Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Julian · 01-11-2006, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chunk

With regards to his dating, why is that then that posters on this forum claim such varying dates for texts?

He dates marks Gospel between 60-80ad with a 4 out of 5 for reliability, yet im seen claims of it dating way after that on here.

I believe that it was later but that doesn't change the fact that most scholars accept that range. Peter's site is fairly traditional.

Julian

Amaleq13 · 01-11-2006, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chunk

With regards to his dating, why is that then that posters on this forum claim such varying dates for texts?

He dates marks Gospel between 60-80ad with a 4 out of 5 for reliability, yet im seen claims of it dating way after that on here.

Peter's website offers what is essentially a description and summary of the scholarly consensus, if it exists, and the basis of any continuing disagreement in the scholarly world, if it exists.

Arguments for dates outside the given ranges should be understood only as representing a minority position.

Johann_Kaspar · 01-11-2006, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Arguments for dates outside the given ranges should be understood only as representing a minority position.

Who cares about majority-minority positions? Aren't the NT scholars in the majority xian believers who think the resurrection, virginal birth, miracles, etc. happened

Johann_Kaspar · 01-11-2006, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

Well, why aren't there churches for the other people who claimed to be the Messiah? There were many people running around claiming to be the Messiah. Where are their churches?

You know what was a messianist Jew in the 8th and 9th auc, do you? Their "churches" (communities) were all destroyed by the Romans...

Johann_Kaspar · 01-11-2006, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

As to your question, the Gospel of Mark was written before the Gospel of Matthew.

It is only your belief or your opinion. You can't prove it. And please no argument about the majority of the scholars... They proved their ignorance.

Johann_Kaspar · 01-11-2006, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Jews didn't think the Messiah was God. They didn't build churches to humans.

They never built churches at all, but temples and synagogues.

Johann_Kaspar · 01-11-2006, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by judge

You do not know when matthew's gospel was written.
You have jumped to the unsupported conclusion that because we have no evidence that it was written very early it cannot have been written very early.
This is just dogma.

What we can say is we do not know how early Matthew was written, apart from that is is just speculation, from a naturalistic perspective anyway.

Nobody knows, ok, but there were several authors about a long period of time before and after 823 auc.

Johann_Kaspar · 01-11-2006, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

We know that Matthew copied Mark and we also know that Mark could not have been written before 70 CE. That's not speculative, that's hard evidence.

No you don't know. Several layers of "Mark" were written before 823 auc. You don't have hard evidence. Or you want to make believe that one author wrote that text over a very short period

:rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

Johann_Kaspar · 01-11-2006, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gooch's dad

Half-Life, the burden of proof is on YOU to show that the gospels are accurate history. In that post, you assumed already that the gospels are accurate. You're assuming that there *was* an empty tomb, and that the story about Joseph of Arimathea is more than just a story.

The stupidity of several scholars (the majority of them ?) is proven by the fact that they don't understand what is "arimathea" and don't understand who is that Joseph.

Boro Nut · 01-11-2006, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

Look, there would not be an early Christian writings if NOTHING HAPPENED!

Of all the religious writings in the world ever, only the Christians wrote about Jesus. Everyone else was busy believing something that you say is untrue.

The Jews, the only people qualified to judge who their messiah would be, never even noticed Jesus at the time he was supposed to have lived, neither did their Roman overlords. The first time the Jews mention him is when refuting much later claims by Christians that he'd already been and gone.

The Jews, who actually know what criteria a messiah is supposed to fulfil, having not been unified under one king and lead to victory against all their enemies in battle, remain unconvinced for some reason. Perhaps you should actually ask a Jew what a messiah is supposed to be. Compare it to the Jesus myth in the bible. You can't claim Jesus won the World Series while believing he never played baseball.

Boro Nut

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.