Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Huon · 12-04-2007, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

A thought occurs to me here: someone is bound to invoke conspiracy theory -- "the bible must be treated differently because the dirty rotten christians are bound to have ... something or other". I would only comment that we must exclude this kind of 'reason' -- we can always imagine a political or religious reason for such a thing for any text.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

I never spoke of "dirty rotten christians". This is an insult, and I will never lower myself to this level of discussion.

Secondly, I understand that some Christians can think that "the bible must be treated differently".

Thirdly, I am quite able to understand that the gospels and the other texts of the NT are older than their first citation. And I am also able to understand that the present versions of the gospels have perhaps some differences with their first versions, of which we know nothing (presently).

Fourth point, I consider myself as an agnostic about the question HJ or MJ.

Fifth point : I am very curious to get an explanation on this point : What exactly happened at the trial of Jesus, who is responsible for what, in this trial ? I have been brought up by atheistic parents of catholic origin, and during more than 50 years, I believed wrongly that the trial of JC was a "cold case", well known, well described. (If there was "a conspiracy" about the gospels, it was not so well devised !).

Amaleq13 · 12-04-2007, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

I think that the illiterate Christians did not need a written text.

And that need would be even less if they were convinced that The End Times were coming.

Which brings us back to your question:

Quote:

Who exactly, needed a written gospel?

Believers who were having trouble understanding why The End was so tardy and potential converts with similar concerns might need some explanations.

Huon · 12-04-2007, 08:52 AM

Amaleq13, I agree with you. But this opinion postpones the writings of the various gospels to around 80 CE, perhaps. And why such a variety of gospels ? This also, seems to point to the idea that there were many groups of Christians with their own interpretations of the religion.

Amaleq13 · 12-04-2007, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

But this opinion postpones the writings of the various gospels to around 80 CE, perhaps. And why such a variety of gospels ? This also, seems to point to the idea that there were many groups of Christians with their own interpretations of the religion.

I think your last sentence answers your question.

mountainman · 12-04-2007, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The gospels and the epistles all portray a figure that was a god-man who was born miracuously, who died, was resurrected, and ultimately ascended to heaven to sit on the right hand of God.

So did the Council of Nicaea.
What a coincidence!

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-04-2007, 08:52 AM	#23
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	Amaleq13, I agree with you. But this opinion postpones the writings of the various gospels to around 80 CE, perhaps. And why such a variety of gospels ? This also, seems to point to the idea that there were many groups of Christians with their own interpretations of the religion.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.