1. 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Are the gospels reliable historical documents? // YES

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by leroy, Jan 28, 2021.

  1. joelr

    joelr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,670
    Ratings:
    +533


    Paul only knows of a Jesus who rose from the dead. He knows of no earthly Jesus or any of the material from the gospels. The narrative starts with Mark. For a time academia believed there was a Q gospel, a common source. But Mark Goodacre wrote an excellent book that pretty much ended that idea. Now scholarship is confident that Mark is the source gospel.

    So the reason they mention disciples is because they were mentioned in Mark. Not because each author knew of the story from other sources.


    The Synoptic Problem | Bible.org


    The Synoptic Problem

    Any serious discussion of the Synoptic Gospels must, sooner or later, involve a discussion of the literary interrelationships among Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This is essential in order to see how an author used his sources (both for reliability’s sake as well as for redactional criticism), as well as when he wrote.

    Robert H. Stein’s The Synoptic Problem: An Introduction1


    The remarkable verbal agreement between the gospels suggests some kind of interdependence. It is popular today among laymen to think in terms of independence—and to suggest either that the writers simply recorded what happened and therefore agree, or that they were guided by the Holy Spirit into writing the same things. This explanation falls short on several fronts.

    a. Historical Naiveté
    b. Naiveté Regarding Inspiration

    When one compares the synoptic parallels, some startling results are noticed. Of Mark’s 11,025 words, only 132 have no parallel in either Matthew or Luke. Percentage-wise, 97% of Mark’s Gospel is duplicated in Matthew; and 88% is found in Luke.


    Among other things are mistakes Mark made which are copied verbatim into other gospels:
    "
    Stein lists three broad categories of Mark’s poorer stylistic abilities: (1) colloquialisms and incorrect grammar, (2) Aramaic expressions, and (3) redundancies. The first and second arguments are significant for pericopes which Mark shares with either Matthew or Luke; the third is valuable for considering material omitted in Mark."


    The most favored solution in scholarship is the Markan priority or that Mark was first and the source of the others.

    To sum up reasons for Markan priority, the following eight arguments have been given.

    (1) The argument from length. Although Mark’s Gospel is shorter, it is not an abridgment, nor a gospel built exclusively on Matthew-Luke agreement. In fact, where its pericopae parallel Matthew and/or Luke, Mark’s story is usually the longest. The rich material left out of his gospel is inexplicable on the Griesbach hypothesis.

    (2) The argument from grammar. Matthew and especially Luke use better grammar and literary style than Mark, suggesting that they used Mark, but improved on it.

    (3) The argument from harder readings. On the analogy of early scribal habits, Luke and Matthew apparently removed difficulties from Mark’s Gospel in making their own. If Matthean priority is assumed, then what is inexplicable is why Mark would have introduced such difficulties.

    (4) The argument from verbal agreement. There are fewer Matthew-Luke verbal agreements than any other two-gospel verbal agreements. This is difficult to explain on the Griesbach hypothesis, much easier on the Lachmann/Streeter hypothesis.

    (5) The argument from agreement in order. Not only do Luke and Matthew never agree with each other when they depart from Mark’s order, but the reasons for this on the assumption of Markan priority are readily available while on Matthean priority they are not.

    (6) The argument from literary agreements. Very close to the redactional argument, this point stresses that on literary analysis, it is easier to see Matthew’s use of Mark than vice versa.

    (7) The argument from redaction. The redactional emphases in Mark, especially in his stylistic minutiae, are only inconsistently found in Matthew and Luke, while the opposite is not true. In other words, Mark’s style is quite consistent, while Luke and Matthew are inconsistent—when they parallel Mark, there is consistency; when they diverge, they depart from such. This suggests that Mark was the source for both Matthew and Luke.

    (8) The argument from Mark’s more primitive theology. On many fronts Mark seems to display a more primitive theology than either Luke or Matthew. This suggests that Matthew and Luke used Mark, altering the text to suit their purposes.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. joelr

    joelr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,670
    Ratings:
    +533
    We reject historical sources that are clearly not historical sources but re-writes of myth.
    Here is another re-working in Mark, the Passover narrative matches with a Jesus ben Ananias story which Josephus wrote about (another likely source of Mark):

    1 – Both are named Jesus. (Mark 14.2 = JW 6.301)

    2 – Both come to Jerusalem during a major religious festival. (Mark 11.15-17 = JW 6.301)

    3 -Both entered the temple area to rant against the temple. (Mark 14.2 = JW 6.301)

    4 – During which both quote the same chapter of Jeremiah. (Jer. 7.11 in Mk, Jer. 7.34 in JW)

    5 – Both then preach daily in the temple. (Mark 14.49 = JW 6.306)

    6 – Both declared “woe” unto Judea or the Jews. (Mark 13.17 = JW 6.304, 306, 309)

    7 – Both predict the temple will be destroyed. (Mark 13.2 = JW 6.300, 309)

    8 – Both are for this reason arrested by the Jews. (Mark 14.43 = JW 6.302)

    9 – Both are accused of speaking against the temple. (Mark 14.58 = JW 6.302)

    10 – Neither makes any defense of himself against the charges. (Mark 14.60 = JW 6.302)

    11 – Both are beaten by the Jews. (Mark 14.65 = JW 6.302)

    12 – Then both are taken to the Roman governor. (Pilate in Mark 15.1 = Albinus in JW 6.302)

    13 – Both are interrogated by the Roman governor. (Mark 15.2-4 = JW 6.305)

    14 – During which both are asked to identify themselves. (Mark 15.2 = JW 6.305)

    15 – And yet again neither says anything in his defense. (Mark 15.3-5 = JW 6.305)

    16 – Both are then beaten by the Romans. (Mark 15.15 = JW 6.304)

    17 – In both cases the Roman governor decides he should release him. (Mark 14.2 = JW 6.301)

    18 – But doesn’t (Mark)…but does (JW) — (Mark 15.6-15 = JW 6.305)

    19 – Both are finally killed by the Romans: in Mark, by execution; in the JW, by artillery. (Mark 15.34 = JW 6.308-9)

    20 – Both utter a lament for themselves immediately before they die. (Mark 15.34 = JW 6.309)

    21 – Both die with a loud cry. (Mark 15.37 = JW 6.309)

    The odds of these coincidences arising by chance is quite small to say the least, so it appears Mark used this Jesus as a model for his own to serve some particular literary or theological purpose. In any case, we can see that Mark is writing fiction here, through and through.
     
  3. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,842
    Ratings:
    +8,031
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    As I said before misuse of terminology. What you describe above does not represent forgeries. Check your dictionary.
     
  4. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,842
    Ratings:
    +8,031
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    No good sources.
     
  5. SeekingAllTruth

    SeekingAllTruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2020
    Messages:
    1,208
    Ratings:
    +620
    Religion:
    agnostic deist
    Shunty, a straight question: Bart Ehrman, a respected Bible scholar calls them "Forgeries". Are you contradicting a respected Bible scholar who knows his stuff???????
    upload_2021-2-2_22-13-48.jpeg
     
  6. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,842
    Ratings:
    +8,031
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    Yes. Look forgery up in the .
     
  7. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian
    Are you familiar with" Dragon Ball " (the cartoon)?
     
  8. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian

    Ok so should we reject all historical documents that where not written by eye witnesses 50+ after the event?

    The point that I am trying to make is that in ancient history we usually have anonymos documents written decades (if not centuries) after the event by non-witnesses. But historians don’t simply reject all these documents.

    Points 1 and 2 form the OP could still be true even after the fact that the documents are anonymous, written 50+ after the fact and by non witnesses.
     
  9. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian
    why not?
     
  10. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian
    Yes, granted why would I trust a theologian from the 200s with good reputation and responsible of writing important documents,

    Next Time I will simply ask you.
     
  11. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian
    The only point that I made is that the 90s is not too late for eye witness authorship………….do you grant this particular point?
     
  12. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian
    Well support your assertion, what is your evidence that these are fairy tales? …………..for example would grant that Exodus is a Myth, but we have good positive reasons to make such a claim , cn you do the same with the gosplels?
     
  13. SeekingAllTruth

    SeekingAllTruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2020
    Messages:
    1,208
    Ratings:
    +620
    Religion:
    agnostic deist
    Perhaps fairy tales is not a good choice of words. IMHO the gospels are fictional statements of faith.
     
  14. SeekingAllTruth

    SeekingAllTruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2020
    Messages:
    1,208
    Ratings:
    +620
    Religion:
    agnostic deist
    Because it can't, that's all.
     
  15. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    39,987
    Ratings:
    +23,591
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Because there is a very high pressure on such people to write something that supports their beliefs, not something that could possibly refute it. He had too strong of a vested interest. Ask historians why they are not seen as reliable.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. SeekingAllTruth

    SeekingAllTruth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2020
    Messages:
    1,208
    Ratings:
    +620
    Religion:
    agnostic deist
    In my opinion and the opinion of many scholars, Mark was referencing the Old Testament particularly psalm 22 in order to give credence to his Christ tale by making it appear that Jesus was fulfilling Ot prophecy. But it's the old "Which came first, the chicken or the egg" problem: was Jesus actually fulfilling OT prophecy OR were the gospel writers just fashioning OT prosaic scriptures into literal events to make it appear Jesus was fulfilling prophecies? It's quite simple for a fiction writer to grab a line like "Why have you forsaken me" out of something written centuries earlier and then put it in the mouth of your main character as he hangs on a cross and say, "See! jesus said the same words as David in Psalm 22. Jesus is fulfilling David's prophecy" even though the psalm was never meant to be prophetic.

    Excellent response, by the way.
     
  17. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian
    The claim is that John died in the year 110……………what sort of secret and evil motive would Clement have in order to invent that lie?
     
  18. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian
    ok support your claim
     
  19. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    39,987
    Ratings:
    +23,591
    Religion:
    Atheist
    You are changing your claims now. It appears that you want to know what his motivation to make that lie would be? John was the last gospel written. By putting a ludicrously high date on John's death it makes it appear more likely that John could have written that gospel. Was that an "evil" lie? Not necessarily. Was it self serving? Yes, no doubt about it.
     
  20. leroy

    leroy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,774
    Ratings:
    +314
    Religion:
    christian
    Yes my theory is that Clement knew that in the 21th century anonymous atheist from forums where going to claim that the 90s is “too late” for eye witnesses , so conveniently and anticipating that objection he invented Johns dead in within the year 110.

    Understand this, my claim is not that John is the author of the Gospel, my claims is that the 90s is recent enough for eyewitness verification, even if the gospel where not written by a witness, there would still be eyewitness around that could ether verify or correct any claims.


    Do the math, many teenagers and adults that knew Jesus would have still be alive by the 90s or even 110, whats so ludricous about that?
     
    #340 leroy, Feb 3, 2021
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2021
Loading...