outhouse

Nope they didnt.

how could they in a culture that was 90% illiterate?? oral tradition was preffered

outhouse

competing sects used and created what they wanted from he original parables


because we have a roman version of what jesus taught

a version coming straight from jesus enemies



oral tradition doesnt record anything.


scribes do. So now you need to stop ignoring who wrote "what" material and for "what" audience was it written.


would it be jesus fault his teachings were hellenized ???




You dont have a valid point really. The movement went in all different directions due to his legend growing after his death. None of his disciples really taught the same exact message, so even with a jewish version of oral tradition, you still would have different teachings on one subject, let alone a hellenized version from 4rth or 10th handed information passed on.

Grog

You are not understanding the argument.

outhouse

there is plenty of evidence for oral tradition


No one


how so when his movement gained popularity after his death?


No

not at all


he taught them to go out and spread his message, no one said they would do it perfectly or the same from one disciple to the next


this I would agree to a point, but take this into context.

Had jesus movement stayed within a sect of judaism, we would be left with a more true version of what jesus was about.


a hellenized version built dogma around the legends jesus never intended. Of couse scholar's take all this into consideration before making any judgements. Its the normal joe that is ignorant to the real path the information took before it was heavily edited and redacted multiple times to the form we are left with today to try and unproffessinally piece it together in reverse

outhouse

are you understanding the hellenization, never intended??


or the redactions or compilations to the finished product by people who didnt have a clue of what really happened??

PhilosopherJay

Hi all,

I have returned from my WayBack machine and transcribed the exact transmission of the final oral communications of Jesus and his followers:


Generation 500: My God Why have You Forsaken Me
Generation 400: "E'lo-i, E'lo-i, la'ma sabach-tha'ni?"
Generation 300: "Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!"
Generation 200: "It is finished"
Generation 100: "Follow the Yellow Brick Road"
Jesus: "Repeat after me, 'The Rain in Spain Falls Mainly on the Plain.' "

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Zenaphobe

A couple of question occurred to me as I was thinking about the claims of an oral tradition.

When would this tradition have had its beginning? Are they claiming that the original 12 disciples memorized the words of Jesus and then passed them on to the next generation of disciples?

If the allegations are true that people in this culture were capable of committing large amounts of information to memory and recalling it perfectly, how could such a simple discrepancy occur as does between Matthew and Luke's accounts of the Sermon on the Mount and the Sermon on A Level Place?

Matthew says, "Blessed are the poor in spirit"

Luke says, "Blessed are you who are poor"

I don't know the Greek, but these appear to be different enough in meaning that it kind of makes me wonder how the oral traditionalists explain the differences while maintaining that memory was as good as the written word back then? Or are oral traditionalists saying there were several differing oral traditions that are each recalled verbatim by different groups?

In the grand scope of the teachings of Jesus, since Jesus kept announcing the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God/Heaven, why would the disciples be concerned with committing all of Jesus' words to memory? He told the disciples that the secrets of the Kingdom were for them to understand and hidden from the uninitiated, and during some accounts of the resurrection, the disciples seem pretty clueless as to what was going on, in spite of learning Jesus' teachings verbatim.

outhouse

since hebrew history started, the first books of the OT were compilations of collections of scriptire "all" based from oral trradition


first the 12 could be a creation based on OT so loose that number, I think really we have the 4 close disciples.


I believe yes some of the parables could have been handed down semi accurately


remember, without any oral tradition the close disciples would still have slihtly different messages, without oral tradition.


there is no perfect, but they could have kept some to a very high degree of accuracy


scholars are split on how the kingdom was preached, it could have been preached in a different way, not a doom and gloom end of the world so to speak. Likely in a spiritual sense.


oral tradition of jesus sayings is one thing. How the unknown authors who never knew, or met, or heard, jesus wrote down biblical jesus for a roman audience is another.


the written sctipture was open for redaction/editing and we know this took place.


different gospels were written by different people with different cultures for different audiences.

aa5874

It is totally in error that the author of gMark knew of the Pauline writings.

No-one can show a single verse in gMark that was copied word-for-word from the Pauline writings.

gMark used Hebrew Scripture.

Mark 1.2 KJV---.Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare the way before thee.
Malachi 3:1 KJV---Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me.....


Mark 1.3 KJV--The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord.....
Isaiah 40:3 KJV----The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD.....

Mark 6.22 KJV---Wharsoever thou shalt ask of me, Iwill give it thee unto half my kingdom
Esther 7:2 KJV--- what is thy request? and it shall be performed , even to the half of the kingdom.

Mark 13.26---And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds....
Daniel 7:13 KJV---I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven.....

judge

The exact same words in every place would point to a common written or oral source.
Christianity has always claimed that the gospel events were known about and diseminated by many people.

If many people knew of this and many people spread the story then we would expect divergent traditions.

You seem to miss the point , divergent traditions, divergent versions doesn't point to no oral tradition, it merely shows that there was no one single common written or oral source.
Which is exactly what fucking xtianity has always said. They always said that many people knew of and many people spoke about the alleged events.
If we had different versions of any story with exactly the same words and exactly the same versions it would mean the story would be highly unlikely to be true.