanted Acts and his Gospel narrative to be the definitive version of what would later be called the New Testament in Luke 1:1-4. Interestingly, he removes from Matthew the verses where Jesus renames Cephas as Peter the rock, the very foundation of his role as pope and Vicar of Christ.
>>18113313We also have 1 Peter which I think may be authentic, but even if we didn't we'd have to posit that Paul and his crew lied about a person who would have been a contemporary with them to people who could look into the matter with relative ease, seems very unlikely to me.
>>18113346Unless the letters were written in the 2nd century
>>18113331Well if you want to go full skeptic you can argue someone pretended to be this Paul character. They already say this about the 4 Gospel writers.
>>18113292>>18113340It's because Peter and most of the other Apostles didn't actually understand the message. Luke, as Paul's disciple/letterwriter/propaganda minister, was working to "set the record straight" with his Gospel narrative. The truth is that Peter didn't understand, and honestly neither did Paul really, that Christ was sent from the True God and not Yahweh. It took Paul introducing the Gospel to the Gentiles, who were not so captured by Yahwist theology and rather were "on the track" of the True God with their philosophy, to truly understand Christ's message.Unfortunately Judaizers and their descendants (the orthodox branches of Christianty: EO, RC, Protestant) failed to understand.
>>18113368But it's still someone writing those letters whether his name was really Paul or someone else
>>18113378You could argue those were communal letters written by committe.
>>18113385That's what mainstream scholarship argues about half of the letters yes
>>18113348I see no good reason to believe this. There's also the fact that the gospels (which are late 1st-early 2nd century) already show knowledge of a number of things Paul wrote wheras Paul's letters don't seem to be aware of anything in the gospels.
>>18113405Early 2nd century was when the church got the letters from Marcion. Paul was in competition with the gospel writers he opens Galatians by stating that if even an angel preaches a different gospel than the one he was preaching they would be cursed
>>18113415Paul was in competition with Luke?
>>18113428Which Luke? Marcion's or the canon?
>>18113430Whoever wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Acts.
>>18113415His theology is also very post-temple which doesn't match works written in the 50s and 60s. He specifically talks about how their bodies are the temple now (for comparison, the Old Testament never calls bodies the temple, regardless of the presence of the Holy Spirit in them).1 Corinthians 6:19 Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;2 Corinthians 6:16What agreement can exist between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will dwell with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be My people.”1 Corinthians 3:16Do you not know that you yourselves are God’s temple, and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?Ephesians 2:21-22In Him the whole building is fitted together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord. And in Him you too are being built together into a dwelling place for God in His Spirit.1 Peter 2:5you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
>>18113446Luke-Acts was likely the church rewritting Marcion's Lukehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Marcion
>>18113415>Early 2nd century was when the church got the letters from Marcion.Why would the proto-orthodox church take a bunch of forged letters from Marcion and add it to the canon? Paul's letters also indicate he thought the world was going to end soon, it'd be insane for someone to forge the stuff in his letters 50+ years after his death.>Paul was in competition with the gospel writersMark is written by a Pauline christian, wheras Matthew is written by a Torah observant christian, but either way they are from after Paul's death.>an angel preaches a different gospel than the one he was preaching they would be cursedGospel just means good news, he's also clearly talking about Torah observers in Galatians.
>>18113415>>18113453>>18113463The Apostle Paul was given revelation by Christ because the Torah-observant Judaizers led by Peter, James, and most of the other original Apostles had completely misunderstood the Incarnation even after the Resurrection and Pentecost. They still believed, right up until the bitter end, that the Mosaic Laws imposed by the false entity Yahweh were still in effect and went about teaching that Christ came from Yahweh rather than the True God.
>>18113463I don't know why they accepted Marcion's collection but they probably changed it into what we know as Luke-Acts. Paul believing the world was going to end is further addressed in 2 Peter 3 when he says with the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day, at that point they were already trying to convince people that judgment day would happen eventually but not necessarily during that generation >but either way they are from after Paul's deathHow do you figure?
That's a very schizo thread
>>18113497well yeah the subject is christianity
>>18113491>2 Peter 3NTA but 2 Peter is an obvious pseudepigraph probably from the mid 2nd century. It doesn't really track to be Paul's writing nor can it possibly be Peter's. Peter was a Judaizer and would not have used the kind of rhetorical language that's used in 2 Peter which is very Hellenic in its conception.The thing you have to understand is that Paul broke from the other Apostles because they did not understand the true message. They had gotten every chance possible (the actual ministry, the Resurrection, and Pentecost) to get it right and most of them - Peter especially - did not grasp it. They were too caught up in the Judaic Law that they grew up in to realize it.
>>18113511>It doesn't really track to be Paul's writing nor can it possibly be Peter'sI agree but it's directly in support of Paul's claims
>>18113491>they probably changed it into what we know as Luke-ActsI'm 50/50 on this personally, but then again we don't know where Marcion got his gospel from. Either way we're talking about a rewrite here, I don't doubt that Paul's letters as we have them now have been messed with, but the core is still original to him. >Paul believing the world was going to end is further addressed in 2 Peter 3I never said 2 Peter was authentic, and yeah, that is one problem it's fixing, another one is in refrence to christians who think the gospels are "cleaverly constructed myths" rather than descriptions of real events.>How do you figure?Mark is the first Gospel we have since Matthew and Luke pull heavily from it. In Mark Jesus foretells the destruction of the temple, which is a clue. Another clue is that the scene of Jesus clearing the temple mirrors a narrative Josephus tells about another Jesus who was arrested in the temple around the time of the jewish war very closely. Doesn't mean Mark is written after Josephus, but it does indicate that they know about the same story.There is also the fact that none of the earliest epistles show any knowledge of any of the traditions in them. When Paul tries to justify why christians should pay taxes in Romans 13 for instance, he doesn't seem aware that Jesus had said to "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's", which would of course have been the strongest argument imaginable.
>>18113551I think this indicates that the Apostle Paul's "knowledge" (gnosis, which is the word he uses!) of Christ was limited in the sense that he was aware of Christ as revealed to him on the Road to Damascus and whatever "contact" he had after that. He wasn't concerned, necessarily, with the details of what had gone down. Considering the somewhat contradictory nature of the Gospels (which already draw heavily from one another) it's possible that during his lifetime the Apostles themselves were in dispute of what really happened. It's obvious, to me, anyway, that the Apostles didn't really understand (as I've been saying this thread.)
>>18113473>They still believed, right up until the bitter end, that the Mosaic Laws imposed by the false entity Yahweh were still in effect and went about teaching that Christ came from Yahweh rather than the True God.1) that’s what Jesus most likely taught, its explicitly stated in Matthew. You MUST keep the law better than the scribes and the Pharisees.2) Paul thought Jesus was Yahweh‘s son
>>18113250holocaust was invented to "fix" and give meaning to a spelling mistake in the bible by our coping apophenic schizophrenic judeo-christo-masonic overlordsthat along with a bunch of other religious, political and financial shit but this is the main reason.
>>18113570I said above (>>18113374):>The truth is that Peter didn't understand, and honestly neither did Paul really, that Christ was sent from the True God and not Yahweh. The Gospel of Matthew was most likely sourced and curated specifically for the Judaizer Hebrew communities cultivated by Peter and James. It is the least reliable of the Gospels in terms of "what was the Incarnation really about" even if it has a lot of the narrative in place which can be corroborated with Luke.
>>18113580>The Gospel of Matthew was most likely sourced and curated specifically for the Judaizer Hebrew communities cultivated by Peter and JamesYes, but all the gospels were written by Jews. So what is your point? Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who instructed people to be baptized, repent of sins, and live according to the Law so they might enter the Kingdom of Heaven, which was to be established on Earth.
>>18113462https://ehrmanblog.org/did-paul-get-along-with-the-other-apostles/
>>18113601Some of the other Apostles and the communities that they founded understood Christ's Incarnation better than the others. Christ took Incarnation to redeem mankind and to instruct them the true path to God, unimpeded by laws imposed by false entities (such as the Judaic Law), or ritualisms done by the Gentiles. A free relationship with God.All of Christ's miracles, for instance, are performed in a way to repudiate the Law and to show that it has been brought to full completion and are unnecessary for true worship. The Crucifixion and Resurrection are powerful examples of what I was talking about with the elimination of ritualistic sacrifices. Christ is the ultimate Sacrifice. It wasn't just about redemption or conquest of death, but the removal of (self-imposed, imposed by false entities) barriers to true union and understanding with the True God.
>>18113620>Some of the other Apostles and the communities that they founded understood Christ's Incarnation better than the others.Even though it is explicitly contradicts what several independent communities were all saying around the same time? More importantly, these same communities were the earliest to write anything down.
>>18113683Who? The Judaizers led by the Denier Peter? Who didn't get it even after Pentecost and needed Paul to come and set him straight, and even then they left each other in negative terms at Antioch?
>>18113720>Who?The communities that wrote the gospels.>The Judaizers led by the Denier Peter?You mean the Jerusalem church? We don’t know. They were not written in Jerusalem, as far as we know.
>>18113743>The communities that wrote the gospels.John understood the Christ. He, or the community which spawned that Gospel, knew that Christ was the Logos, of the Greek Philosophy, made Flesh. >You mean the Jerusalem church? We don’t know. They were not written in Jerusalem, as far as we know.Meaningless drivel and evasion.
>>18113613Ehrman knows it's all fiction
>>18113257https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust
>>18113116Can someone tell me why so many secular scholars refuse to engage honestly with his work? I'm just a lyman but it seems pretty solid to me, Im about 50/50 personally.
>>18116378Because they know they'd get rekt. Bart Ehrman thought Robert Price was an easier target and just embarrassed himself.
>>18116423qrd?
>>18116547https://files.catbox.moe/qwgbo9.webm
>>18116599bizarre how old men can sit there with a camera in front of them and debate the stupidest shit
>>18116378appeal to majority.It's the same in every field. Academics are scared shitless of challenging the mainstream and since renaissance up until WWI the scholarly consensus among the non-religious academics and intellectuals was that jesus was just another mythical god (eg james frazer's golden bough) but after WWI everythign chagnes & this is most likely ZOG somehow influencing the academia and pushing this idea that jesus was a historical figure in order to influence and brainwash the NPC masses into caring about the worthless desert in buttfuckistan so they can continue funneling billions of US dollars to israel and send zogbots to die there and all that. Because if jesus didn't exist at all, then the torah is probably fake and americans have no reason to care about the middle east and israel and also means jews don't belong in the middle east which means israel has no right to exist.Not to mention the insanity of jesus situation in the circus of 21st century academia. The historicists say that jesus existed but he basically didn't do the 99% of the shit in the bible and 99% of the bible is fake and gay and he didn't walk on water or the sky didn't turn black for three hours during the day of jesus' crucifiction and neither did zombies get out of their graves and walk in the streets of jerusalem when jesus died and jesus didn't perform any miracles and he was just an ordinary rabbi who got mythicized later by his followers.But the problem is that this is a ship of Theseus situation and if you remove all of these things that make jesus jesus, you are basically denying jesus and all that is left is just another unimportant schizo rabbi rambling about his schizophrenic delusions who has only given his name to this jesus figure we now know.If you believe in Clark Kent and not believe in Superman, you don't believe in Superman period.If i get a corvette and replace the engine and the transmission and everything with that of a prius I don't have a corvette.
>>18116599Bart is a clown.
>>18116876>Da joosboring.
>>18113116Tell me, have you heard of physiognomy? Enjoy Hell.
>>18117905I mean he isn't ugly, well now he is, but that's because he's gotten fat.
>>18113267>Bart Ehrman disagrees so you are le wrong
>>18117905He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.
>>18119870>bro is ugly enough to be the messiahchristbros... we're the pharisees now
>>18119870>He was despised and rejected by mankindAccurate description of the scholarly community's view of him, totally unjustified too.
>>18113374>Unfortunately Judaizers and their descendants (the orthodox branches of Christianty: EO, RC, Protestant)based Oriental Orthodox and Church of the East sandniggers getting it right
>>18116876>and neither did zombies get out of their graves and walk in the streets of jerusalemThat was metaphor
>>18120985The entire gospels of Matthew and Mark were meant to be metaphorical.
>>18120985So was Jesus.
>>18113327Carrier argues that six letters - Gal, 1-2 Cor, Romans, Philippians, 1 Thess - are by the same guy who calls himself "Paul" and make sense as AD 40-50ish constructions.He also argues 1 Clement was written soon after Paul's death along with Hebrews.Carrier bases his theories about Christ from these.
>>18121027Mark is allegory. Matthew wanted to tell a cool story.
>>18121396He thinks Paul wrote in the 40-50s? He got pranked
