Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gnosis92
what specific issues do you have with their [Jesus Seminar's] methodology, given if you've taken the time to read their rather thick books.
|
I have not read their books, but I have read a lot of stuff about them by people who have. I gather that on the issue of Jesus' historicity, they just took it for granted that there was a real Jesus of Nazareth who had some disciples who somehow got the Christian ball rolling. If anyone has any specific evidence to the contrary, I await their enlightenment, but I suspect I'd have heard about it by now.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gnosis92
if mark's gospel was written 70 cd about events 30 ce, and secular authors like pliny and tacitus describe that there were christians who believed in things that match up with what mark says, the likelyhood of a document written 40 years after the fact being completely fictious is less historically plausible.
|
Pliny does not report any Christian belief in anything mentioned by any of the gospel authors. Tacitus confirms only that Christians of his day (early second century) believed that their founder had been executed by Pilate.
To say a document was "written 40 years after the fact" assumes a fact for it to have been written after. I still don't see the implausibility of a work of fiction describing events happening 40 years earlier. I lived through the entire Cold War, and I read a bunch of novels during that time describing Cold War events ostensibly occurring at about the same time the author was writing the story.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by gnosis92
here's one example i found from the bible gateway
Mark 5:41
He took her by the hand and said to her, "Talitha koum!" (which means, "Little girl, I say to you, get up!" ).
|
I can't even guess how you think that proves your point.
08-12-2006, 12:58 PM
