Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 06-17-2011, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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

You have NOT really answered the question at all since you ADMIT it is about the GOSPELS.

Please deal with the OP.

What are the SOURCES for the GOSPELS?

No one here is talking about gLuke alone and you KNOW the author of gLuke may be LYING that he got information from "witnesses" if gLuke was written when all the so-called "witnesses" were ALREADY DEAD.

Please name a credible WITNESS for the Gospel stories of Jesus?

Not, even "Paul" is a WITNESS for the Jesus stories.

Listen to "Paul".

1Co 15:3-4

Quote:

For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures

And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures

Amazingly "Paul" names NO PERSON who told him about the Jesus story he either got it from Scripture or from REVELATION.

[Gal.1

Quote:

....11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Incredibly "Paul" seem UNAWARE of any ORAL TRADITION or did NOT need any.

Gal.1

Quote:

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, 16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood

The Pauline writings has PUT OPENED A CAN OF WORMS.

The Source of the GOSPELS could have ORIGINATED from REVELATIONS using Scripture and NOT oral tradition.

"Paul" got his Jesus story from Scripture and Revelations so the Gospels may have ORIGINATED the very same way.

After all, Isaiah 7.14 is from Hebrew Scripture.

Vorkosigan · 06-17-2011, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

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

Great! So provide some affirmative evidence of orality!

dog-on · 06-17-2011, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Jon, there is a particular ancient orthodox tradition that seems to be reflected in this scene. Let me know if you can identify it...

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

Just wondering what you actually knew about ANE culture and tradition, since you are arguing for oral tradition.

Anyway, for Peter's denial, Numbers 22: 21 - 34

JonA · 06-18-2011, 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Jon, there is a particular ancient orthodox tradition that seems to be reflected in this scene. Let me know if you can identify it...

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

Just wondering what you actually knew about ANE culture and tradition, since you are arguing for oral tradition.

Anyway, for Peter's denial, Numbers 22: 21 - 34

You might have to give me a little more. The connection between the story in Numbers and Peter's denial seems something of a stretch.

Would you be able to tell us how and why you think them related?

Jon

steve_bnk · 06-18-2011, 12:13 AM

1. Creative imagination.
2. Embellishment of ordinary happenings

dog-on · 06-18-2011, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Just wondering what you actually knew about ANE culture and tradition, since you are arguing for oral tradition.

Anyway, for Peter's denial, Numbers 22: 21 - 34

You might have to give me a little more. The connection between the story in Numbers and Peter's denial seems something of a stretch.

Would you be able to tell us how and why you think them related?

Jon

They are really not, but I thought it was funny.

Solo · 06-18-2011, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonA

You might have to give me a little more. The connection between the story in Numbers and Peter's denial seems something of a stretch.

Would you be able to tell us how and why you think them related?

Jon

They are really not, but I thought it was funny.

That is a strange connection dog-on

Have you not ever thought the story of Balaam was the likely model for Luke's tale of Saul's conversion ? Luke repeats it three times, doesn't he ?

Jiri

dog-on · 06-18-2011, 03:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

They are really not, but I thought it was funny.

That is a strange connection dog-on

Have you not ever thought the story of Balaam was the likely model for Luke's tale of Saul's conversion ? Luke repeats it three times, doesn't he ?

Jiri

Good catch, Jiri. I hadn't considered that.

Regarding the Petrine denial, what I think is relevant is that it mirrors Jesus asking his disciples three time, who they believe he is. That and, on another level, the tradition of declaring things three times, as a sign of final certainty, such as the ancient middle eastern tradition regarding the mechanism for obtaining a divorce, or the Orthodox tradition of denying a prospective convert three times, before accepting the sincerity of their application.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-18-2011, 12:13 AM	#75
steve_bnk Contributor Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,602	1. Creative imagination. 2. Embellishment of ordinary happenings

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.