Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Hitch is dead
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 471 of 560 (875975)
05-10-2020 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 469 by ringo
05-10-2020 2:00 PM


Re: Historical and/or Fiction
ringo writes:
I have more respect for Faith's version than I do for your made-up version. You and Phat clearly want a cutesy teddy bear of a God. You have no interest in the "God that is" (if there is one). You don't accept God as He is (if He is). You create Him in the image you want to see.
First off, it isn't made up. It is consistent with middle of the road Anglicanism, and for that matter it is Biblical if you don't try and turn the Bible into something essentially dictated by God.
Also, you patronizingly call it cutesy. It seems that you insist that God has to be a genocidal tyrant. Fine if that is what you believe then so be it.
Jesus was far from cutesy. With a small group of guys from the peasant class he stood up to everyone in power within his culture whether it was in the Temple or in the palaces. He went up against the Levites, the Pharisees, the Herodians and the Romans.
On faith and guts Jesus went into Jerusalem, claiming His messiahship, understanding that it would in all probability mean a slow, torturous humiliating death. He did all this with the belief, that He gained through study and prayer, that through doing this God would in some way vindicate His life, message and death.
Not really cutesy.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 469 by ringo, posted 05-10-2020 2:00 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 472 by ringo, posted 05-11-2020 12:36 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 474 of 560 (876006)
05-11-2020 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 472 by ringo
05-11-2020 12:36 PM


Re: Historical and/or Fiction
ringo writes:
That doesn't preclude it from being made up.
In one very real sense it is made up and I have no doubt that some of what I believe is wrong. It is faith and belief. Christianity is a man made religion that is built around the belief that Jesus as a Jew was resurrected by God.
It then takes accounts from both oral and written sources from those who were apostles or disciples of Jesus during His ministry. The Bible represents a progressive understanding of the nature of God, within a Jewish context, as compiled by fallible humans.
ringo writes:
In other words, it's Biblical if you make up your own Bible, ignoring the parts of the actual Bible that you don't like.
You want it both ways. You want to disparage Faith for a inerrant view of Scripture and then at the same time disparage my belief in a Bible written by imperfect humans.
GDR writes:
It seems that you insist that God has to be a genocidal tyrant.
ringo writes:
I'm just going by YOUR source, which says He is.
There are 66 books in the Bible from hundreds of sources over hundreds of years, and you want to insist that I give them all equal credibility.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 472 by ringo, posted 05-11-2020 12:36 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 493 by ringo, posted 05-12-2020 7:42 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 478 of 560 (876021)
05-11-2020 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 476 by Stile
05-11-2020 4:26 PM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
GDR writes:
Most of what Jesus taught was counter-cultural.
Stile writes:
I thought it's one of your major points that "the golden rule" (which is, really... "most of what Jesus taught...") is pretty much present in all cultures?
The "Golden Rule" would have been present and can even be found in the Hebrew Scriptures, but it was still counter-cultural. They hated the Romans and Jesus was telling them to love their enemies.
Stile writes:
Just because something isn't popular - doesn't mean it didn't exist.
One for Stile. Interestingly enough there was a period where the Romans labeled the Christians as atheists.
Stile writes:
Yet he did get food and water and shelter by "followers" everywhere he went.
Sounds like incentive to me.
As much incentive as anyone ever has... travel, accommodations, food, friends...
I never said they were all instant sultans.
I understand you don't want them to have any other incentive - that's clear.
And I'm also not saying I know what their incentive was.
But to say that you do know exactly what their incentive was, for sure, and that no other incentive could possibly exist - that's also clearly false.
Well, in reading ancient history we can see that there were certainly disincentives, starting with the stoning of Stephen.
I think that we can have a fairly good understanding of their incentive. Say I had been a follower of Jesus 2000 years ago. Suddenly this man I had been a disciple of is humiliating crucified by the Romans. Obviously a messiah can't be crucified by the enemy so I come to the realization that Jesus was simply a failed messiah. However a couple of days later Jesus shows up again but He is different some how. He has been resurrected and tells us that we are to spread His message, as confirmed by God with the resurrection, to the nations. That seems to me to be the likely incentive.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 476 by Stile, posted 05-11-2020 4:26 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 479 by Tangle, posted 05-11-2020 5:39 PM GDR has replied
 Message 482 by Stile, posted 05-12-2020 8:24 AM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 480 of 560 (876027)
05-11-2020 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 479 by Tangle
05-11-2020 5:39 PM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Tangle writes:
Yup. You've cracked it. The story you heard that he died but then someone tells you he resurrected himself is conclusive - solves all your problems, why would anybody tell that story? I really can't think.
In my hypothetical I was an eye witness. As there were a sufficient number of us that dedicated our life to having witnesses the resurrected Jesus, others also came to believe that it was historical. I guessing that we can't count you in as part of that group.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 479 by Tangle, posted 05-11-2020 5:39 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 481 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2020 2:56 AM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 483 of 560 (876076)
05-12-2020 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 481 by Tangle
05-12-2020 2:56 AM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Tangle writes:
You assume the stories are true because you say such eye witnesses existed, but the way the stories in the bible evolve and grow over time demonstrates that they didn't. They were added into the story later to make them more believable. It wasn't even in the very first version of the bible - Mark.
I've read Carrier before. He has his point of view. He writes about Genevieve and tries to draw a parallel between that story and the resurrection.
You would think that he could do better than that. Nobody ever followed her are concurred with the account. In short order Jesus' resurrection garnered a following that began with the eye witnesses.
Also you make a point about the early manuscript of Mark ending at 16:8. Good grief. I doubt that there is anyone who disputes that. It is also generally conceded that the original ending of Mark was lost. This wouldn't be surprising as it would have been written on a scroll. The endings and often the beginnings did get lost. The dead sea scrolls were missing many of their beginnings and endings.
Papias a contemporary of Polycarp wrote this.
Papias quote writes:
The Elder [John] also said this, Mark, being the interpreter of Peter, whatsoever he remembered he wrote accurately, but not however in the order that these things were spoken or done by our Lord. For he neither heard the Lord, nor followed him, but afterwards, as I said, he was with Peter, who did not make a complete [or ordered] account of the Lord’s logia, but constructed his teachings according to chreiai [concise self-contained teachings]. So Mark did nothing wrong in writing down single matters as he remembered them, for he gave special attention to one thing, of not passing by anything he heard, and not falsifying anything in these matters.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 481 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2020 2:56 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 485 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2020 12:44 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 484 of 560 (876080)
05-12-2020 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 482 by Stile
05-12-2020 8:24 AM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Stile writes:
And let's say that none of that actually happened.
Doesn't the story seem a bit more enticing than 'nothing at all?'
That seems like a very likely incentive as well.
Firstly who would believe it unless there was considerable support from a large group of eye witnesses.
We know the most about Paul. He had a position of influence and power with the Pharisees and was strongly committed to that movement. He completely gave that up to follow Jesus leading to a life that involved being often dependent on hand outs, being tortured and spending considerable time in priison.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 482 by Stile, posted 05-12-2020 8:24 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 488 by Stile, posted 05-12-2020 2:41 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 486 of 560 (876084)
05-12-2020 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 485 by Tangle
05-12-2020 12:44 PM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Tangle writes:
So to remind you of what you say everyone knows, Mark, the anonymous author of the earliest gospel who, you tell us gets the story from Peter does not have the resurrection in his account! It's added over a century later by we don't know who. Obviously a total fabrication.
This, you tell us, is the most important event in the entire book, the event that you tell us you hang your whole faith on; without it you tell us your religion would be defunct. Yet it's missing from the first, and one would expect, the most reliable description of supposed events. How can you possibly think that any of this is in anyway reliable?
It isn't conclusive, but the majority of scholars believe that the original ending was lost.
However even with just the original ending at 16:8 it doesn't just end with an empty tomb, but also with the statement that "His is Risen". Also the whole book of Mark recognizes Jesus as "Son of God". There is no reason to assign that title to Jesus without resurrection.
Tangle writes:
A matter of belief I suppose. It overrides all possible objections from fact.
..as is the disbelief in the whole narrative.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 485 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2020 12:44 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 487 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2020 2:17 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 489 of 560 (876102)
05-12-2020 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 487 by Tangle
05-12-2020 2:17 PM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Tangle writes:
But for whatever reason it wasn't there! Someone filled in the hole a hundred plus years later with a story that you like. I'm asking why - how - you can possibly find that believable? Not only is it not evidence being entirely hearsay anyway, it's actually a forgery - added to later.
Actually we don't know that it wasn't original, but I'm pretty much convinced it wasn't.
I don't see it as a forgery. There was actually more than one ending tacked on but this was the one they stuck with. I would contend that whoever did write it did it in a manner that they believed Mark had ended it prior to it being lost. The other synoptics used Mark as source material for much of what they wrote so the tagged on ending is reasonable. Also, as I already pointed out, the uncontested part does not only end with an empty tomb but also with a risen Jesus.
Tangle writes:
It wouldn't even get thrown out of court as poor evidence, it wouldn't even get to court at all - it's so non-evidential. Yet it's all the 'evidence' you have that you hang this shebang off.
There are lots of things that are true that get thrown out of court.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 487 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2020 2:17 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 492 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2020 5:33 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 490 of 560 (876103)
05-12-2020 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 488 by Stile
05-12-2020 2:41 PM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Stile writes:
To imply such fabrications would be impossible... when they still happen today, with all the tools now available to us... is pretty silly.
I'm not sure why you would say that. I have never said or implied that it is impossible that it was fabricated. I have simply claimed that it is less likely to be a fabrication, than that they got it essentially correct for the reasons that I have given.
Regardless, it is belief.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 488 by Stile, posted 05-12-2020 2:41 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 491 by Stile, posted 05-12-2020 4:02 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 494 of 560 (876122)
05-12-2020 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 491 by Stile
05-12-2020 4:02 PM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Stile writes:
That, to me, implies a rhetorical question with the answer being: "If the eye witnesses didn't exist - then no one would have believed the story and the Christian religion would have fizzled before it began."
It is my position that without eye witnesses and the Christian religion wouldn't have fizzled, it would never have been considered.
I don't see how anyone can read the NT without realizing that the authors firmly believed the eye witnesses, and it is generally conceded that the Gospel of John was written by an eye witness, either John son of Zebedee or John the Elder and probably the latter.
I realize that they could be using metaphorical language but the Jews had numerous others that would have been more likely candidates than some one who had not raised an army, was no threat to the Romans and who had suffered the most humiliating death possible. It was never suggested that any of the Maccabean leaders were resurrected even though they talked about it while being tortuously put to death, and they had actually reigned for 100 years.
Stile writes:
That being said, however, I understand if I mis-read your implications and took your reasoning to a level you did not intend.
In the end I don't know that the resurrection is historical but I do strongly believe that it is.
AbE
Stile writes:
But such is the never-ending discussion and fun.
Think how much more fun you could have if you came over from the dark side.
Edited by GDR, : No reason given.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 491 by Stile, posted 05-12-2020 4:02 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 503 by Stile, posted 05-14-2020 12:17 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 495 of 560 (876123)
05-12-2020 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 492 by Tangle
05-12-2020 5:33 PM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Tangle writes:
Mark was not an eyewitness. His story was completed by more anonymous people over a hundred ears later under the same name.
According to Papias who the Gospel was written by Mark, (likely Jean Mark) who was a companion of Peter.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 492 by Tangle, posted 05-12-2020 5:33 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 497 by Tangle, posted 05-13-2020 3:53 AM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 496 of 560 (876124)
05-12-2020 8:22 PM
Reply to: Message 493 by ringo
05-12-2020 7:42 PM


Re: Historical and/or Fiction
ringo writes:
Not at all. I disparage Faith for having a view of scripture that directly contradicts scripture. I disparage you for having a made-up view of God that ignores most of scripture. Neither of you sees scripture for what it is.
I have given a rational for how I understand the Bible.
How about you tell us how you see the Scripture as it really is.
ringo writes:
Pretty much. You have no rationale for your cherry-picking except what you want to hear.
I understand through the message of Jesus. It isn't that complicated. Jesus Himself refutes much of OT teaching. Frankly, sometimes my understanding of Jesus has been exactly what I don't want to hear. It is simply what I believe to be true.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 493 by ringo, posted 05-12-2020 7:42 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 501 by ringo, posted 05-14-2020 11:23 AM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 499 of 560 (876180)
05-13-2020 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 497 by Tangle
05-13-2020 3:53 AM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Tangle writes:
Except that it's now accepted that Mark wrote his stories from a compilation of hearsay and myth.
The following is a summary of the work of Richard Bauckham a Cambridge professor who has done a massive amount of research of the ancient documents and shows the strong evidence that the narrator of Mark was a disciple of Peter, as confirmed by Papias and Polycarp.
Eyewitness Testimony
Tangle writes:
And the development of the resurection story over time is very obvious.
That is only true in the sense that theologians from the 1st centruy until now are still working out what it is that we should take away from what God did in resurrecting Jesus. However, from the beginning it was understood that God had resurrected Jesus. The earliest Christian writings that we have are Paul's Epistles and He is very clear that God resurrected Jesus. Paul wrote this about 53AD.
quote:
12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.
As far as Christ coming again is concerned there are a number of ways of looking at that. Firstly I agree that many of the early Christians were expecting Him to come again sooner rather than later. It really isn't very clear though. Jesus often referred to Himself as the Son of Man. This is clear reference to Daniel 7 where we have one like a Son of Man "coming" to the Ancient of Days. In a sense that is a second coming and the texts can be construed that way. Personally I'm not concerned about when ,and I even concede that it might simply be that Christ comes again to us individually when we "shuffle off this mortal coil".
Also the call from Jesus on the cross of "My God My God why have you forsaken me" is as that wiki article has done misconstrued what Jesus meant. The writer of that wiki article takes it out of context. It is the first line of Psalm 22. The Jews that were at the cross would understand that He was drawing their attention to that psalm, which they would all be familiar with. When we go down to vs 24 the psalmist has written this.
quote:
24 For he has not despised or scorned the suffering of the afflicted one; he has not hidden his face from him but has listened to his cry for help.
In other words Jesus is saying to them that even in His darkest hour when it looks like He has been forsaken, He hasn't been. God is with Him in His suffering.
Edited by GDR, : typo

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 497 by Tangle, posted 05-13-2020 3:53 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 500 by Tangle, posted 05-14-2020 3:07 AM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 504 of 560 (876214)
05-14-2020 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 503 by Stile
05-14-2020 12:17 PM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Stile writes:
I actually agree with this.
I just go a few more steps.
With this information, and the following:
That sounds like a great starting point.
Stile writes:
-how (un)reliable we know eye witnesses are
The key to the whole thing is the resurrection. It is similar to the accounts of witnesses to any occurrence such as a car accident. They may disagree on the details but they all agree that the accident occurred. Some of the accounts around the resurrection are inconsistent, but there is no disagreement about their assertion that the resurrection happened.
Stile writes:
-how reality-ignoring we understand religions can be
Agreed, but in this case there is no evidence that there was anyone who had considered even the possibility that anyone would be resurrected as an individual within their time. Here is a quote from John 11.
quote:
23 Jesus said to her, Your brother will rise again. 24 Martha answered, I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.
They believed that there would be a general resurrection, presumably for Jews anyway, at the end of time. The idea of resurrection in the middle of human history had never been considered as far as we know from all the records. Lazarus of course was resuscitated as a mortal into a finite life, whereas resurrection was about being raised into a renewed and eternal physicality.
Stile writes:
-how "my-way-or-the-high-way" we understand religions can be
I suppose, but in this case it meant that there was a major downside of following Jesus, as besides being ostracized by your community it could mean torture and death. Look what happened to Jesus and Stephen. I suppose that you could use the heaven and hell argument, but that would only resonate if you were prepared to believe something that was completely outside of the expectet. Also of course all the early Christians had to leave the faith that they had been born and raised in, as well as accept a new life style that emphasized mercy, peace and love in the midst of living under the thumb of a brutal and life threatening Roman regime.
Stile writes:
-how we know the speed of which the hope of "a saviour" can flourish through an oppressed population
Agreed, but in this case Jesus as saviour wasn’t at all like what a saviour was supposed to be. A saviour was to lead them and drive the Romans out of the promised land. Jesus is telling them to love their enemies. How do you think a saviour like that would have been received in Nazi occupied areas in 1942?
Stile writes:
everything we know about mob-mentality
I haven’t seen a lot of mobs going around telling people to love their neighbours and even their enemies.
Stile writes:
-everything we know about history's ability (or lack-of) for "fact-checking"
There are those at the time that some of the eye witnesses were still alive that claimed to have done much fact-checking. For example, Luke, Papias and Polycarp. Certainly it has been difficult over the centuries for historians to do much fact checking and as a result Christianity took on a lot of Latin and Hellenistic thinking, which involved both the theology and the position of the church. Recently however, with the discovery of material such as the dead sea scrolls there is more information available and even more specifically is the fact that there is such a wealth of material instantly available for scholars to work with on the internet. Here is an interesting article about ancient documents that came out a couple of years ago. Secrets Hidden in Ancient Manuscripts There is nothing there specific to what we are talking about but it is an example of how we are continuing to have a better understanding of ancient times. There is certainly many on both sides of this issue that are engaged in historical fact finding.
Stile writes:
-everything we know about story- telling
There are certainly legendary accounts of events in the Bible but I contend that the resurrection does not have the kind of feel to it. I would agree that the nativity stories do have a legendary feel, so I have a much more tentative belief about that.
Stile writes:
-everything we know about how stories-to-embellishment-to-myths were major/popular historical tools
I can’t disagree with that, but that usually happens over longer periods of time. NT accounts were being written and circulated while there were still eye witnesses to confirm or reject them. However I do agree that there is a strong likelihood of embellishments in the Gospels.
Stile writes:
-everything we know about how the game "telephone" works
IMHO there isn’t much of that going on in the NT. I think that the evidence favours the belief that John was written by an eye witnesses, and that the other books were written by either eye witnesses or individuals that had direct contact with eye witnesses.
Stile writes:
how can anyone read anything in the Bible (or any other ancient religious or even folk-lore-related text) and say "Yup - this happened, no doubt."
I don’t think that I have suggested that anyone can, nor can anyone say that nope — this didn’t happen, no doubt. I remain convinced that the essential element of the NT, which is that God resurrected Jesus into a renewed and physical form of existence, is historical. I can’t say that it happened — no doubt . However, Christianity makes sense of my life and the world I live in, in a way that nothing else does.
Stile writes:
I understand this doesn't show "it didn't happen."
..and it doesn’t show that it did.
Stile writes:
But to be convinced it did happen - with all we know about how humans operate - pushes the boundaries of credibility (for me.)
Again IMHO, I suggest that if the disciples wanted to keep the movement that Jesus started going and so created a legendary account around it, that this isn’t at all what they would have come up with. Firstly, in spite of what some on this forum have claimed there is no personal motivation for them to do that. Their leader had died a humiliating death at the hands of the enemy. (Paul even has to write that he wasn’t ashamed to preach a crucified messiah.) It would have taken the collusion of many in order to pull it off, and it would have meant having their accounts perfectly in line with each other.
As you agreed, they believed that God had resurrected Jesus, and it would be something very difficult to believe without having overwhelming evidence.
Cheers

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 503 by Stile, posted 05-14-2020 12:17 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 517 by Stile, posted 05-20-2020 1:11 PM GDR has replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 505 of 560 (876222)
05-14-2020 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 500 by Tangle
05-14-2020 3:07 AM


Re: It is about sacrificial love
Tangle writes:
And the following is strong evidence that the anonymous author of Mark (who never claims to have even met Peter) was not a disciple of Peter. Papias also never met any of the apostles and got his 'information' from oral traditions. It's an edifice built on speculation and hearsay
Mark doesn't directly claim to have been a disciple of Peter but the evidence points that way. We have this from Papias.
quote:
The Elder also said this, Mark, being the interpreter of Peter, whatsoever he remembered he wrote accurately, but not however in the order that these things were spoken or done by our Lord. For he neither heard the Lord, nor followed him, but afterwards, as I said, he was with Peter, who did not make a complete [or ordered] account of the Lord’s logia, but constructed his teachings according to chreiai [concise self-contained teachings]. So Mark did nothing wrong in writing down single matters as he remembered them, for he gave special attention to one thing, of not passing by anything he heard, and not falsifying anything in these matters.
Papias also wrote the following.
quote:
I shall not hesitate also to put into ordered form for you, along with the interpretations, everything I learned carefully in the past from the elders and noted down carefully, for the truth of which I vouch. For unlike most people I took no pleasure in those who told many different stories, but only in those who taught the truth. Nor did I take pleasure in those who reported their memory of someone else’s commandments, but only in those who reported their memory of the commandments given by the Lord to the faith and proceeding from the Truth itself. And if by chance anyone who had been in attendance on the elders arrived, I made enquiries about the words of the elderswhat Andrew or Peter had said, or Philip or Thomas or James or John or Matthew or any other of the Lord’s disciples, and whatever Aristion and John the Elder, the Lord’s disciples, were saying. For I did not think that information from the books would profit me as much as information from a living and surviving voice.
Tangle writes:
It's a long and scholarly article - and I think pretty fair. I'm no biblical scholar and I now know more about this squirming nest of conjecture that I really want to. It's clear that there's no reason at all to believe any particular version of the historicity of the bible stories.
Well your article does show that you can make a case for either POV.
Your account makes an interesting point when in it contrasts the accounts of what happened to Paul after his conversion. The writer contrasts Acts 9:19-23 with Galatians 1:16-19. My reading is that the accounts do in some ways differ they were written for two different purposes and so they come out differently. In Acts,(written in most scholars opinion by a companion of Paul), was simply giving an account of what transpired when Paul was converted. In Galatians it is Paul himself who is essentially establishing his credentials as an apostle in saying that his understanding of Jesus came directly from the risen Jesus, and that his initial knowledge was not from the other apostles. Both accounts agree that at least later he did meet with at least Peter and James.
This was a major change in Paul's beliefs and his life. He essentially had to repudiate all that he had stood for and leave the life where he was moving up the ranks, to a life largely consisting of hardship, torture and imprisonment. It would have taken a lot to have him make this change. Maybe we should give serious credibility to what he claims happened to him that caused him to make the changes that he did.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 500 by Tangle, posted 05-14-2020 3:07 AM Tangle has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024