CountryPreacher

Why would you disparage "gospel?" The message of the first four NT books are viewed as just that by Christians. It's what the message was - It was the euangelion Gr. "good tidings" Did I say I believe that as personal for me? Not at all. Is that what it is for Christians? Of course it is.

"Self-serving document" If it is or isn't, what is the point?

Amaleq13

Missed it or dodging it?

And the same goes for the lack of response to Ben's question.

CountryPreacher

If you will allow your self to understand the purpose for the book of Mark certain issues you raise are no longer relevant.

For Mark his readers are already Christians, and already share the faith of the author - the faith in the tradition which Marks writes down. The deeds of Jesus can be repeated by his followers. His way of life was the way of the Cross; and that way must still be followed - the whole central section of the Gospel (8:27-10:45) is built about a necleus of discipleship sayings (8:34-38; 9:33-50; 10:23-31) which demand renunciation, bearing one's cross, losing one's life to save it, becoming the slave of the brethren, while it sets forth the supreme example of the renunciation of the Son of man in the three successive passion announcements. (8:31; 9:31 10:32-34). The teaching of Jesus is mentioned more than once, but rarely given. )See F. Grant - The Earliest Gospel (or via: amazon.co.uk))

Here is additional historical proof - It's called INTERNAL EVIDENCE. Since the author of Mark assumes the reader knows the teachings of Jesus already, the teachings of Jesus had to exist, therefore, Jesus had to exist.

Civil1z@tion

You make a big leap between "the teaching of Jesus had to exist" and "Jesus had to exist." Why couldn't someone pre-Mark have made up Jesus and his teachings? Thye wouldn't have had to write it down, only to start an oral tradition. The existence of a non-written tradition of Jesus does not prove his existence any more than the non-written traditions of pre-literate Scandavia prove the existence of Odin.

aa5874

INTERNAL EVIDENCE cannot be regarded as proof without EXTERNAL EVIDENCE to corroborate or verify the internal evidence.

And all works of fiction must have an original author and it is not necessary for these events to have occurred or to be known beforehand.

Minimalist

Because the gospels are not "historical" documents, by any definition of the term I know. They are items of faith.

The few actual historical references in them tend to contradict each other, i.e., the alleged nativity which Matthew has prior to 4 BC and Luke has after 6 AD and John and Mark ignore in total.

CountryPreacher

Allow me to prove just who's "Understanding of Mark" IS erroneous.

The prior question is "What is the moral nature of Jesus.

1. I would suggest it has a serious defect. To speak of MAN'S INHUMANITY TO MAN is nowhere more epitomized than the fact that some who would not listen to His (Jesus) preaching were the object of a vindictive fury resulting in everlasting punishment. What was it that he called them?

"You serpents, you generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?"

Just because they did not like his preaching! How Christian of him.

2. Then Christ says, "The Son of Man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His Kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."

And now to my point about Jesus not being Divine I use your first vers.

3. This is the story of the Gadarene swine. Was Jesus kind to the pigs? I think not! He put the devils in them and caused them to run down the hill, into the drink, and drown.

"Jesus love me this I know!" Sung by porky and the three pigs!

You say Jesus was divine. You say he was "all powerful" (That's omnipotent)
So of all the infinite choices he had, he performs an act of cruelty to animals. How Christian of him!

No! Your vers. proves you neither understand what happened, the moral (or lack of moral) implication of it, nor the context of the entire Book of Mark as it relates to the vers or vers in question.

Please be better prepared next time.

CountryPreacher

Klaus - You say "The canonical gospels are of a fake christianity. they Judaise pre-Catholic christianity..."

I'm not sure what boat you come on, but early Christianity WAS Jewish. Jesus was very Jewish. He believed, read from, and lived by the Hebrew Scriptures, and taught the same.

Did he go beyond the Hebrew Scriptures? Yes!

Was he a social liberal? Yes.

Do people follow what Jesus taught? In the main - NO!

Is Christianity Christian? No - it's Paulism ie Justification by faith.

CountryPreacher

Well my Muslim friend - here is a little problem for you to consider.

First, the Exodus did not happen at the time and in the manner described in the Bible. The children of Israel were said to have camped at Kadesh-barnea for 38 of the 40 years of their wanderings. Yet even after many excavations and surveys of the entire area, there is no evidence of activity in that area in the Late Bronze Age. See The Bible Unearthed Silberman and Finkelstein p. 63 for a complete treatment of the subject.

2nd - Same with the Patriarchs. No activity in the area where they were suppposed to have lived at the time The Hebrew Scriptures claim.

Then the "camels" present a huge problem. They did not exist in the time of Abraham, Isaiac, and Jacob even though the Hebrew Scripture says they did.
Again see The Bible Unearthed P 27 - 47 Ch. 1 "Searching for the Patriarchs."

This presents a real problem for you and the Quran.

CountryPreacher

Missed nothing.

1. Not interested in poorly stated questions.

2. Not interested in bad questions.

3. Not willing to answer each and every question.

I answer what is of interest to me.