• 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!

What Jesus said! Jesus Himself? How, What and where?

firedragon

Veteran Member
Not in any formal setting

No problem. Its still great. Thanks.

The bhagavad geetha was ranked among one of the top read books of top CEO's around the world. I think that was almost 20 years ago. This book was known among them for business strategy. Well, that was an amazing thing.

The dhammapada contrary to some people is part of the Sutta pitaka, and is probably the number one read part of the Buddhist Tripitaka. What a read. But these two are so contrasting. I mean the Bhagavad geetha and the Dhammapadha.

Also you spoke of Ecclesiastes. Thats my most favourite read in the Tanakh. Love it. In my opinion the philosophy is quite different to other books in the Bible. Except for the proposed redaction at the end.

So the reason I responded to your post was because you spoke of some of my most favourite books as if I secretly messaged you to please me. ;)

Thanks and cheers.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
Very good. So whats the method? Please explain what you mean.

At the present stage of its development, the historical-critical method moves through the following steps:

Textual criticism, as practiced for a very long time, begins the series of scholarly operations. Basing itself on the testimony of the oldest and best manuscripts, as well as of papyri, certain ancient versions and patristic texts, textual-criticism seeks to establish, according to fixed rules, a biblical text as close as possible to the original.

The text is then submitted to a linguistic (morphology and syntax) and semantic analysis, using the knowledge derived from historical philology. It is the role of literary criticism to determine the beginning and end of textual units, large and small, and to establish the internal coherence of the text. The existence of doublets, of irreconcilable differences and of other indicators is a clue to the composite character of certain texts. These can then be divided into small units, the next step being to see whether these in turn can be assigned to different sources.

Genre criticism seeks to identify literary genres, the social milieu that gave rise to them, their particular features and the history of their development. Tradition criticism situates texts in the stream of tradition and attempts to describe the development of this tradition over the course of time. Finally, redaction criticism studies the modifications that these texts have undergone before being fixed in their final state, it also analyzes this final stage, trying as far as possible to identify the tendencies particularly characteristic of this concluding process.

While the preceding steps have sought to explain the text by tracing its origin and development within a diachronic perspective, this last step concludes with a study that is synchronic: At this point the text is explained as it stands, on the basis of the mutual relationships between its diverse elements, and with an eye to its character as a message communicated by the author to his contemporaries. At this point one is in a position to consider the demands of the text from the point of view of action and life (fonction pragmatique).

When the texts studied belong to a historical literary genre or are related to events of history, historical criticism completes literary criticism so as to determine the historical significance of the text in the modern sense of this expression.

It is in this way that one accounts for the various stages that lie behind the biblical revelation in its concrete historical development.

Interpretation of the Bible in the Church (bc.edu)
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Muslims, Bahai's, Christians, Some Hindus, and even a few Jews, quote sayings of Jesus as if they are historical sayings of Jesus himself. Of course most Christians would definitely believe the New Testament has his sayings in some form or another. Some believe they are absolutely verbatim, while some believe it is the inspiration worded by a human being.

Muslims typically use the New Testament quotes to validate their own faith. Bahai's do the same thing. Christians of course as understandable would use all of it for their whole theology or more. Some Hindus who believe in a Bahai like theology where a new representative of God is the incarnation of Jesus himself would use the New Testament to derive some quotes for their theology.

I cant list all the institutions who do this so please understand.

Other than the methodology of "faith", what other historical method do you use to validate any of Jesus's attributed statements in the NT?
They probably use the same epistemology you use to validate Mohammed statements. A priori belief in a magical book, basically.

ciao

- viole
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
At the present stage of its development, the historical-critical method moves through the following steps:

Textual criticism, as practiced for a very long time, begins the series of scholarly operations. Basing itself on the testimony of the oldest and best manuscripts, as well as of papyri, certain ancient versions and patristic texts, textual-criticism seeks to establish, according to fixed rules, a biblical text as close as possible to the original.

The text is then submitted to a linguistic (morphology and syntax) and semantic analysis, using the knowledge derived from historical philology. It is the role of literary criticism to determine the beginning and end of textual units, large and small, and to establish the internal coherence of the text. The existence of doublets, of irreconcilable differences and of other indicators is a clue to the composite character of certain texts. These can then be divided into small units, the next step being to see whether these in turn can be assigned to different sources.

Genre criticism seeks to identify literary genres, the social milieu that gave rise to them, their particular features and the history of their development. Tradition criticism situates texts in the stream of tradition and attempts to describe the development of this tradition over the course of time. Finally, redaction criticism studies the modifications that these texts have undergone before being fixed in their final state, it also analyzes this final stage, trying as far as possible to identify the tendencies particularly characteristic of this concluding process.

While the preceding steps have sought to explain the text by tracing its origin and development within a diachronic perspective, this last step concludes with a study that is synchronic: At this point the text is explained as it stands, on the basis of the mutual relationships between its diverse elements, and with an eye to its character as a message communicated by the author to his contemporaries. At this point one is in a position to consider the demands of the text from the point of view of action and life (fonction pragmatique).

When the texts studied belong to a historical literary genre or are related to events of history, historical criticism completes literary criticism so as to determine the historical significance of the text in the modern sense of this expression.

It is in this way that one accounts for the various stages that lie behind the biblical revelation in its concrete historical development.

Interpretation of the Bible in the Church (bc.edu)

Genre criticism? Textual criticism?

Okay. So can you show how you apply "Textual Criticism and Genre Criticism" that you spoke of on the text of the NT and determine what are the actual words of Jesus?

Please demonstrate.
 

DNB

Christian
No DNB. Its incorrect. But that's fine.



Again, the gospel writers have taken statements from the Septuagint. That is an external critique you are making, and prophecies being corroborated by later writers does not mean they are authentic statements of Jesus himself. While the NT makes some profound statements as you say, a lot of them dont conform to the OT.
All Jesus' sayings conform to the OT. There was a time when the austerity of God was necessary in order to prove His holiness, and our wickedness. Jesus fulfilled the Law, thus proving its justification, but also allowing God to abrogate it. Therefore, also revealing God's mercy.
It is the wisdom and profundity of both Testaments, that compels me to accept the Bible's veracity in its entirety. So, yes, my faith is acquired, but through tangible means. Outside of love, Jesus did not repeat what every other charismatic did before, or after him. He made claims, and offered interpretations unheard of before. In other words, he made it rather easy to reject him, thus one's faith in Jesus and all that the Bible asserts that he did and said, has deeper convictions than just one hoping that it's true. He brought a sword to separate mother from daughter and wife from husband, etc...
 

DNB

Christian
Show me a verse in the Tanakh that says " I and my father are one" and "disciples, me and God are one (Not verbatim)"
Genesis 2:21-24
2:21. So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22. The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." 24. For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Genesis 2:21-24
2:21. So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22. The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." 24. For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

No. Thats not a man telling God "You and I are one". Or/and saying "You, me, disciples are one".

This is a man and a woman becoming one flesh. Absolutely different.

Yet I respect your interaction DNB. Its always a privilege.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Old science testimonials. No temple pyramid allowed advice.

Then new life sacrifice in the rebuilt temple modern technology pyramids.

Told not to rebuild. Did it anyway. As rich men rule the earth.

Jewish Christian movement began new advice teaching. Was verbal. Documented human attacks and human possessions and human healings. As healers.

As that is what healers did and still do.

Prayer meditation healing balms oils remedies. Review body types ailments treatments.

Journals medical spiritual and phenomena seen.

In the general community.

Orders used namesakes to denote spiritual human hierarchy. Same as any medical association does today.

Knowledge wisdom determined what order you were working with by status what I proved I knew.

Ignored advice by occult radiation scientists and elite ownership as per usual human greedy man behaviours.

Jewish began healing temple status first. Why Roman Catholic taught by Jewish Christian movement built their buildings on resonance understanding of the Rocks facure.

Like using crystals as supportive reasoning assisted healing. Yet as natural stone dusts in environment were irradiating it was difficult.

Lots of journals were then used in Romes choice to write the New testimonials.

Which historic owns why various groups were angry at them first for not listening to rational advice.

Hence the journals written about human behaviours is not assisting natural history of humans owned self development.
 

DNB

Christian
No. Thats not a man telling God "You and I are one". Or/and saying "You, me, disciples are one".

This is a man and a woman becoming one flesh. Absolutely different.

Yet I respect your interaction DNB. Its always a privilege.
But, the principle is there. We can go on forever splitting hairs on what relationships can become one i.e. team members, family members, office workers, dance partners, friends, three musketeers, ... If you're looking for a verbatim remark from the Old Testament, that Jesus cited in the New, then you're not being reasonable and are missing the point. I'm stating that the principles were shared between the Old and New, and when they contradicted, it was only because there was a changing of the guard as Jesus acknowledged - which is why there are two Covenants. Certain precepts are meant to be antithetical to one another, in order to appreciate the significance and superiority of the New Law.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
Okay. So can you show how you apply "Textual Criticism and Genre Criticism" that you spoke of on the text of the NT and determine what are the actual words of Jesus?

I do not believe we will ever 'know' the 'actual' words of Jesus, the first stage in the compilation of the Gospels, as Jesus wrote nothing. 2nd stage, the oral tradition, the preaching of the Apostles, establishing Christian churches,
3rd and final stage, the Gospels as we have them now with the 'sayings' of Jesus in narrative form. Outside of the hypothetical "Q" source there is no collection of Jesus words.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I do not believe we will ever 'know' the 'actual' words of Jesus, the first stage in the compilation of the Gospels, as Jesus wrote nothing. 2nd stage, the oral tradition, the preaching of the Apostles, establishing Christian churches,
3rd and final stage, the Gospels as we have them now with the 'sayings' of Jesus in narrative form. Outside of the hypothetical "Q" source there is no collection of Jesus words.

There is no evidence of an oral tradition. What was the chain of oral transmission? From who to whom?

Think about it.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I do not believe we will ever 'know' the 'actual' words of Jesus, the first stage in the compilation of the Gospels, as Jesus wrote nothing. 2nd stage, the oral tradition, the preaching of the Apostles, establishing Christian churches,
3rd and final stage, the Gospels as we have them now with the 'sayings' of Jesus in narrative form. Outside of the hypothetical "Q" source there is no collection of Jesus words.

Hold on. I neglected the answer you gave in answer to "textual criticism and genre criticism". Is this the answer? Is this your application of textual criticism and genre criticism? OMG.
 
Top