anthony93

What I meant to say, I guess was this: I really wish we could stop talking about the gospels like they were goddamn (pun intended!) news reports rather than literary works written by people almost 100 years after the supposed events took place! Talking about whether the Romans would have done this cuz that is pointless. The gospels were written by people who never met ANYONE in the texts them selves because they were all LONG DEAD OR NEVER EXISTED. There is evidence, I believe, that the gospels don't even get the geography of Judea right (where is that quote...sorry, gotta look for it). Some of the characters are obvious literary devices. There are entire scenes (like the trial before Pilate) where no witness could have reported what happened. I mean, really, the Romans would never have let JC and his gang stage manage the whole Passion story, and they would've arrested the whole lot of them and crucified 'em together, don't you think? If there is any history in the gospels, it's been painted over so many times I don't think we'd know if we (royal we, here) saw it.

Ok, sorry for that. Anyway, I'm interested in what the gospel writers had to say and why they said it. For example, how come the Gospel writer doesn't have the Risen Christ appear to the Centurions (like at Golgotha, "truly this man was the son of god") and have them convert? Why not, they would have been dead (if they existed) anyway? I mean two earthquakes in two days (Friday afternoon and Sunday morning) and the Dawn of the Dead of Friday ( I wonder what the Torah says about slaying the undead during Sabbath?) scenario and no one remembered EXCEPT the gospel writers?

mata leao

anthony 93, do you have any evidence other than angry hyperbole to back up your bald assertions? How can you say NO WITNESS could have seen the trial?

anthony93

Yep, right you are.

John: 19 : 13 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.

Doesn't preclude anyone else, in fact, when Pilate was pronouncing judgement there would have been a scribe of some sort (ignoring for the moment that i still think this is an entirley imaginary story). I should have said, no witness that would have described the events to the Gospel writer. Do you suppose maybe Pilate agreed to be interviewed for the soon-to-be-released Life of the Savior (being written, I think almost certainly after Jerusalem was sacked & the Temple burned in 70)?

Me either.

There are cases where the incident described was certainly not seen by anyone other than JC, like the temptation in the desert. There are other, more mundane incidents where the gospel writer is setting the stage for something (if it even makes sense to think in term of one author). For example, how about the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well?

John: 4 : 7 There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.
John: 4 : 8 (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)
John: 4 : 9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.
John: 4 : 10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

Who remembered this story? Not the disciples they were buyng meat (all of them? ) This is an obvious (I think it is, anyway) literary device to let JC get up on his soap box. (5 husbands? 5?!)

Hey, I think this is a topic for its own thread....