Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I don't have a question for you, Jerrell. I just thought I'd mention that it seems odd to me that you would have started this thread on a debate forum. I hope you're prepared to see posts that challenge your opinions. As you obviously know by now, not all Christians on RF see things in exactly the same way.Jerrell said:Anyone who has a Biblical or Christian question to ask, ask it here I am willing to answer any and every question any would have.
Katzpur said:I don't have a question for you, Jerrell. I just thought I'd mention that it seems odd to me that you would have started this thread on a debate forum. I hope you're prepared to see posts that challenge your opinions. As you obviously know by now, not all Christians on RF see things in exactly the same way.
I couldn't agree more. I know a lot of pagans whose lives conform more to the standard that Christ set than do a great many Christians. Interestingly, the Bible is a whole lot more clear as to how a Christian should behave than it is on what a Christian must believe.roli said:....and not all who vow to be Christian are true adherents of the Christ of the bible either,but by title only....!!
Godlike said:Jerrell, what are your opinions about New Testament authorship? I refer to the Gospels in particular. Could they be forgeries? Do you attribute their authorship strictly to the apostles or disciples of Christ, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John etc? Do you accept they drew on many varied sources extant @ the time, fifty odd years after Christ, such as Hellenic and Pagan myth and folklore as well as the Judaic tradition? I mean no offence by "myth", I take it to mean metaphor and allegory not untruth.
Jerrell said:I hope I answered your question.
I'm sorry, but where are you getting that from?Jerrell said:The Gospel of John is one of the Earlyist Gospels written, some 30-50 years after Christ's death.
Sure, i understand each was from a different perspective, but what i mean is - which is the correct version. Which gives the correct last saying of Jesus?Jerrell said:Each Gospel presents a diffrent perspective of the ressurection. John was actually there, Matthew saw Jesus after he was risen, and Luke and John Mark gathered informatin from witnesses, and Apostles. All of the Ressurection accounts are accurate, cause each gives a diffrent perspective.
Really? Not according to my bible. Matthew has Mary Magdalene and another Mary - it doesn't say which one - visiting the tomb alone, no one else does.Jerrell said:Mary Magdalene and Mary the Mother James, and Salome were the first to visit the tomb (Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:1, Luke 24:1, John 20:1). They, once seeing Jesus went and told the Disciples, Peter and John then ran to the tomb and saw two angels who said, "why look ye among the dead for the living?'. After this Jesus appeared to 10 of the disciples, and to Thomas the 11th later.
1) John's Gospel Judging from it's contents and other factors was written in the year 90 A.D. Jesus died around 30 A.D. Since these both are approximate there is a window of error of a few years. The Maximun amount of years after Jesus' death that this book could have been written is up to 50 years. Therefore I said 30-50 years.Halcyon said:I'm sorry, but where are you getting that from?
Sure, i understand each was from a different perspective, but what i mean is - which is the correct version. Which gives the correct last saying of Jesus?
I mean, his last saying cannot be a quote from Psalm 22 followed by a loud cry and also "Father, in your hands i place my spirit" and also "I am thirsty" followed by "It is accomplished". Only one of those three scenarios can be the correct account, which is it?
Really? Not according to my bible. Matthew has Mary Magdalene and another Mary - it doesn't say which one - visiting the tomb alone, no one else does.
Mark has Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome visiting the tomb alone.
Luke has Mary Magdalene, Joanna and Mary the mother of James first to the tomb, later followed by Peter alone.
John has Mary Magdalene alone visiting the tomb, but returning before she entered it after she spied the stone had be rolled away. She went and got Peter and the Beloved Disciple, the Beloved Disciple was the first to the tomb.
Your version seems to be an amalgamation of the accounts of Mark and John. Why discount Joanna and the account of Peter alone returning without the Beloved Disciple?
Not necessarily. Have you ever asked a group of people who witenessed an certain event to share their story about what had happened? They all have different versions. Does that mean that the story was made up? No. They were just viewed and told from different perspectives.wanderer085 said:The many conflicts of the gospels show convincingly that the gospels(written by unknow authors) were made up
But, of course, you cannot prove this claim.Is there any Chance they are forgiries? In my Opinion no, why would 12 men suffer greatly, be cursed by their family, persecuted, stoned, ridiculed, they became outcasts, and 11 of the Apostles died because of Christ, how can they be fake ot flase in their message?
You mean like what color Robe Jesus wore, or whether Judas evecierated or hung himself, or the two differing liniages of Adam-Joseph. There are plenty of specific details, and often they don't match (which is odd if we assume at least that last two authors had the writings of the first two).The details in the Gospels are to the exact
So the Earlies Gospel is written when Jesus's contemporaries would have been in their 80s during a time where average life expectancy was less than half that? And that's the earliest gospel? That's not very reassuring.The Gospel of John is one of the Earlyist Gospels written, some 30-50 years after Christ's death.
Well Paul wasn't there for any of the events. And I'm not sure what 80+ year old witnesses who lived in a different subcontinent could offer (IIRC, Paul lived in Rome). You can't substantiate their sources either way; but create a timeline where most potential witnesses would be dead.I beleive that Luke and Mark got their information from Paul himself, witnesses, and Peter, and maybe a few other Apotles.
Just as the creationists don't believe the truths of geology, physics, and biology, just as the Christians don't believe the Zeus killed Chronos, just as you deny that Aliens retrieved the Heaven's Gate group; so we can always find a reason to doubt something.Just as the Persians do not beleive the holocuast happened, just as the Japanese do not beleive the truth about WWII, just as some people doubt that The Americans even landed on the moon, and so much more, we can always find a reason to doubt something, we can make up so many excuses. As for me, the details, the fulfillment of Prophecy is to accurate to be just myth or folklore.
No. Differing accuonts of an event do not mean the event was fictitious. But when accounts conflict on objective fact, at most one can be correct.Not necessarily. Have you ever asked a group of people who witenessed an certain event to share their story about what had happened? They all have different versions. Does that mean that the story was made up? No. They were just viewed and told from different perspectives.
That's a good point. However, isn't the Bible supposed to be God's Word? In that case, either the accounts should match up - because I'd assume God would give the same story to the various authors - or it must be admitted that the Bible is riddled with human perspective, in which case it loses its status as the Word and becomes merely a book of human experience. I see nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't seem to fit into the context of Christian faith.Mister_T said:Not necessarily. Have you ever asked a group of people who witenessed an certain event to share their story about what had happened? They all have different versions. Does that mean that the story was made up? No. They were just viewed and told from different perspectives.
How do ya figure one at most?JerryL said:No. Differing accuonts of an event do not mean the event was fictitious. But when accounts conflict on objective fact, at most one can be correct.
Judas did hang himself and his bowels did gush out. What do you think happens to bloated corpses of people that are left out in the sun too long?JerryL said:If Judas hung himself, then he did not evecerate himself
Different shade of red and purple can look like either or.JerryL said:If the robe placed on Jesus was red, then it was not purple
That is a baseless and, therefore worthless, assertion, and your subsequent pedagogy is no better. All you manage to demonstrate is an irresponsible ignorance of current scolarship or an arrogant willingness to discount it. You have every right to believe whatever you wish, but it suggests remarkable hubris that you would presume to instruct others.Jerrell said:Good Question. The Gospels were written by Two Apostles, Matthew and John, and by two of Paul's companions, Luke and John Mark.