Let’s take a look at one of Don Camp’s latest contributions regarding the authenticity of the Jesus story and how it was all prophesied beforehand and explained after the fact:
Don: You mean all the Old Testament prophecies that spoke of the eternal continuance of the Messiah king were mistaken?
What prophecies, Don? You mean all those tenuously connected Old Testament stories that the gospel writers, especially Matthew, pressed into service to construct their Jesus stories? That this is how it happened is the scholarly consensus and once we exclude the possibility of magic, the only way ‘prophecy’ can later be ‘fulfilled’.
Don: “After he has suffered he will see the light of life and be satisfied; (Isaiah 53:11).
Which proves my point. You think this is a prophecy? It could mean anything about anyone!
Don: The prophecy about him not seeing corruption as a dead body was mistaken?
And again. Not mistaken: lifted from the OT around which to build the resurrection story.
Don: The words of Jesus as he repeatedly told his disciples of his resurrection were mistaken?
He didn’t. The stories were written long after Jesus supposedly lived. Those who created his story gave him this ‘foreknowledge’ long after the event.
Don: Paul made nothing up; his simply explained what it all meant.
Oh come on, Don. Why would God leave it to someone who’d never met Jesus, and appears to know nothing about him, to explain ‘simply’ what he was all about? Of course Paul made it all up, after he had some sort of vision, in his head, from which he developed a fanciful theology, one that was very much at odds with that put in Jesus’ mouth years later. Hence Paul’s disputes with the ‘pillars of the church’ whom he held in such disdain.
I know you’ll have some convoluted explanation about how everyone else has got it wrong, Don, but it’s you who’s got it all back to front!