Calling out ThinkOfOne

@FMF

This request was dodged regardless of when you think the Gospels were written -

Could you indicate which sayings are the ones invented by the hijackers? Then we can seperate them out from the ones you think are un-hijacked and authentic.

Matthew chapter 5 - 48 verses.
Matthew chapter 6 - 34 verses.
Matthew chapter 7 - 29 verses.

Please list the ones invented by the hijackers.

@sonship said
@FMF

This request was dodged regardless of when you think the Gospels were written -

Could you indicate which sayings are the ones invented by the hijackers? Then we can seperate them out from the ones you think are un-hijacked and authentic.

Matthew chapter 5 - 48 verses.
Matthew chapter 6 - 34 verses.
Matthew chapter 7 - 29 verses.

Please list the ones invented by the hijackers.

All of them. I believe they were all written decades and decades after the death of Jesus by people who had never met him but who were creating a new breakaway religion.

@FMF

All of them. I believe they were all written decades and decades after the death of Jesus by people who had never met him but who were creating a new breakaway religion.

What evidence then do you present that Jesus was a typical Jewish rabbi that taught the traditional Jewish religion established by Moses ?

You have no way of comparing what He taught with a new "breakaway" deviation or the "hijacking" embellishments added. Why should we assume your suspicion is adequate to explain a new testament?

Didn't the old religion contain a prediction that a "new covenant" would one day be made by God with His people? Jeremiah 31:33.

@sonship said
What evidence then do you present that Jesus was a typical Jewish rabbi that taught the traditional Jewish religion established by Moses ?

I am not presenting any evidence. I am presenting my perspective. I just assume that he was a maverick because he caused a stir and ended up getting executed by the Romans.

@sonship said
You have no way of comparing what He taught with a new "breakaway" deviation or the "hijacking" embellishments added.

Indeed, the whole thing is fuzzy and buried in centuries of superstition and people settling for some writings undertaken decades after his death and not finalized until centuries after his death.

@sonship said
Why should we assume your suspicion is adequate to explain a new testament?

You shouldn't if you don't want to. And I certainly don't think you should if, without it, you would feel life had no purpose or meaning and you became unhappy as a result.

@sonship said
Didn't the old religion contain a prediction that a "new covenant" would one day be made by God with His people? Jeremiah 31:33.

That the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts sought to root them in older texts is no great surprise and, while the links might present themselves to you as evidence of some great supernatural occurrence, they present themselves to me merely as evidence that the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts took great care to root them in older texts.

@FMF

That the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts sought to root them in older texts is no great surprise and, while the links might present themselves to you as evidence of some great supernatural occurrence, they present themselves to me merely as evidence that the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts took great care to root them in older texts.

Do you think many years after the life of Jesus new religion makers went back and put words in Jeremiah's book ?
In they're taking great care did they after the fact write prophecies and attribute them to Jeremiah?

Let's go back further to the five books of Moses. In the New Testament writers great care to falsely conspire to make Jesus look like prophecy fulfillment, did they add to Pentateuch words that were not there originally ?

Ie. John the Baptist said of Jesus "Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world".

Did john say this unusual thing and then the NT writers create much in the Pentateuch about the slaying of the lamb in Exodus and all the expiatory offerings in Leviticus ?

@sonship said
@FMF

[quote] That the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts sought to root them in older texts is no great surprise and, while the links might present themselves to you as evidence of some great supernatural occurrence, they present themselves to me merely as evidence that the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts took great care to root them in older texts ...[text shortened]... about the slaying of the lamb in Exodus and all the expiatory offerings in Leviticus ?

If you had been able to comprehend what FMF wrote, you'd know he's saying that it's the other way around: The NT writers patterned their texts after OT texts in an attempt to deceive readers into believing it "evidence of some great supernatural occurrence".

How is it that you're so often so blind to the blatantly obvious?

This is what you do. You often take what others write and make up a narrative that has little to nothing to do with what was actually said. You do this with what other posters write. You do this with scripture as well.

No matter how many times this has been pointed out to you, you continue to do it. It's as if you're a slave to it.

@sonship said
@FMF

[quote] That the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts sought to root them in older texts is no great surprise and, while the links might present themselves to you as evidence of some great supernatural occurrence, they present themselves to me merely as evidence that the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts took great care to root them in older texts ...[text shortened]... about the slaying of the lamb in Exodus and all the expiatory offerings in Leviticus ?

Whoosh.

@thinkofone said
If you had been able to comprehend what FMF wrote, you'd know he's saying that it's the other way around: The NT writers patterned their texts after OT texts in an attempt to deceive readers into believing it "evidence of some great supernatural occurrence".

How is it that you're so often so blind to the blatantly obvious?

This is what you do. You often take what o ...[text shortened]... many times this has been pointed out to you, you continue to do it. It's as if you're a slave to it.

So do you think scripture in the NT are false, and you condemn others by not
following the parts you like best?

@FMF

That the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts sought to root them in older texts is no great surprise and

Give me just two of your strongest cases of this "rooting". Don't start with the lesser ones. Give me your two most exemplary cases in the New Testament writers' artificial "rooting".

Surely two examples is not too much for you ?
Where are your two most striking cases of this imaginative "rooting"?

, while the links might present themselves to you as evidence of some great supernatural occurrence,

The most convincing evidence is that I met Jesus Christ.

The meeting of Him and the understanding of Scripture worked together in my life.
The explanations of the Bible as a whole make the most sense of what I have experienced.

And of what millions down through the ages attest with me to have also experienced.
"Jesus is alive in an extraordinary yet wonderful way. Jesus is available."

To the conspiracy of some Galilean fishermen coordinating together at the cost of every one of their lives, to invent Jesus -

Everyone knows that Jesus Christ stands for moral righteousness and the highest standard of ethical living.
Jesus Christ is not only just a good man. He is gloriously good. He is good with a splendor that places Him in a class by Himself.

Explain how deceived, conniving, exploiting, dishonest, manipulative, imposters used their crooked skills to create a fictional Someone of impeccable moral reputation.

Did Peter make up a story about how he denied Jesus three times after assuring Him that he would be faithful as a disciples even to death? Did Peter make up that incident ?

"Whoosh!" will not do as a reply.

they present themselves to me merely as evidence that the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts took great care to root them in older texts ...[text shortened]... about the slaying of the lamb in Exodus and all the expiatory offerings in Leviticus ?

There was nothing wrong with the WHOOSHED questions I asked before.

Way John the Baptist creating an artificial "link" to the Pentateuch by saying to his disciples that Jesus was the Lamb of God coming to take away the sins of the world ?

Whoosh us in an answer.

@sonship said
@FMF

That the writers of the new breakaway religion's texts sought to root them in older texts is no great surprise and

Give me just two of your strongest cases of this "rooting". Don't start with the lesser ones. Give me your two most exemplary cases in the New Testament writers artificial "rooting".

Surely two examples is not too muc ...[text shortened]... t Jesus was the Lamb of God coming to take away the sins of the world ?

Whoosh us in an answer.

All of it.

@FMF

All of it.

That's a dodge to avoid specifics. You're whooshing to avoid specifics.

Give us two of your strongest examples of this "rooting" to the Old Testament text to fabricate a prophetic link.

@sonship said
The most convincing evidence is that I met Jesus Christ.The meeting of Him and the understanding of Scripture worked together in my life. The explanations of the Bible as a whole make the most sense of what I have experienced.

Good for you. As I have often said, if your religious beliefs give you solace and purpose in life, good for you. If "the most convincing evidence" you have is your own belief, that is your prerogative.