Freethought & Rationalism Archive

IamJoseph · 07-10-2009, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by xaxxat

Kind of hard to record the details 100 years after they happened, huh?

It was less than a 100 years.

Quote:

Kysar also observes on the dating of the Gospel of John: "The earliest date for the gospel hinges upon the question of whether or not it presupposes the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. Most agree that it does, although there have been persistent attempts to argue otherwise. The reasons for positing a post-70 date include the view of the Temple implicit in 2:13-22. Most would argue that the passage attempts to present Christ as the replacement of the Temple that has been destroyed." (p. 918) Note also the irony of 11:48: "If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place [i.e. temple] and our nation." Finally, there is no mention of the Sadducees, which reflects post-70 Judaism. The retort that there is also no mention of scribes misses the mark, as the Pharisees represented the scribal tradition, and the Pharisees are mentioned.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/john.html

Wow. The temple already was destroyed before by Babylon - predicted by Solomon centuries earlier, and the setting period of the Gospels saw a widespread revolt happening. How can anyone score points for the blatant - and call it *PROPHESY* - why not prophesy the sun will rise tomorrow?

The proof John could not have written before the temple's destruction is also blatant: where is the writings predating the Temple's destruction? no excuses- writings was commonplace at this time. Think dead sea scrolls and 1000's of Roman archives. <edit>

Does 'belief' transcend truth?

storytime · 07-10-2009, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

Was it the tax or the fact that the Romans treated the emperor as a God.

Probably the tax. Think what would happen should the churches today be taxed. The Christians would take up arms and march on Washington shooting as they went.

Which is what seems to have happened with the Jews and Rome.

Rendering to Caesar what is Caesars is not a Christian doctrine.

arnoldo · 07-10-2009, 06:09 AM

arnoldo · 07-10-2009, 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

Was it the tax or the fact that the Romans treated the emperor as a God.

Probably the tax. Think what would happen should the churches today be taxed. . .

Wouldn't that be a violation of seperation between Church and State?

show_no_mercy · 07-10-2009, 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Quote:

Originally Posted by xaxxat

Kind of hard to record the details 100 years after they happened, huh?

It was less than a 100 years.

Quote:

Kysar also observes on the dating of the Gospel of John: "The earliest date for the gospel hinges upon the question of whether or not it presupposes the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. Most agree that it does, although there have been persistent attempts to argue otherwise. The reasons for positing a post-70 date include the view of the Temple implicit in 2:13-22. Most would argue that the passage attempts to present Christ as the replacement of the Temple that has been destroyed." (p. 918) Note also the irony of 11:48: "If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our place [i.e. temple] and our nation." Finally, there is no mention of the Sadducees, which reflects post-70 Judaism. The retort that there is also no mention of scribes misses the mark, as the Pharisees represented the scribal tradition, and the Pharisees are mentioned.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/john.html

What you posted doesn't seem to refute the position that gJohn was written almost 100 years after the supposed events. John also has Christians being kicked out of the synagoges which didn't happen until around the Council of Jamnia which was around 95 CE. This council also presupposes that the Sadducees were long gone. The Sadducees didn't automatically disappear once the Temple fell.

It might be more accurate to say that this gospel was written 70 - 80 years after the supposed events it depicts. Which isn't a lot better than 100 years.

storytime · 07-10-2009, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petergdi

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

Was it the tax or the fact that the Romans treated the emperor as a God.

"Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is God's" quite clearly prohibits emperor worship. That's a good point. It is also true that what is permitted to be given to Caesar has no lasting value.

Peter.

And what was given to God went into the rabbi's pocket while the congregation wasted away in poverty, maybe petitioning Caesar for assistance and aid to the poor. Nothing changes in the religious hiarchy. Jesus saw the power and advantage of the Pharisee priesthood and that's why he wanted to overthrow it. A New Jerusalem in his name meant his glory, his riches.

arnoldo · 07-10-2009, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

It was less than a 100 years.

Wow. The temple already was destroyed before by Babylon - predicted by Solomon centuries earlier, and the setting period of the Gospels saw a widespread revolt happening. How can anyone score points for the blatant - and call it *PROPHESY* - why not prophesy the sun will rise tomorrow?

The proof John could not have written before the temple's destruction is also blatant: where is the writings predating the Temple's destruction? . .

There is evidence the gJohn wasn't an invention of Eusebius. . .

Quote:

... a King I am. I for this have been born and (for this) I have come into the world so that I should testify to the truth. Everyone being of the truth hears my voice. Says to him Pilate, "What is truth?" and this saying, again he went out to the Jews and says to them, "I nothing find in him a case."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rylands...ry_Papyrus_P52

P52 probably wasn't the autograph rather a copy of an earlier copy. . .

storytime · 07-10-2009, 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thor Q. Mada

I would have been really impressed if the lord and savior could write.

I would be impressed with a single Hebrew gospel. But the Europeans made no such demands.

Neither did the Jews. They did just as everyone else. They accepted what they were given without question.

arnoldo · 07-10-2009, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petergdi

"Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is God's" quite clearly prohibits emperor worship. That's a good point. It is also true that what is permitted to be given to Caesar has no lasting value.

Peter.

And what was given to God went into the rabbi's pocket while the congregation wasted away in poverty, maybe petitioning Caesar for assistance and aid to the poor. Nothing changes in the religious hiarchy. Jesus saw the power and advantage of the Pharisee priesthood and that's why he wanted to overthrow it. A New Jerusalem in his name meant his glory, his riches.

That's an interesting twist considering Mark 11:15-18.

IamJoseph · 07-10-2009, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

There is evidence the gJohn wasn't an invention of Eusebius. . .

Just when you got me interested it becomes an anti-climax. I honestly cannot accept this, specially because of the lack of surrounding evidences and that of any Hebrew writings - which I find more reliable than the European. This fragment is in major dispute of its dating:

Quote:

Although Rylands 52 is generally accepted as the earliest extant record of a canonical New Testament text,[2] the dating of the papyrus is by no means the subject of consensus among critical scholars. The style of the script is strongly Hadrianic, which would suggest a most probable date somewhere between 117 CE and 138 CE. But the difficulty of fixing the date of a fragment based solely on paleographic evidence allows a much wider range, potentially extending from before 100 CE past 150 CE.

I find this archive listed below very interesting, perhaps even more than the dead sea scrolls - but this is subject to this document being genuine. This is a few years older than the scrolls, and says what I've always suspected - that the Greeks and Phonecians got their alpha beta from the Hebrew alef beth. It would be extremely implausable for a Jewish historian to write this in a Greek dominion, in the face of the Greeks - if it was not true. A host of other reasons back this premise. It also lists references to Moses [thus a known figure at this time], and David, Solomon, the temple details and of Jeremia - which says the 3000 year stories in the Hebrew bible was considered factual history 3rd C BCE:

Quote:

Eupolemus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Eupolemus was a Jewish historian whose work survives only in five fragments (or possibly six fragments) in the Eusebius of Caesarea's Praeparatio Evangelica (hereafter abbreviated as Praep.) embedded in quotations from the historian Alexander Polyhistor and in the Stromata (hereafter abbreviated as Strom.) of Clement of Alexandria.

A sixth passage which Polyhistor attributes to Eupolemus in Eusebius' quotations of Polyhistor is usually considered spurious as being dissimilar to the other passages quoted and has come to be called Pseudo-Eupolemus.
Style and vocabulary indicate the writing as also originally in Greek and the date of composition of the seemingly genuine passages is about 158/7 BC. That the author dates his work by the Seleucids rather than the Ptolemies suggests Palestinian rather than Egyptian origin. It has been speculated that the author might be the Eupolemus who was ambassador of Judas Maccabeus to Rome as found in 1 Maccabees 8.17f and 2 Maccabees 4.11.[1]

The fragments usually considered Eupolemus' genuine work are:

• A statement that Moses was the first wise man, that he taught the alphabet to the Jews who passed it on to the Phoenicians who passed it on to the Greeks, and that Moses first wrote laws for the Jews (Praep. 9.26.1).
• Some chronology about the period from Moses to David and some details of David's arrangements for building the temple followed by purported transcripts of letters exchanged between King Solomon and "Vaphres King of Egypt" and between Solomon and "Souron the King of Tyre", the Biblical Hiram (Praep. 9.30.1–34.18).
• A short statement about gold shields made by Solomon (Praep. 9.34.20).
• A very short account of the persecution of the prophet Jeremiah by King "Jonachim" who seems to correspond to the Biblical kings Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah followed by a short fictionalized account of the fall of Judah ending with the note that Jeremiah preserved the ark and the tablets (Praep. 9.39.2–5).
• A chronologial summary indicating 5,149 years from Adam to the 5th year of Demetrius (Strom. 1.141,4).

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

07-10-2009, 06:09 AM	#43
arnoldo Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Latin America Posts: 4,066	<removed>

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.