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 ONCE AGAIN! Facts in the Bible is supported by archaeology.

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by KenS, Nov 30, 2018.

  1. joelr

    joelr Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    800
    Ratings:
    +304
    No, the gospels are anonymous.
    They all start with Euangélion katà Maththaîon; which is how Greek writers say "as told to me by".
    So there is no confirmed source material, or information about how many people had been told the story and passed it on. Just that an anonymous Greek speaking person wrote them.

    The writers were also writing in a non-historical style which was highly mythical from a literary perspective. So they were writing mythology and fan fiction and incorporating parables, ring structure, Markan sandwiches and other devices to construct a mythical narrative that passed on wisdom.
    They were no trying to decieve but to give spiritual lessons using fiction.

    No different than Lord of the Rings but the myth structure is much denser.
    For example there will be 20 events leading up to a central event in the story. Then the next 20 events mirror or reverse the first 20. History is not written this way.

    Or parables like the fig tree story which is really a story about the Temple cult.
    Or stories about bleeding old/young women which represent new/old Israel.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. joelr

    joelr Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    800
    Ratings:
    +304

    1. Nations that do not serve Israel will perish. 60:12
    2. "The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me."
      These words were spoken by Isaiah and referred to Isaiah. They were not a prophecy about a future prophet, as Jesus claimed in Luke 4:16-19, where he supposedly read these verses in the synagogue while applying them to himself. 61:1-2
      1. Jeremiah

      2. Jeremiah prophesies that all nations of the earth will embrace Judaism. This has not happened. 3:17
      3. "The prophets prophesy falsely." 5:31
      4. God will make Jerusalem an uninhabited "den of dragons." 9:11
      5. Judah will become a desolate den of dragons. 10:22
      6. "The prophets prophesy lies" in God's name. 14:14
      7. God will destroy by famine and sword those who are misled by the prophets, as well as the prophets themselves. 14:15-16
      8. Matthew (1:12) lists Jeconiah as an ancestor of Jesus -- which, according to this prophecy, disqualifies Jesus as the Messiah. 22:28-30
      9. God's prophets are profane, wicked, adulterous, lying sodomites. 23:11-14
      10. God damned lying prophets 23:25-40
      11. Jeremiah prophesied that the Babylonian captivity would last 70 years. Yet it lasted from the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE to the fall of Babylon in 538 BCE, a period of only 48 years. 25:11
      12. God says he is going to punish Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians for what they have done to his people -- even though God Himself is the one who made the Babylonians attack and enslave Judah! As part of the punishment God will take the land of the Babylonians and "make it perpetual desolations." A false prophecy, since present-day Iraq is quite occupied.25:12-13
      13. Hananiah vs. Jeremiah: Good Prophet, Bad Prophet 28:1-17
      14. A new prophet shows up proclaiming the good news: God was going to break the yoke of Babylon and bring the people of Judah back home. His name was Hananiah. 28:1-4
      15. God kills Hananiah for disagreeing with Jeremiah. 28:16-17
      16. God will send his usual blessings upon his people: "the sword, the famine, and the pestilence." He "will make them like vile figs, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil." 29:17-18
      1. Matthew (2:17-18) quotes this verse, claiming that it was a prophecy of King Herod's alleged slaughter of the children in and around Bethlehem after the birth of Jesus. But this passage refers to the Babylonian captivity, as is clear by reading the next two verses (16 and 17), and, thus, has nothing to do with Herod's massacre. 31:15
      2. Misquoted in Hebrews 8:9 as:
        "Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord." 31:32
      3. "David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel." But the Davidic line of Kings ended with Zedekiah; there were none during the Babylonian captivity, and there are none today. 33:17
      4. God lies to Zedekiah again by telling him that he will die in peace and be buried with his fathers. But later (2 Kgings 25:7 and 52:10-11) he dies a violent death in a foreign land. 34:2, 5
      5. The beginning of the end for Zedekiah. Despite God's earlier assurances (34:5) that he would die peacefully at home, here Zedekiah watches as his children are killed and then has his eyes put out and he is shackled and taken to Babylon. 39:6-7
      6. All those who move to Egypt will die by the sword, famine, or pestilence. None "shall escape from the evil" that comes directly from God. But many, including Jews, have moved to Egypt and most seem to have escaped from God's promised evil. 42:15-18, 22
      7. God will kill the young men of Damascus and set the city on fire. (Some Christians believe this prophecy is being fulfulled today in Syrian civil war.) 49:26-27
      8. Jeremiah predicts that humans will never again live in Hazor, but will be replaced by dragons. But people still live there and dragons have never been seen. 49:33
      9. God prophesies that Babylon will never again be inhabited. But it has been inhabited constantly since the prophecy was supposedly made, and is inhabited still today. 50:39
      10. God says that Babylon will be desolate and uninhabited forever. He says that only dragons will live there. But Babylon has been dragon-free and continuously inhabited since then. 51:26, 29, 37, 43, 62, 64
      11. "The sea is come up upon Babylon: she is covered with the multitude of the waves thereof." 51:42
      12. God promised Zedekiah (Jeremiah 34:5) that he would die peacefully and be buried with his fathers. But here we see that he died a miserable death in foreign land. 52:10-11
        1. Lamentations

        2. The "prophets also find no vision from the LORD." 2:9
        3. "Thy prophets have seen vain and foolish things for thee." 2:14
          Ezekiel

        4. "Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel that prophesy." 13:2
        5. God deceives some of his prophets and then kills them for believing his lies. 14:9
        6. Ezekiel prophesies that Tyrus will be completely destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar and will never be built again. But it wasn't destroyed, as evidenced by the visits to Tyre by Jesus and Paul (Mt 15:21, Mk 7:24, 31, Acts 21:3). 26:14,21, 27:36, 28:19
        7. Ezekiel prophesies that Israel will reside in its homeland safely and securely, never again to fight neighboring nations. 28:24-26
        8. Ezekiel makes another false prophecy: that Egypt would be uninhabited by humans or animals for forty years after being destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar. But there was never a time when Egypt was uninhabited. Humans and animals have lived there continuously since Ezekiel's prophecy. 29:10-11
        9. "The day of the LORD is near ... it shall be the time of the heathen." 30:3
        10. The rivers of Egypt (identified as the Nile in NIV, NASB, and RSV) shall dry up. This has never occurred. 30:12
        11. Ezekiel prophesies God will protect the Israelites from "the heathen". "And they shall be safe in their land." But the Israelites have never lived peacefully with their neighbors, and they've never been safe from attack. 34:28-29
        12. "And David my servant shall be king over them."
          How's that supposed to happen? David had been dead (if he ever lived) for more than 400 years when these words were written. 37:24
        13. "Thou shalt come up against my people of Israel ... in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land, that the heathen may know me ... O Gog." 38:16
        14. The prophecy about Gog and Magog has been interpreted dozens of different ways; none of them came to pass. Goths, Huns, Saracens, Tatars, Scythians, Hitler, Russia, and Sadam Husein -- all these and more have been identified as the
     
  3. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    2,239
    Ratings:
    +302
    Religion:
    None
    No-one can take all of the bible as literal - we have to allow for symbolic language and
    alternate eye-witness accounts, ie the two different accounts of the thieves on the cross.
    And no-one can say the bible is entirely fictional because lots is supported by extra-biblical
    or archaeological evidence (ie Edict of Cyrus allowing captives to leave Babylon and rebuild
    their temples)
    So it's down to the "minimalist" (ie yourself) verses the maximalist (ie me) view of the bible.

    I would take 95% of Genesis to be literal truth or symbolic language for something which
    really happened (ie first creation account is verified by science, but the literal language of
    six days is figurative) Second account (Adam and Eve and the Serpent) I have trouble with
    and I suspect some culture has tacked this onto the 1 Genesis at some point.
     
  4. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    2,239
    Ratings:
    +302
    Religion:
    None
    Too much to cover here, and I am about to go out for tea.
    Quickly - God's promise of driving out the inhabitants - the culprit
    here was the Jewish nation. They were commanded to do so but
    disobeyed. It was a common theme in the Old Testament - even
    King Saul lost his throne for not "utterly destroying" the enemy.

    Isaiah 52 is in two sections - the first covers Israel, the second
    section and all of 53 is about the Messiah. It is clearly so. This
    argument is proffered by the Jews. Similar verses are found all
    the way through the Old Testament backing up what Isaiah says
    is the lot of the Messiah. Best to read it for yourself.
     
  5. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    2,239
    Ratings:
    +302
    Religion:
    None
    Not sure of this "as told to me" business.
    The names given to the four Gospels were from much later times,
    but obviously passed down through the generations.
    But you can see John in John's Gospels as we have his letters
    and accounts of who he was as a person.
    Matthew fits with Matthew in the Gospels.
    And Luke, though having met Jesus, clearly was an historian. His
    book of Acts is classic historic writing (people love his nautical
    material particularly.) What disqualifies Luke as one of the classic
    historians in the mind of some people is his accounts of the
    miracles in the Gospel of Luke, and in Acts.
     
  6. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,444
    Ratings:
    +15,246
    Religion:
    Atheist
    When judging Luke I have heard him praised on his knowledge of places. Places that he names appear to be correct and usually in the "right" place. Meaning the locations match his narrative. That would make him a fine geographer. He definitely gets some history wrong and that may be where he loses points with the historical crowd.

    I think some of your other judgments may merely be confirmation bias.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    2,239
    Ratings:
    +302
    Religion:
    None
    Luke's main claim to fame was his history of the Apostolic church.
    If he was out on some dates or political events this would be no
    different than any other historian. As we know, no two historians
    will ever agree on every issue of an historic event.
    He was with Paul on Paul's last journey to Rome - but you would
    hardly know this from reading his account. In four places he used
    the pronoun 'we' meaning he was with Paul. Acts was completed
    ca 64 AD.
     
  8. The Anointed

    The Anointed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2018
    Messages:
    1,615
    Ratings:
    +169
    Religion:
    biblical believer
    Rabbinic sources state that the First Temple stood for 410 years and, based on the 2nd-century work Seder Olam Rabbah, place construction in 832 BCE and destruction in 422 BCE, 165 years later than secular estimates.

    The greater majority of biblical students today, accept the secular date of 587 B.C., as the correct date for the destruction of the temple and reject completely the Rabbinic dates as to the construction and destruction of the temple and yet, some like yourself, believe the erroneous Rabbinic period for the existence of the temple, to be 410 years, thereby erroneously believing that the temple was constructed in 997 B.C..

    Whereas, the Jewish historian Josephus, says that "the temple was burnt four hundred and seventy years, six months and 10 days after its construction, revealing that it was constructed in 1057 B.C.

    In the year that Moses died, [Forty years after the exodus] Deuteronomy 29: 5-8; Moses said to the people; “For forty years (since the exodus) the Lord led you through the desert, and your clothes and sandals never wore out, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . .King Sihon of Hesbon and King Og of Bashan came out to fight against us . But we defeated them, took their land, and divided it among the tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh. This all happened in the fortieth year after the Exodus.

    Three hundred years later, Jephthah, the elected leader of the Israelites, went to war against, and defeated the King of Ammon, who attempted to reclaim the land that was lost 300 years previously. See Judges 11. This happened 340 years after the exodus. Jephthah led Israel for 6 years and died 346 years after the Exodus. (Judges 12: 7)

    Ibzan succeeded Jephthah and he led Israel for 7 years and he died 353 years after the exodus. After Ibzan, Elon led Israel for 10 years and died 363 years after the exodus. After Elon Abdon led Israel for 8 years and died 371 years after the exodus, See Judges 12: 8-15.

    The next leader was the prophet ELI, who led Israel for 40 years and died when the Philistines defeated the Israelites and captured the Covenant Box, 411 years after the exodus, (1 Samuel 4: 18.) The Spiritual and temporal reigns of Samuel and Samson are believed to have overlapped, and for the next 20 years the five Philistine kings ruled Israel until they were killed by Samson, who for 20 years was the thorn in the side of the Philistines, while Samuel was the Israelites spiritual guide and judge for that twenty years from the death of Eli.

    Then came Saul, who, according to Young’s Analytical Concordance ruled Israel for 40 years. Saul was followed by David who reigned for 40 years, followed by Solomon, who, in the fourth year of his reign began construction of the temple, which was completed 7 years later in the 11th year of his reign, which Temple stood for 470 years 6 months and 10 days, before being destroyed in 587 B.C.,

    587+470+11+40+40+20+40+8+10+7+6+300+40=1573 B.C. According to this, Moses, who was born 80 years before the exodus, was actually born in 1653 B.C.

    Josephus dates the exodus as occurring in 1567 B.C. 6 years later than 1573 B.C., and some 40 years before the destruction of Jericho.
     
  9. The Anointed

    The Anointed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2018
    Messages:
    1,615
    Ratings:
    +169
    Religion:
    biblical believer

    Gnostic wrote………In the gospel of Matthew, its tree started with Abraham, but in the Luke gospel, it goes alway back to Adam and to God. Plus, both trees of Joseph, showed that Joseph have different fathers, with 2 different lines Joseph to David, and those lines with Matthew’s line having go back 27 generations, while Luke’s genealogy has 42 generations.


    The Anointed……..I realise that being a atheist, you are not conversant with the scriptures that in your ignorance you attack, but the genealogy of Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, as seen in Matthew, is not the genealogy of Jesus, but of Joseph the son of Jacob, who married the already pregnant Mary, thereby becoming the step father of Jesus, having no genetic connection to the child at all.

    The genealogy as recorded in Luke, is that of Joseph the son of Heli [Alexander Helios III] from the tribe of Levi. Two different men by the name Joseph, which name was as common in those days as it is today.

    Gnostic wrote………Mary’s father was never mentioned. And the first time, Christians given the Mary-Heli connection was the early 4th century Eusebius. Did Eusebius have any literary record that explicitly says Heli was really Mary’s father, not Joseph’s father?

    The answer to that is, a “No”. Eusebius used fabricated excuses, not any lost record of Mary’s line to David.


    The Anointed……….It was Luke the companion of Paul, who in the 1st century before the sack of Jerusalem and the destruction of Herod’s temple by the Romans, wrote that Heli was definitely the father of Joseph ben Heli, the biological father of Jesus.

    Alexander Helios or Heli, was a descendant of Nathan the prophet, the son of Bathsheba from the tribe of Levi, who was adopted by King David, and Heli had a son by the name Joseph, and Heli later married Hanna the sister of Elizabeth the mother of John the Baptist, and aunty of Mary, and Heli is the father to both Joseph and Mary by two different women.

    Gnostic wrote………Beside that, Mary in the gospel of Luke, made it very explicit that she was related to Elizabeth (Luke 1:36), the mother of John the Baptist, and that Elizabeth was a descendant of Aaron (1:5).

    Which would mean Mary was most likely a descendant of Aaron too, not to David or to Judah. Joseph has been referred to as “son of David”, but Mary was never called “daughter of David”. And the story of travel to Bethlehem, stated that Joseph was of the line of David, not Mary.


    The Anointed…….. Hanna, the mother of Mary, was the daughter of Yehoshua/Jesus III, the Levite, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC and is believed to have been murdered at the orders of Herod the Great.

    Jehoshua the high priest in Jerusalem and his wife Phanuel of the tribe of Asher, were the parents of Hanna, the sister of Elizabeth, who gave birth to John the Baptist at a very advanced age, and Hanna/Anna, was the aged grandmother of Jesus.

    Gnostic wrote………As I said, the whole Mary being daughter of Heli was made up, with Eusebius first coming up with this idea, but he has nothing to verify his claim about Mary’s alleged line, let alone the identity of her parent.

    The Anointed……. From “The Ancestors of Jesus in First and Second Century Judea BCE”
    By Robert Mock M.D.
    December 2007.
    Book One
    Chapter Two we learn that this young maiden, Miriam, was a child of sorrow. Her father, Heli, a Davidic and Hasmonean prince, called Alexander Helios III, was apparently executed, in the world where many Davidian aspirants, as the “young lions of Judah”, were eliminated by the cruel and tyrannical King Herod the Great., Etc.

    A son of the famous Boethus family of seven sons, Mary’s great-great-great grandfather, arrived into Jewish history as one of the giants of the priests of the House of Zadok. The High Priest Hananeel (Ananelus) the Egyptian/Jew was privileged to sacrifice one of the nine red heifers before the temple of Herod was destroyed in 70 AD.

    The great grandfather of the biblical Jesus was Yehoshua/Jesus III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC and is believed to have been murdered at the orders of Herod the Great. The sonless Yehoshua, had three daughters, Joanna, Elizabeth and Anna/Hanna.

    Knowing that his Zadokian lineage would become extinct unless his daughters were placed with future husbands according to the Torah, he married them off to chosen husbands.

    Joanna, was betrothed to Joachim from the non-royal genetic lineage of David. The second daughter of Yehoshua III, was Elizabeth. This was the Elizabeth, who, at a very advanced age was to become the mother of John the Baptist in 7 BC, a year before the birth of Jesus and some 16 years after the death of her father in 23 BC, and she was betrothed to a Levite priest by the name Zacharias of the priestly course of Abijah.

    The young Davidian prince Heli, [Alexander Helios III] was chosen by Yehoshua/Jesus III the high priest in Jerusalem, as the candidate to marry his daughter Hanna/Anna.

    Hanna/Anna, the third daughter, was betrothed to Alexander Helios (Heli) a young Macedonian Jew, of the tribe of Judah through Nathan the Levite, who was the stepson of King David.

    Gnostic wrote………But the problem isn’t just with Matthew and Luke. There is also the problem with the gospel of Matthew when you compared the lines of 1 & 2 Kings (OT), in which the the gospels are missing 4 generations. I would guess that 3 of omitted names (Ahaziah, Joash & Amaziah) were made in the gospel, because the author want to use the magic number “14 generations”.


    The Anointed……… Ahaziah was the only son of Ahab and Jezebel, and was not in the line of descent from King David. Ahaziah died childless. His sister, ‘Athaliah’ had married Joram/Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat, and Joram the son-in-law to Ahab, ruled Israel after the death of his brother-in-law for four years until the death of his father Jehoshaphat the King of Judah, in the beginning of his fifth year as King of Israel, he then ruled both Israel and Judah for eight years.

    Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat, who married Athaliah the daughter of Ahab, is recorded in the genealogy of Matthew.

    Athaliah named their firstborn son after her dead brother ‘Ahaziah,’ and after ruling both Israel and Judah for 12 years, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat, set his son ‘Ahaziah’ [The Grandson of Ahab and Jezebel] as King of Judah. This ‘Ahaziah’ [The Grandson of Ahab and Jezebel] is not recorded in Matthew.

    Joash, the son of Ahaziah was the great grandson of Ahab and Jezebel, his name is also missing in Matthew 1.

    Amaziah, the son of Joash, was the great- great grandson of Ahab and Jezebel. Amaziah, the father of Uzziah, is also missing from the genealogy as recorded in Matthew.

    Matthew has Jehoshaphat, his son Jehoram……3 descendants of Ahab missing……then Uzziah the fourth generation from Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat, as descendants of King David.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,444
    Ratings:
    +15,246
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Why assume that atheists do not understand the myths of the Bible? They often understand them better, as in this case, due to their lack of belief.
     
  11. The Anointed

    The Anointed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2018
    Messages:
    1,615
    Ratings:
    +169
    Religion:
    biblical believer
    The very fact that they believe the bible is a book of myths, proves beyond all doubt that they are incapable of comprehending the truths revealed therein.
     
  12. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,444
    Ratings:
    +15,246
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Not so. Understanding the Bible allows one to see that it is largely a book of myths.
     
  13. joelr

    joelr Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    800
    Ratings:
    +304


    There is much much more than that. The point isn't to even try to"cover" it, it's not possible. The point is it clearly isn't prophetic. Some things come true and many many other don't. Some things are sort of weasled around by apologetics and some are obviously just left alone.
    This is what you would expect if something was written by men.

    There are over 200 things on this list, we haven't even gotten to the good stuff (NT). It's the same thing with Nostradamus prophecies. Some came true, some came true in a vague way and many other things didn't.
     
  14. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,444
    Ratings:
    +15,246
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Perhaps you should be asking how we know that it is a myth. For example Luke totally botched his nativity myth. That is why no serious scholar takes that part of Luke's work seriously at all.

    In fact both Matthew and Luke fabricated a nativity story so naturally they do not agree with each other. At one point in time Matthew's lineage was argued to be that of Mary's. There is no legitimate reason to think that either is correct.
     
  15. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    2,239
    Ratings:
    +302
    Religion:
    None
    Some things can be compared to Nostradamus style writing.
    But... (as always, the but) even the vaguest of bible prophecies
    usually belong to similar ones which are more fully fleshed out.
    Isaiah 53 is the most complete and succinct Gospel - and it is
    in the Old Testament: born of a woman, rejected by his people,
    tried, executed and raised again.
    One worth reading are two chapters in Ezekiel which speak of
    a war yet to come, involving Israel's return (but not from Babylon
    where Ezekiel was exiled.) Chapter 38 and 39 are definitely NOT
    in the style of Nostradamus - they give everything except the date
    and the ally of Israel (who wasn't known at the time of writing.)

    As for 'written by men'...
    what our cognoscenti can't explain, they ignore. I ask Jews who
    was David writing about in Psalm 22 and 69 - it certainly wasn't
    himself having his hands and feet pierced. They can't answer.
    Until recently Jews couldn't answer who Isaiah 53 was speaking
    of - these days (thanks to the Internet perhaps) they will say it's
    Israel. This answer is the "best fit" next to admitting it's Jesus.
    Israel BTW never atoned for others, nor resurrected to see the
    fullness of their suffering.
     
  16. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    2,239
    Ratings:
    +302
    Religion:
    None
    This is what happens. You have multiple accounts of an historic event.
    Each vary, ie two accounts of the Hannibal myth (?)
    Critics say the Gospels were written centuries later, even by the Roman
    Catholic church (absurd) but if so then why the discrepancies? Why
    weren't these ironed out? How could one thief on the cross repent in one
    account, and rail upon Jesus in another?
    But the whole purpose of the four accounts was to give us four people's
    views of the events.
     
  17. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    27,444
    Ratings:
    +15,246
    Religion:
    Atheist
    The problem is that the differences go beyond mere viewpoints.

    And no, most critics say that the gospels were written over a generation later, most at least two, than the events that they portrayed. They were not eyewitness accounts. They were stories about stories.
     
  18. joelr

    joelr Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    800
    Ratings:
    +304

    All scholarship believes the bible is all myths, so the idea that someone is "incapable of comprehending truths" is delusional.

    There is no doubt that the gospels read as myth. Histories were not written this way.
    Histories from those times did:
    name sources, discuss skepticism, amazement at incredible events.

    The markers of myth are very high in all gospels. They emulate prior myths and are aimed at teaching lessons.
    No other sources attest gospel events except forged documents and histories that just repeat what the gospels already say.

    If you're interested a PhD covers much of this as well as how the Jesus story copies the Moses story as well as takes things from the Elijah-Elisha tale, and much more on how scholars know we are looking at myth - markan sandwiches, ring structure and so on

    15:46 he starts with the Moses parallels
    at 24:43 he speaks about mythic structure, ring structure etc..

     
    #758 joelr, Jan 27, 2019
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  19. PruePhillip

    PruePhillip Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2018
    Messages:
    2,239
    Ratings:
    +302
    Religion:
    None
    Well, Luke wrote the Acts prior to 64 AD.
    He is also the author of the Gospel of Luke.

    There's this site I have just started reading
    it challenges the "Markian myth" that Mark
    wrote the first Gospel. Trouble with lots of
    academic fashions is that this is all they
    often are - fashions of belief.

    Interestingly, this site mentions the use of
    Hebrew "shorthand" for accounts. I wonder
    if John used such shorthand, his own account
    seems to have been written as it happened.
     
  20. joelr

    joelr Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2014
    Messages:
    800
    Ratings:
    +304
    Kata specifically means "according to" in Greek. Bible historians believe around the 2nd century one person (or a group) took those 4 gospels and used this designation to "source" the gospels. This became the 2nd official canon which was in response to the first canon the Marcionite canon.
    My PhD source for this is below if needed.

    As scholar John Dominic Crossman pointed out all of the gospels are extended parables and were meant to be that. The creeds originally in Paul don't mention Pontius Pilate, Mary or anything about the life of Jesus.
    Many decades later we have Bishop Ignasius who was part of a sect that was pushing for literal historicity. That sect was power hungry and able to get the ear of Constantine and make things literal.

    Luke copies the Elija-Elisha story the most of all the gospels. Historians don't disqualify Luke because of miracles, they know it's a re-telling of Kings for one. This has been pointed out by many PhD, including Thomas Brodie, Raymond Brown, Craig Evans and Randal Helms

    The same exact phrases are used in Greek in both stories.
    Luke 1:5-17 reverses Kings 16:29-17:1
    Luke 7:1-10 transforms 1 Kings 17:1-6
    Luke 7:11-17 transforms 1 Kings 17:1-6
    Luke 7:18-25 transforms 1 Kings 22
    Luke 7:36-50 plays on 2 Kings 4:1-37
    Luke 8:1-3 plays on 1 Kings 18
    Luke 9:57-62 transforms 1 Kings 19
    Luke 10:1-20 transforms 2 Kings 2:16-3

    and so on....

    Your wrong about John, the authentic letters know NOTHING about his life, his teachings, examples of his deeds, it's very odd. Paul only knows of the resurrection and he knows it by revelation and "scripture".



    source on Greek Kata and gospel dating 4:06
     
Loading...