Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,585 Year: 4,842/9,624 Month: 190/427 Week: 103/85 Day: 8/2 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Matthew 28 versus John 20.
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3521 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

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


Message 62 of 89 (596077)
12-12-2010 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Theodoric
12-11-2010 3:49 PM


Re: Any evidence?
Theodoric writes:
And lets get back to your original assertion that Romans got more peaceful and loving after christianity became the state religion. Still waiting for evidence of this.
This is from wiki
quote:
Crucifixion was in use particularly among the Seleucids, Carthaginians, and Romans from about the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD. In the year 337, Emperor Constantine I abolished it in the Roman Empire, out of veneration for Jesus Christ, the most famous victim of crucifixion.
The whole thing with gladiators went on for quite a while later but it was a start. My point is also to compare the dominant society then to the dominate societies of the world today. The world seems to gradually developing more respect for human life since the time of Christ.
Obviously I have no evidence that it has anything to do with Christ and what He taught. We once again go back to our individual beliefs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Theodoric, posted 12-11-2010 3:49 PM Theodoric has not replied

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


Message 63 of 89 (596079)
12-12-2010 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Kapyong
12-11-2010 4:09 PM


Kapyong writes:
Modern NT scholars agree that NOT ONE of the NT books was written by anyone who ever met any historical Jesus.
It's possible, as in most cases we can't be positive about the writers other than Paul. Paul writes that he met with the disciples directly so he would have heard what they had to say.
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Kapyong, posted 12-11-2010 4:09 PM Kapyong has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Kapyong, posted 12-12-2010 11:36 PM GDR has replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3521 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

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


Message 65 of 89 (596092)
12-13-2010 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by Kapyong
12-12-2010 11:36 PM


Kapyong writes:
What matters is the evidence - which shows that NOT ONE book was written by anyone who met Jesus.
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.
Kapyong writes:
In fact - Paul talked with certain people who OTHERS later claimed had met Jesus.
Read Acts 15. James for one was the brother of Jesus.
Kapyong writes:
Paul specifically says he learnt about Jesus NOT from any man, but from Revelation.
He would be referring to his road to damascus experience.
Kapyong writes:
Do you accept the punishment for wayward children is DEATH?
Yes or no?
No

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Kapyong, posted 12-12-2010 11:36 PM Kapyong has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Kapyong, posted 12-13-2010 2:14 AM GDR has replied
 Message 67 by Kapyong, posted 12-13-2010 2:23 AM GDR has not replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3521 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 3521 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

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


Message 68 of 89 (596104)
12-13-2010 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Kapyong
12-13-2010 2:14 AM


I never suggested that James who was the brother of Jesus was the same person who wrote the book of James.
The authorship of James is a very open question. If it was James it would have had to be written earlier than it is generally believed, which may have been the case.
If it is James the brother of Jesus, the letter as you noted was "to the twelve tribes which are in the Dispersion" who would be aware of his relationship. Why would he write it in?
It is also written as a series of exhortations rather than as a narrative. It would make no sense to be relating stories about the life of Jesus.
I repeat though again that it is a very open question as to whether it was written by James the brother of Jesus, someone who had been taught by James. a different James or even someone who wrote it and named the book after James. Take your pick.
Kapyong writes:
Ah, so you only accept SOME of the Bible?
Just like me.
That's the trouble with this forum. We all read different threads. I have gone over my view of the Bible many times on other threads and it can get tedious.
I'm curious though which passage you were referring to when you asked the question about wayward children.
Edited by GDR, : To add the 2nd bit

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Kapyong, posted 12-13-2010 2:14 AM Kapyong has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 69 of 89 (596109)
12-13-2010 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Kapyong
12-13-2010 2:23 AM


Topic Please
Participants:
Please reread the Message 1. The originator wants to know how Matthew 28:1-10 and John 20:1 and 2 can be reconciled.
General discussion of Bible authorship is not the topic. It is a very narrow topic, please stick to it.
Please direct any comments concerning this Administrative msg to the General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List') thread.
Any response in this thread will receive a 24 hour suspension.
Thank you
AdminPD Purple

Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach.-- Encylopedia Brittanica, on debate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Kapyong, posted 12-13-2010 2:23 AM Kapyong has not replied

  
rstrats
Member
Posts: 139
Joined: 04-08-2004


Message 70 of 89 (596111)
12-13-2010 7:41 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by GDR
12-09-2010 9:19 PM


Re: The topic
GDR,
re: I see it as being completely relevant to the topic as I assume the question concerns how we can reconcile the accounts...
A very safe assumption since the OP specifically asks: How can this be reconciled?
re: Also if the resurrection didn't occur...
I wonder if you might point out where the OP questions the resurrection?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by GDR, posted 12-09-2010 9:19 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by GDR, posted 12-13-2010 10:24 AM rstrats has replied

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


Message 71 of 89 (596120)
12-13-2010 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by rstrats
12-13-2010 7:41 AM


Re: The topic
rstrats writes:
A very safe assumption since the OP specifically asks: How can this be reconciled?
re: Also if the resurrection didn't occur...
I wonder if you might point out where the OP questions the resurrection?
I am probably not clear on what you were asking. You gave several differences in the accounts in the gospels around the story of the empty tomb.
I took from this that you were questioning how someone could reconcile their Christianity with the fact that the gospels couldn't all be completely accurate.
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. They do all agree though that the crime was committed.
Sorry about going off topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by rstrats, posted 12-13-2010 7:41 AM rstrats has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Kapyong, posted 12-14-2010 3:50 PM GDR has replied
 Message 73 by rstrats, posted 12-14-2010 4:07 PM GDR has replied

  
Kapyong
Member (Idle past 3521 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

  
rstrats
Member
Posts: 139
Joined: 04-08-2004


Message 73 of 89 (596377)
12-14-2010 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by GDR
12-13-2010 10:24 AM


Re: The topic
GDR,
re: I am probably not clear on what you were asking.
I say what in the OP.
re: You gave several differences in the accounts in the gospels...
Actually, I only gave two.
re: I took from this that you were questioning how someone could reconcile their Christianity with the fact that the gospels couldn't all be completely accurate.’
That would be an issue for another topic.
re: 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...
But what if the people testifying were being inspired by a higher power? Why would this higher power inspire them to contradict each other?

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 74 by jar, posted 12-14-2010 5:02 PM rstrats has replied
 Message 76 by GDR, posted 12-14-2010 6:28 PM rstrats has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34051
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 74 of 89 (596385)
12-14-2010 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by rstrats
12-14-2010 4:07 PM


Re: The topic
But what if the people testifying were being inspired by a higher power? Why would this higher power inspire them to contradict each other?
Inspiration is not dictation.
"But what if the people testifying were being told what to say by a higher power?"
Then it's likely the higher power told them not to sound like the testimony was rehearsed.
The big question I still have not seen addressed is in Message 3.
Why would they need to be reconciled?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by rstrats, posted 12-14-2010 4:07 PM rstrats has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by rstrats, posted 12-14-2010 6:48 PM jar has replied

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


Message 75 of 89 (596404)
12-14-2010 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Kapyong
12-14-2010 3:50 PM


Re: The topic
Kapyong writes:
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 ?
The gospel accounts are not written in a mythological form as I suggest Genesis is . (Which doesn't mean Genesis doesn't represent many great truths about many things.)
The accounts are also not written in a way that represents anything that a first century Jew would write to fit Jewish messianic expectations. Also the accounts, particularly after the resurrection are written in a way that implies that; although it sounds strange this is what I experienced.
According to the gospel accounts the disciples all abandoned the mission when Jesus was being executed by the Romans. They went back to their fishing and whatever else they did, believing that Christ was the latest in a fairly long line of failed messiahs. Then something happened which caused them to dedicate their lives to taking the Christian message of love, kindness and justice to the world along with the story of Jesus and particularly His resurrection.
Assuming we give any credibility to the gospels at all, l I think that we have to believe that the disciples and other followers believed the accounts of Christ's resurrection and that he was indeed the messiah.
I see the question as not one about whether it was mythology or not, but whether or not the disciples were mistaken or not.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Kapyong, posted 12-14-2010 3:50 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