Evidence please

Originally posted by @dj2becker
When you say the Jesus story you mean the writers made stuff up?

Decades of 'chinese whispers' passed on by all manner of people and groups, and sub-groups, all in many respects in competition with each other; dozens of other supposedly 'eye witness accounts' rejected; nothing finalized until literally hundreds of years later, when corporate Christianity had finally finessed its fastidiously assembled text.

I have no doubt that all manner of emotions and elements were in play: earnestness, hysteria, ambition, good-intentions, fervour, imagination, conjecture, melodrama, faulty memory, errors, omissions, assumptions, embellishments, fascination, zealotry, creativity and, yes, most likely deceit as well. Countless people, over many,many years. What's the upshot of 'survival of the fittest' when accounts of magical things are competing for the hearts and minds of potential subscribers?

Originally posted by @whodey
So if I claim to be a prophet of God and my prophesies come true it means nothing?

Seems to me that you have simply provided 'evidence' of the NT being composed quite consciously to align the Jesus story with ancient Hebrew mythology by people who were conversant in that mythology but who were committed to setting up the new religion. From your point of view, the same 'evidence' leads you to believe that Jesus was a supernatural being around whom all manner of magical things happened. I suppose you find my deduction far-fetched. But I feel the same way about your deduction.

Originally posted by @whodey
It was the later ,but in the case of the man in the Case for Christ, it was not. I hope you are not saying he is lying.

I think the people who formulated Christianity over a period of 400 or so years were probably people with the mindset and integrity of the much-admired Benny Hinn and his entourage, and similar religious leader figures.

Originally posted by @fmf
Decades of 'chinese whispers' passed on by all manner of people and groups, and sub-groups, all in many respects in competition with each other; dozens of other supposedly 'eye witness accounts' rejected; nothing finalized until literally hundreds of years later, when corporate Christianity had finally finessed its fastidiously assembled text.

I have no d ...[text shortened]... when accounts of magical things are competing for the hearts and minds of potential subscribers?

You were a Christian for decades. How exactly did you stumble upon this imaginative revelation?

Originally posted by @fmf
I think the people who formulated Christianity over a period of 400 or so years were probably people with the mindset and integrity of the much-admired Benny Hinn and his entourage, and similar religious leader figures.

And you think this why? Because, let me guess, you have a gut feeling?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You were a Christian for decades. How exactly did you stumble upon this imaginative revelation?

I just thought about it all and ended up with a perspective that made sense to me.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
And you think this why? Because, let me guess, you have a gut feeling?

No, it's not a gut feeling. It's something more substantial, like a deduction, an opinion. The gut feeling I once talked about was regarding the possibility that there may be a god, something far weaker than a deduction or an opinion, and something from which there is basically no upshot for me.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
One prophecy on its own is probably not compelling enough and could be coincidence, but when you have more than 300 prophecies fulfilled by one man the mountain of evidence is hard to ignore.

Now, I've spent a fair few posts answering your counter-questions as best I can. Here's mine again: Were the writers of the NT unaware of these "300 prophecies" before they created the texts that publicized and promoted the Jesus story/religion?

Originally posted by @fmf
No, it's not a gut feeling. It's something more substantial, like a deduction, an opinion. The gut feeling I once talked about was regarding the possibility that there may be a god, something far weaker than a deduction or an opinion, and something from which there is basically no upshot for me.

It sounds more like a 'conspiracy theory'.

Originally posted by @fmf
Now, I've spent a fair few posts answering your counter-questions as best I can. Here's mine again: Were the writers of the NT unaware of these "300 prophecies" before they created the texts that publicized and promoted the Jesus story/religion?

1. How could I know for sure?
2. What difference would it make if they were honest people?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
1. How could I know for sure?
2. What difference would it make if they were honest people?

1. You can't. So you don't know. Thanks for the answer. As for me, I can't imagine that they weren't aware of the content of what is now known as the OT.

2. They may have had good and honest intentions. They - the innumerable people whose hands the text passed through - may have believed sincerely that it was the right thing to do incorporate as much ancient Hebrew mythology as they could in order to give their new religion gravitas and legitimacy.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
It sounds more like a 'conspiracy theory'.

OK, as I said, from your point of view, the same 'evidence' about this whole issue of the creation of the NT over a period of 400 years leads you to believe that Jesus was a supernatural being around whom all manner of magical things happened. I am quite comfortable with the fact that you find my deduction and perspectives far-fetched. But, as you know, I feel the same way about what you deduce and therefore believe about it all.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
One prophecy on its own is probably not compelling enough and could be coincidence, but when you have more than 300 prophecies fulfilled by one man the mountain of evidence is hard to ignore.

Is Psalms 118:22-24 one of those 300?

Originally posted by @fmf
1. You can't. So you don't know. Thanks for the answer. As for me, I can't imagine that they weren't aware of the content of what is now known as the OT.

2. They may have had good and honest intentions. They - the innumerable people whose hands the text passed through - may have believed sincerely that it was the right thing to do incorporate as much ancient Hebrew mythology as they could in order to give their new religion gravitas and legitimacy.

What are your comments on the following?

Logically speaking, there is an eternity wherein one will give an account for the deeds of his life, or else there is no existence after death. The logical “law of the excluded middle”—a thing either is or it is not—demands this.

1. Now, reflect upon the implications of this principle in light of the charge that the New Testament writers lied about the events in the life of Christ. If they believed in eternity, why would they falsify the records regarding Jesus, knowing that such lies would exclude their entrance into heaven. Lying is well nigh universally conceded to be unethical.

2. On the other hand, if Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John did not believe in eternal accountability, and so callously fabricated the documents that affirmed Jesus’ divine nature, why would they have subjected themselves to the persecution that accompanied Christianity—since this life would be all they believed they would ever enjoy?

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/2-are-the-gospel-writers-credible

Originally posted by @dj2becker
What are your comments on the following?

I have no comments on it. I am not even going to read it. You've just copy pasted some text from a web site right? I'm not interested.