jgoodguy

So many possibilities, so little evidence.

2000 years from now, a copy of Gone with the Wind is found and little else from the 19th and 20th centuries. To the 40th century discoverer, is it history or not. Much of what is called Ancient History is informed speculation someone looks at less than good evidence and rolls the intellectual dice to make a decision because a decision must be made.

We do not know if gMark was written as propaganda, as a inspirational piece or history as the author knew it. Was it intended to be true, inspiration or both? Don't know.

aa5874

But, Why do you think that you know what will happen 2000 years from now if a copy of Gone with the Wind is found, when you REALLY don't know?

And would there be a disclaimer in 4000 CE copy of "Gone with the Wind" which states This book is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents are products of the author's or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, are is purely coincidental?

You fail to accept that hundreds of documents about Jesus have survived and he was described as the offspring of the Holy Ghost of God, who walked on water, transfigured, resurrected and ascended to heaven.

These events are not history whether the author was or was not inspired, and there are writings that have survived so that we can compare the information found in the Gospel stories with others who wrote about contemporaries of the supposed Jesus.

Amaleq13

No, it means the author was depicting Spider-Man as an historical personage.

jgoodguy

I think that I can speculate about 2000 years into the future as well as you can speculate 2000 years into the past. This issue is not if they are history books but if they contain history. Gone with the Wind for example contains references to historical persons, places and things. It is the characters within that are fiction. Yet they are also based on historical types of persons. Even with the disclaimer you speculate, history can be determined.

Looking at an 1930s movie, one can see the types of transportation, buildings, clothing, habits, customs and aspects of society from that time. The problem is does the person in the movie have a historical counterpart and if the movie portrays that person accuracy.

aa5874

Please read the disclaimer again. Everything should be considered fiction.

If someone finds a book of fiction 2000 years from now, why should they assume or speculate that certain parts are inherently true when it is already disclaimed in advance by the author that it is all his imagination or coincidence?

jgoodguy

First find me a book with a disclaimer that it is 100% author imagination. You will find in most cases a legal disclaimer to discourage lawsuits. http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200161.txt Gone with the Wind online has no such disclaimer.

aa5874

Please read what I wrote. I asked you if the disclaimer would be in the 4000 year copy of Gone with Wind.

Again, would there be a disclaimer?

Now, if an author places a disclaimed in his book then whether you think it is 0% imagination is actually irrelevant. You simply cannot guess such things.

I sure hope someone does not find only a Spiderman Comic book 2000 years from now without a disclaimer, based on your views.

jgoodguy

The disclaimer is not from the author, but from the publisher. The disclaimer allows the use of historical facts and persons.

A Spiderman comic book from my childhood and teen hood contained no
disclaimer which came into use after. A 2000 year old comic could be missing the disclaimer.

A Spiderman comic contains some historical facts including fashion, construction features, political views and perhaps historical events and people.

Therefore a historian without anything else could extract historical facts from the comic. That said, I remember an ancient Mad Magazine description of an excavation of a 1960s motel 2000 years or so in the future and it was very amusing.

spamandham

There are many possibilities. Here are a few:

1. Mark recorded what he believed to be true, in the normal manner for writers of his time (which includes socially accepted embellishments)

2. Mark invented the whole thing to settle doctrinal issues.

3. Mark wrote an allegorical novel with Jesus representing both the Jewish people and the messianic dream. The time frame was chosen for symbolic reasons (40 years prior to the fall of the Temple).

4. Mark wrote a fictional novel to poke fun at Jews, and it became a religion.

5. Mark is a rewrite of an earlier version of essentially the same story, just as it is commonly accepted that Luke and Matthew are rewrites of Mark.

6. Mark wrote a story who's real message has nothing to do with the surface message, but could only be revealed by those with the right gnosis

7. Mark was written by Rome to undermine Jewish messianic movements.

8-101 ?

My guess would be it has something to do with vindicating your preconceptions, but that's just a guess. :huh:

You know better than I why you continue.

spamandham

Here's one that does. Lucian's "The True History". Make note of when Lucian wrote and his reasons for the disclaimer.