LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksMore then just hearsay..Using Bible quotes ISN'T providing Proof as they are bias. Thats the trouble, people think the Bible is Irrefutable. They will use the Bible to prove the validity of the Bible...Originally Posted by aboutenough
More then just hearsay..Using Bible quotes ISN'T providing Proof as they are bias. Thats the trouble, people think the Bible is Irrefutable. They will use the Bible to prove the validity of the Bible...
The Bible consists of passages that have been agreed on by church leaders. The writers of the Bible are anonymous. Gospels are attributedto Mathew, Mark, Luke and John, but no one knows for sure.
Tell you what. The ability to be provoked is yours. I am 100% responsible for what I write. I am NOT responsible for YOUR reaction to my writing. My statements reflect the reading I've been doing about the historicity of Jesus.
I'm willing to stop answering your posts altogether if it brings you peace. You may want to put me on ignore so that your mind is no longer disturbed by my view. Take care.
Last edited by sky writer; 6th October 2011 at 08:25 AM.
ALL indications point to the conclusion that the Christian religion, though an offspring of Judaism, did not issue from any of the great currents then dominant in Jewish thought and known under the name of Pharisee, Sadducee and Essene. It sprang from small eccentric circles and stood out so little in the history of Palestinian Judaism before the year 70 that Josephus thought himself dispensed from mentioning it in his writings. Christianity was not a contagious movement of organized asceticism, still less a form of legalist pietism and least of all a school of traditional conservatism. It was distinctly a Messianist movement, carried on in conditions peculiar to itself and without the sanguinary fanaticism of the Zealots. It invoked as its head a Christ who, after dying on earth, was living at the right hand of God; his return would proceed from the higher world, that is, from his own being and nature, and in this sense it soon became a salvation-mystery of which the Christ was life and soul, the coming of this Christ progressively shifting its position to a new point and becoming realized, so to speak, in the faith of his Church. A mystery of this nature could not fail to get denned in a theology.
Although the writings comprised in the New Testament constitute our chief source for the history of primitive Christianity, they carry no privilege in the eyes of the scientific historian, save what may be derived from their relative value as evidence, when compared with non-canonical writings. All the documents of ancient Christianity, canonical and non-canonical, will be classed in this chapter according to their kind, though not according to their literary kind precisely, since the greater number do not fall into any of the accepted classes of literature. We shall deal first with those documents which affect, more or less distinctly, the form of epistles; second, with those in the form of apocalypse; third, with those, known as Gospels, which present the sacred legend of Jesus and the apostles; fourth and last, with the sharply defined group of second century apologists.
The Birth of the Christian Religion: Chapter 1
Last edited by sky writer; 6th October 2011 at 08:29 AM.
yeah anonymous ?"Paul, a servant...,Paul called to be...,James, a servant...,Peter, an apostle..."
The Bible does prove the Bible because it is not a single book by a single author but is many books over a wide period of time comments on itself. It is a compilation of the beloved links so sought after in the world of internet debate.
Paul wrote Epistles, not Gospels. He never met Jesus. No one knows for certain who wrote the Gospels. They are attributed toMatthew, Mark, Luke and John.
There is no non-Christian historical evidence of Jesus life. I would think if Jesus walked on water, raised the dead, changed water into wine, multiplied fishes and loaves and rose from the dead, historians of the time would have made note of it.
You may notice how self-serving some of the passages of the NT are for the institutional church. There's a reason for that. They eliminated all other Jesus writings to include the ones that served building an institution.
IMO, Jesus did not come to form a religion.
so you just talking about the Gospels? your post said the Bible.
no he did not come to form a religion , which is a man made thing. He came to form a relationship or should I say reform or restore a relationship. The institutional Church as you say is not self served in the Bible but is misinterpreted purposely or otherwise by the institutions themselves.
Paul did meet Jesus.
No, he didn't. Paul never met Jesus.
Oldest known snippet from the New Testament is a papyrus fragment from the Gospel of John, discovered in Egypt, the oldest known fragment from any part of the New Testament, dated from the first half of the 2nd century C.E.
The fragment resides in the John Rylands Library in Manchester, England.
