Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,231 Year: 5,488/9,624 Month: 513/323 Week: 10/143 Day: 0/10 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Matthew 28 versus John 20.
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3557 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 58 of 89 (595960)
12-11-2010 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by GDR
12-09-2010 12:35 AM


Gday,
GDR writes:
They were written about 40 years after the resurrection so there would still have been eyewitnesses.
Would have been?
That's IF you assume there WERE eye-witnesses.
But really - how many :
* identifiable people
* claimed to have met Jesus
* in authentic writing.
?
Paul
Paul never met a historical Jesus, and never claimed to.
He did claim to have had revelations "thru Christ" etc.
He did claim to have had a vision of Christ.
And others (Acts) claim Paul had a vision of Christ.
It is worth noting that Paul does not place Iesous Christos in history :
* No places - Paul never mentions Bethlehem, Nazareth, Galilee, Calvary, etc.
* No dates - Paul never places Iesous Christos in time.
* No names - Paul never mentions Mary, Joseph, Pilate, Judas, Nicodemus, Lazarus etc.
* No miracles - Paul never mentions the miracles/healings of Jesus
* No trial/tomb - Paul never mentions the trial or the empty tomb etc.
Paul's Christos is a heavenly being, not a historical person.
the 500
Paul claims 500 others had a vision of Christ. The Gospels do not mention that, no other writer mentions that, and we have no names or evidence for any of the 500. Even IF it happened - they had a VISION like Paul - nothing historical.
G.Mark
The author of this book never identifies himself, and never claims to have met Jesus. According to traditon, Mark was a secretary of Peter and never met Jesus. This Gospel, like all of them, started out as an un-named book.
G.Matthew
The author of this book never identifies himself, and never claims to have met Jesus. According to tradition it was written by an apostle - but it never says so, and it mentions Matthew without the slightest hint that HE was writing it.
G.Luke
The author of this book never identifies himself, and never claims to have met Jesus. According to tradition it was written by a follower of Paul.
G.John
According to tradition this Gospel was written by the apostle John, and the last chapter says :
" This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true."
This is part of a chapter that was added to the Gospels, and it is clearly someone else making a claim for the book. It most certainly does not even come close to specific claim that anyone personally met Jesus.
Jude
This letter contains no claim to have met Jesus.
Johanines
1 John contains this passage :
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touchedthis we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4We write this to make our[a] joy complete.
Some believers assert this is a claim to have met Jesus.
What did he see and hear? He certainly never says it was Jesus. He just had a spiritual experience and wants to tell everyone about it - "God is light". Nothing here about any historical Jesus at all.
James
There is no claim to have met Jesus in this letter - supposedly from Jesus' BROTHER ! Yet it contains NOTHING anywhere about a historical Jesus, even where we would expect it. It is clear this writer had never even HEARD of a historical Jesus.
Revelation
No claim to have met Jesus.
the Petrines
2 Peter has this passage :
1.16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
Here we see Peter directly claim to have witnessed Jesus' transfiguration. The ONE and ONLY such direct personal claim in the entire NT.
But -
2 Peter is the very latest and most suspect book in the whole NT - scholars agree it is a forgery, so do many Christians, ancient and modern. A late and deliberate forgery that claims NOT to be based on "cunningly devised fables" - probably in direct response to critics claims. THAT is the one single book that contains a claim to have met Jesus.
Clement
Never claimed to have met Jesus or anyone who did.
Papias
Does not claim to have met Jesus or anyone who had.
He did claim to have met Presbyters who told him what some disciples had said.
Discusses two books of Matthew and Mark , not called Gospels, not quite like modern Gospels.
Polycarp
Never claimed to have met Jesus or anyone who did.
Irenaeus claimed Polycarp met discples who met Jesus
Ignatius
Never claimed to have met Jesus or anyone who did.
Justin
Never claimed to have met anyone who met Jesus.
Discusses UN-NAMED Gospels not quite like ours.
So,
the entire NT contains only ONE specific claim to have met a historical Jesus - from the most suspect forgery in the whole book.
There is NOT ONE reliable claim by anyone to have ever met Jesus.
But -
there is a vast body of CLAIMS by later Christians - claims that are NOT supported by the earlier books, or by history.
Just later books and claims, and claims about books.
Kapyong

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by GDR, posted 12-09-2010 12:35 AM GDR has not replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3557 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 60 of 89 (595963)
12-11-2010 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by GDR
12-09-2010 12:35 AM


Gday,
GDR writes:
I think it is generally agreed that the first books were by Paul around 50 AD and the first gospel, (Mark) was about 15 years later. I agree that the minor details would vary over that span of time.
Minor details ?
In fact -
there are huge contradictions that cannot be reconciled - have a look at Dan Barker's Easter Challenge :
Page Not Found - Freedom From Religion Foundation
Will YOU please try to answer those contradictions, GDR ?
Here are two examples :
Was the tomb open when they arrived?
* Matthew: No (28:2)
* Mark: Yes (16:4)
* Luke: Yes (24:2)
* John: Yes (20:1)
Who was at the tomb when they arrived?
* Matthew: One angel (28:2-7)
* Mark: One young man (16:5)
* Luke: Two men (24:4)
* John: Two angels (20:12)
K.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by GDR, posted 12-09-2010 12:35 AM GDR has not replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3557 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 61 of 89 (595965)
12-11-2010 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by GDR
12-09-2010 1:51 PM


Gday,
There were no doubt other written records around by eyewitnesses,
Pardon?
What OTHERS ?
We don't have ANY eye-witness accounts to Jesus at all.
The only claim to have met Jesus is the forged 2 Peter.
Modern NT scholars agree that NOT ONE of the NT books was written by anyone who ever met any historical Jesus.
Do YOU think otherwise?
K.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by GDR, posted 12-09-2010 1:51 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by GDR, posted 12-12-2010 8:05 PM Kapyong has replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3557 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 64 of 89 (596091)
12-12-2010 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by GDR
12-12-2010 8:05 PM


Gday,
GDR writes:
It's possible,
It's POSSIBLE?
That's ALL you've got?
Well, it's POSSIBLE Jesus was a space alien - so what?
What matters is the evidence - which shows that NOT ONE book was written by anyone who met Jesus.
Indeed - we only have ONE CLAIM to have met Jesus in the entire NT - in the late, forged 2 Peter - how do YOU explain that ?
GDR writes:
as in most cases we can't be positive about the writers other than Paul
We don't know for certain about any of the NT authors. But modern NT scholars agree none of them were written by anyone who ever met a historical Jesus.
If YOU believe otherwise, please tell us which book, and why?
GDR writes:
Paul writes that he met with the disciples directly
No he didn't.
He never said me talked to anyone who met Jesus.
Paul NEVER mentions anyone who met a historical Jesus.
Have you ever READ Paul, GDR ?
In fact - Paul talked with certain people who OTHERS later claimed had met Jesus.
GDR writes:
so he would have heard what they had to say.
In fact Paul says the exact opposite :
"For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man's gospel. For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ. "
Paul specifically says he learnt about Jesus NOT from any man, but from Revelation.
Have you really never read Galatians, GDR ?
GDR writes:
In the end, no matter who wrote the various books of the Bible we have to choose whether we accept what is written or not. I have a hunch you don't.In the end, no matter who wrote the various books of the Bible we have to choose whether we accept what is written or not. I have a hunch you don't.
Do YOU ?
Do you accept the punishment for wayward children is DEATH?
Yes or no?
K.
Edited by Kapyong, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by GDR, posted 12-12-2010 8:05 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by GDR, posted 12-13-2010 12:00 AM Kapyong has replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3557 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 66 of 89 (596102)
12-13-2010 2:14 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by GDR
12-13-2010 12:00 AM


Gday,
(Kapyong wrote: "In fact - Paul talked with certain people who OTHERS later claimed had met Jesus".)
GDR writes:
Read Acts 15. James for one was the brother of Jesus.
Exactly like I said GDR !
Someone ELSE claimed James was the brother of Jesus.
James did NOT.
James was allegedly the BROTHER of Jesus,
so
we would expect his letter to be chock-full of personal details about Jesus.
Well,
guess what?
The letter of James only even MENTIONS the name "Jesus" twice in the whole letter.
It has NO personal details at all !
NOT one shred of historical information about Jesus can be found in the letter allegedly from a member of his FAMILY !
The person who wrote the letter of James had OBVIOUSLY never even HEARD of a hisyorical Jesus.
Let examine the letter to see what I mean -
The ONLY 2 places to use the name Jesus are here :
1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are in the Dispersion: Greetings.
The introduction of the letter, mentions he is a "servant" of God and of Lord Jesus Christ (ie. a typical faithful phrase invoking their highest names) - totally FAILS to mention he is brother to Jesus.
2:1 My brothers, don't hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ of glory with partiality.
Another faithful phrase telling us nothing about Jesus. No mention James is his brother.
What DON'T we see in James :
NO mention of Jesus' family at all - NO Mary or Joseph or siblings.
NO mention of the birth stories - NO Bethlehem, Nazareth, Magi, Herod, the flight...
NO mention of teachings Jesus - NO sermon, Lord's prayer, food regulations
NO mention of miracles - NO Lazarus, feeding the multitude, healing the sick...
NO mention of any Gospel event - NO Teaching at the Temple, Temple Cleansing, Triumphal Entry, Temptation, Baptism in Jordan etc, etc...
NO mention of the trial of Jesus - NO Pilate, Sanhedrin, Judas etc...
NO mention of the empty tomb, the crucifixion, the resurrection !!! hello?
I can not find a SINGLE PIECE of information "about Jesus" in the whole epistle of James.
From a person who was supposedly in Jesus' very family and probably would have experienced many of these events if they had really happened.
Even when expected
Even worse, if you do read James, there are many places where you would expect him to mention Jesus or his teaching -
Chapter 1 talks about resisting temptation - NO mention of the temptation of Jesus !
Chapter 2 starts like this in some versions - "do you .. really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?" (a different translation of the phrase which in the Greek goes something like this: "do not with partiality believe in Jesus Christ the glorious").
Here is James trying to convince them to believe in Jesus Christ, and he totally fails to even mention he knew Jesus, let alone was his brother - instead all he gives to try and prove Jesus is some preaching about the poor and the rich WITHOUT mentioning anything Jesus said about the poor.
James quotes "Love Thy Neighbour as Thyself" - but NOT from Jesus, just "scripture".
James preaches about adultery - NO mention of Jesus' teachings.
James argues that faith without works is useless - when he provides examples, it's from the OT - Abraham, Rahab - NO mention of Jesus.
James reminds people not to curse or speak evil - NO mention of Jesus' teachings on that.
James preaches about suffering and patience - NO mention of Jesus as example, just Job and the prophets.
James talks about the church elders bringing healing and forgiving sins - NO mention of Jesus doing that.
James even invokes Elijah who was a "human being like us" - NO mention of Jesus !
James never knew any Jesus
In dozens of places, James preaches something that CRIES out for a mention of Jesus or his teachings - but it looks like James has never even HEARD of Jesus of Nazareth - just the risen Christ, a spiritual being.
Note that James uses the phrase "my brothers (and sisters)" DOZENS of times - NOT the slightest hint that HE is the brother of Jesus anywhere in the letter.
There simply is NOTHING about Jesus in the letter of James to indicate the writter had ever even HEARD of a historical Jesus.
It's just claims and books, and claims about books.
But NO claims to have ever met a historical Jesus.
Kapyong

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by GDR, posted 12-13-2010 12:00 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by GDR, posted 12-13-2010 2:44 AM Kapyong has not replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3557 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 67 of 89 (596103)
12-13-2010 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by GDR
12-13-2010 12:00 AM


Gday,
GDR writes:
We don't really know one way or the other. The only tradition was in existence and undoubtedly there was more material that we no longer have. However, as I have already said, I'm fine either way. We all to make up our mind as to what it is that we are going to believe.
There is no "either way".
We DO know (as well as we know much of history.)
Not one of the books of the NT was written by anyone who met any historical Jesus.
And it's useless pretending there is "more material" out there - as if it supports YOUR view! The other material could just as easily say Jesus was a myth, or a space alien.
GDR writes:
He would be referring to his road to damascus experience.
He is referring to his teaching (or 'gospel') about Jesus - that it came NOT FROM any MAN. Paul makes it clear he got it from revelation, NOT the other men.
And Paul makes it clear he is "just as good" an apostle as anyone else.
Paul's visions make him "just as good" as any other apostle - all the others merely had visions like him.
As far as Paul goes - no-one ever met any historical Jesus - it's all spiritual revelation. I don't think Paul (or the writers of most NT epistles) had ever even HEARD of a historical Jesus.
GDR writes:
No
Ah, so you only accept SOME of the Bible?
Just like me.
K.
Edited by Kapyong, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by GDR, posted 12-13-2010 12:00 AM GDR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by AdminPD, posted 12-13-2010 5:29 AM Kapyong has not replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3557 days)
Posts: 344
Joined: 05-22-2003


Message 72 of 89 (596374)
12-14-2010 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by GDR
12-13-2010 10:24 AM


Re: The topic
Gday,
GDR writes:
As far as reconciling the different accounts that you mentioned the only thing I can say about that it is the same as you would find in a court of law when people remember the events around a crime differently and they can't all be right.
Yes, different memories are one POSSIBLE reason that M.28 does not match J.20.
That is -
IF you simply ASSUME there WAS a historical event in the first place.
But another possible reason is that all the books are MYTHS, not based on history at all.
Why do you assume the first reason ?
K.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by GDR, posted 12-13-2010 10:24 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by GDR, posted 12-14-2010 6:13 PM Kapyong 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