JonA

Not you too! Is that what we're back to again? Asking your opponents to fish out evidence in support of your position?

LOL. No thanks.

Jon

ApostateAbe

Jon, dog-on has done that with me too often, and I put him on my ignore list. You may want to consider doing the same.

GakuseiDon

Yeah, he's done it with me, also.

Doug Shaver

My honesty.

That's nice, but it doesn't tell me anything about your presuppositions.

I've been debating on Internet forums such as this for 12 years. I've never seen anyone yet admit to judging any argument on anything but its own merits. But, it is clear that not all of them actually do judge arguments strictly on their merits, and so it's clear that some of those people are not telling the truth. However, from "They are not telling the truth" I do not infer "They are not honest." Does that seem odd to you, or do you get my point?

Vorkosigan

Can we stop arguing about who is honest, and instead discuss the oral tradition for the basis of Peter's denial.

Note that merely being unable to point out a Septaugint or other literary source does not affirm the presence of an oral tradition basis for the story. The case for oral tradition must be made affirmatively, with methodologically sound evidence.

Hence, this "point to a literary source" argument is fallacious. If 90% of GMark can be sourced from the OT, then the whole thing is fiction. To assume that anything not literary is oral tradition is to put forth a "god of the gaps" argument that will be familiar to anyone who debates about the Magic Space Primate with Creationists. In this case, its the Jesus of the Gaps: wherever there is a gap in literary origins, there must lie Jesus. A totally fallacious approach.

Hence, can we have an affirmative argument for oral tradition for the Petrine Denial (or other portion of GMark)?

Vorkosigan

Sheshbazzar

Thanks for such a complete listing of those apparent similarities. Many people look at The NT texts as something that just spontaneously popped into being, based upon the life and actions of a real person, while remaining quite unaware of how large an influence those Intertestamental textual source materials were, and how profusely they were employed and incorporated into the fabrication of these NT stories.

I would also point out that those minor differences in the wording would come about through the processes of independent translations, and finally into English.
Rendered back into the old Hebrew or Aramaic idiomatic language, the readings would in most cases end up being identical, or much closer to being identical, than our English variations might seem to indicate.
The NT writers 'cherry picked' (or plagiarized) the pre-Christian ideas and sayings of these texts, often word for word, to fashion their own make-believe writings.
Also the idea of ongoing warfare being waged between 'The Children of Darkness' versus 'The Children of The Light' as is presented within the DSS.

All these things, along with the OT, and likely many other as yet unidentified 'lost' writings, served as textual and oral Sources for the Gospels.
Almost nothing that is found within The Gospels needs sourced from memories of any actual events or situations, other than the retro-'prophesied' destruction of the Jerusalem Temple.





.

JonA

There is no 'Jesus of the Gaps'. Nowhere did I claim that 'wherever there is a gap in literary origins, there must lie Jesus'.

In fact, this entire thread is concerned with traditions, not with the actual truth of those traditions. The issue is whether the gospel writers incorporated any oral sources in their writings or not. The issue is not whether they are telling some truth about Jesus.

Jon

Juststeve

Luke told us where he got the information in his Gospel. He was aware of other writings and investigated. Unless we just assume that the author of Luke is a liar, that seems to answer the question for at least that Gospel.

Steve

aa5874

But, who is arguing that gLuke is the first Jesus story? No-one

What is the source for the ORIGINAL Gospel story? How did we GET the Jesus story?

If you BELIEVE the Memoirs of the Apostles, gMark, gMatthew or some other story was the ORIGINAL Jesus story then did the author INVENT his story or did he get it from ORAL tradition?

The Gospel stories in the NT ALL appear to be fundamentally FICTION based on the information found in the Gospels themselves and do not appear to be from oral tradition since we have no stories about the Jesus character in the writings of antiquity from writers like Philo and Josephus who wrote about MAD MEN like Carabbas and Jesus the Son of Ananus.

Juststeve

aa5874:

The original question was to sources for the gospels, both source and gospel plural. I answered for the case of Luke. If you want to start a different thread feel free.

Steve