Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Gray Lensman · 05-29-2004, 03:08 AM

The following is a quote from a discussion on another forum (not a religious forum, I should add, but a science fiction fan site)

Quote:

The bit about 80 accounts of Jesus' life and only one being chosen flies in the face of all the evidence that the four gospel accounts we have of Jesus' life were written by first-generation Christians, 3 of whom were almost certainly there at the time, and the other of whom very clearly took a lot of effort to get his facts right. There have been conflicting accounts of Jesus' life written, but all the others were from the second Century or later. The bit about Jesus being divine is unmistakable throughout the New Testament, and you won't find any reputable scholars who say that very much of the New Testament is later than the first generation of Christians

Now, I'm not especially clear on Biblical history, but I'm pretty certain that much of the above is wishful thinking. I'm not looking to get into an argument with this guy, but he has taken others to task for their supposed lack of Biblical knowledge and I would be interested to hear what 'reputable scholars' really do believe. Can anyone help? I'm pretty new to all this, so if this subject's been discussed before, apologies.

GakuseiDon · 05-29-2004, 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gray Lensman

The following is a quote from a discussion on another forum (not a religious forum, I should add, but a science fiction fan site)

Now, I'm not especially clear on Biblical history, but I'm pretty certain that much of the above is wishful thinking. I'm not looking to get into an argument with this guy, but he has taken others to task for their supposed lack of Biblical knowledge and I would be interested to hear what 'reputable scholars' really do believe. Can anyone help? I'm pretty new to all this, so if this subject's been discussed before, apologies.

Most scholars believe that the first Gospel were written about 40 years after Christ was crucified, and none by the first generation of Christians, i.e. none of the Gospels writers met Jesus personally. Ask him for his sources.

gregor · 05-29-2004, 07:45 AM

I agree with with GD, and while most people on this forum would reject all of the assertions from the quote, as would most conventional scholars, arguments from what "most people believe" is truly a slippery slope.

Such arguments frequently deride into an assertion of truth based upon greater numbers, followed by an retort that those with greater numbers are from scholars with presuppositions and hence biases, etc.

It's better to point out the grounds for arguing a position (e.g. the dating of the gospels is not supported by Paulian letters, the lack of attestation of authorship internally and externally until centuries later, the question of the validity of prophesy of the temple's destruction, etc.)

CX · 05-29-2004, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gray Lensman

The following is a quote from a discussion on another forum (not a religious forum, I should add, but a science fiction fan site)

Now, I'm not especially clear on Biblical history, but I'm pretty certain that much of the above is wishful thinking. I'm not looking to get into an argument with this guy, but he has taken others to task for their supposed lack of Biblical knowledge and I would be interested to hear what 'reputable scholars' really do believe. Can anyone help? I'm pretty new to all this, so if this subject's been discussed before, apologies.

I would ask for references. I've been studying biblical criticism as a layman for about 6 or 7 years. This is NOT the academic consensus.

Javaman · 05-29-2004, 09:09 AM

I'd always thought that the earliest gospel (Mark) had a widely-agreed-upon date somewhere around 70 C.E. and no earlier than about 66 C.E. I wouldn't mind seeing some of the writings saying 40 C.E. (unless you're referring to Q incorporated partly into Luke and Matthew).

Vorkosigan · 05-30-2004, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gray Lensman

Can anyone help? I'm pretty new to all this, so if this subject's been discussed before, apologies.

What forum is this? <sharpens knives>

Vorkosigan

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

05-29-2004, 07:45 AM	#3
gregor Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 932	I agree with with GD, and while most people on this forum would reject all of the assertions from the quote, as would most conventional scholars, arguments from what "most people believe" is truly a slippery slope. Such arguments frequently deride into an assertion of truth based upon greater numbers, followed by an retort that those with greater numbers are from scholars with presuppositions and hence biases, etc. It's better to point out the grounds for arguing a position (e.g. the dating of the gospels is not supported by Paulian letters, the lack of attestation of authorship internally and externally until centuries later, the question of the validity of prophesy of the temple's destruction, etc.)

05-29-2004, 09:09 AM	#5
Javaman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Nebraska Posts: 1,708	I'd always thought that the earliest gospel (Mark) had a widely-agreed-upon date somewhere around 70 C.E. and no earlier than about 66 C.E. I wouldn't mind seeing some of the writings saying 40 C.E. (unless you're referring to Q incorporated partly into Luke and Matthew).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.