Amaleq13

How about my old buddy The Catholic Study Bible? That reference acknowledges that the Fourth Gospel as we have it is the work of several authors.

How about The Anchor Bible Dictionary? By way of Early Christian Writings, we have this:

"Robert Kysar writes the following on the authorship of the Gospel of John (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, v. 3, pp. 919-920):

The supposition that the author was one and the same with the beloved disciple is often advanced as a means of insuring that the evangelist did witness Jesus' ministry. Two other passages are advanced as evidence of the same - 19:35 and 21:24. But both falter under close scrutiny. 19:35 does not claim that the author was the one who witnessed the scene but only that the scene is related on the sound basis of eyewitness. 21:24 is part of the appendix of the gospel and should not be assumed to have come from the same hand as that responsible for the body of the gospel. Neither of these passages, therefore, persuades many Johannine scholars that the author claims eyewitness status."

FatherMithras

OFT seems to be transferring his problems onto us!

Our "philosophical assumptions" are that evidence is what's required to prove something. Fancy that! We hold the accepted positions by scholoars and he gives us a link by a minority group to assert it as fact.

Iasion

Greetings,

You really beleive these epistles were actually written by these people? Let's consider the letter of James.


Now James was allegedly the BROTHER of Jesus,
so
we would expect his letter to be chock-full of personal details about Jesus.

Well,
guess what?

The letter of James only even MENTIONS the name "Jesus" twice in the whole letter.

It has NO personal details at all !
NOT one shred of historical information about Jesus can be found in the letter allegedly from a member of his FAMILY !

Hello?

The person who wrote the letter of James had OBVIOUSLY never even HEARD of a hisyorical Jesus.

Let examine the letter to see what I mean -


The ONLY 2 places to use the name Jesus are here


1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are in the Dispersion: Greetings.

The introduction of the letter, mentions he is a "servant" of God and of Lord Jesus Christ (ie. a typical faithful phrase invoking their highest names) - totally FAILS to mention he is brother to Jesus.

2:1 My brothers, don't hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ of glory with partiality.

Another faithful phrase telling us nothing about Jesus. No mention James is his brother.


What DON'T we see in James :

NO mention of Jesus' family at all - NO Mary or Joseph or siblings.
NO mention of the birth stories - NO Bethlehem, Nazareth, Magi, Herod, the flight...
NO mention of teachings Jesus - NO sermon, Lord's prayer, food regulations
NO mention of miracles - NO Lazarus, feeding the multitude, healing the sick...
NO mention of any Gospel event - NO Teaching at the Temple, Temple Cleansing, Triumphal Entry, Temptation, Baptism in Jordan etc, etc...
NO mention of the trial of Jesus - NO Pilate, Sanhedrin, Judas etc...
NO mention of the empty tomb, the crucifixion, the resurrection !!! hello?

I can not find a SINGLE PIECE of information "about Jesus" in the whole epistle of James.

From a person who was supposedly in Jesus' very family and probably would have experienced many of these events if they had really happened.


Even when expected

Even worse, if you do read James, there are many places where you would expect him to mention Jesus or his teaching -

Chapter 1 talks about resisting temptation - NO mention of the temptation of Jesus !

Chapter 2 starts like this in some versions - "do you .. really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?" (a different translation of the phrase which in the Greek goes something like this: "do not with partiality believe in Jesus Christ the glorious").

Here is James trying to convince them to believe in Jesus Christ, and he totally fails to even mention he knew Jesus, let alone was his brother - instead all he gives to try and prove Jesus is some preaching about the poor and the rich WITHOUT mentioning anything Jesus said about the poor.

James quotes "Love Thy Neighbour as Thyself" - but NOT from Jesus, just "scripture".

James preaches about adultery - NO mention of Jesus' teachings.

James argues that faith without works is useless - when he provides examples, it's from the OT - Abraham, Rahab - NO mention of Jesus.

James reminds people not to curse or speak evil - NO mention of Jesus' teachings on that.

James preaches about suffering and patience - NO mention of Jesus as example, just Job and the prophets.

James talks about the church elders bringing healing and forgiving sins - NO mention of Jesus doing that.

James even invokes Elijah who was a "human being like us" - NO mention of Jesus !


James never knew any Jesus

In dozens of places, James preaches something that CRIES out for a mention of Jesus or his teachings - but it looks like James has never even HEARD of Jesus of Nazareth - just the risen Christ, a spiritual being.


Note that James uses the phrase "my brothers (and sisters)" DOZENS of times - NOT the slightest hint that HE is the brother of Jesus anywhere in the letter.


There simply is NOTHING about Jesus in the letter of James - the person who wrote this letter knew nothing of a Jesus.


Iasion

RPS

So no one here argues that Jesus didn't exist? Check what the scholars have to say about that idea and consider whether pot and kettle are meeting coming and going....

John A. Broussard

Aw, c'mon.

If your brother turned out to be god almighty and you were writing your memoirs, would you talk about his nappies?

The Catholic Church solves the problem by insisting that Mary was a virgin, once and for all.

So James could not possibly have been almighty god's brother.

pharoah

I'm afraid that for the first time in my life I'm going to have to side with Henry Morris on this one. :banghead:

First of all, you believe that Jesus is God. So you would have us believe that Almighty God would tell his followers a tale about himself that defames his name and that he knows is not true.

If you accept the geneology in Luke, then Adam and Noah were historical characters. So you would have us believe that Jesus would thoroughly confuse us by referencing myths about him and his dealings with these characters and not clearly label them as myths.

Remember also that the gospels labeled many tales that Jesus told as parables, clearly marking their non-historical nature. Why wouldn't they or any of the epistles that mention the flood or the creation give some sort of hint that these stories are just parables/fables? :huh:

It is not enough for you to simply assert that these stories are allegories. You need to show proof from either the Bible or other ancient sources that the Jews knew that these stories were allegories.

Exactly where is it that the OT stops being allegorical and starts becoming historical and factual? Show me the reasoning that you use to discern this turning point.

John A. Broussard

I've lost track of how many times I've asked this question in one way or another and never received an answer.

Good luck!

TomboyMom

Where did anyone in this thread assert this?
I thought this thread was about whether non-biblical historical sources confirm the existence, actions and nature of Jesus.
It would not be possible to disprove that there was a man who lived in Israel around 2000 years ago named Yeshua.

TomboyMom

O_F: This is the second time I have asked you to provide evidence for your assertion. What conclusion should I draw from your failure to do so?

Llyricist

Futhermore, if it's allegory or metaphor, what is it an allegory or metaphor to/of? I never saw anyone provide any satisfactory answer to what the "real meaning" of most of those allegories and/or metaphors are. :huh:

ETA: I get the feeling it would go something like Arthur Dent's critique of Vogon Prostetnic Jeltz's poetry.