aa5874

The link has NO abundance of evidence that Justin was referring to the same documents as Irenaeus. Some posters, including you, were just speculating without any corroborative sources.

First of all, Irenaeus did not mention that Justin's Memoirs of the Apostles was the same documents as the Synoptics.

No evidence was produced to show that Matthew, Mark or Luke did exist at any time or could have written any Gospels.

No corroborative source whatsoever was produced to show that the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark or Luke could not have been copied from the Memoirs of the Apostles as found in Justin's writing.

No evidence was produced to show that that Gospels according to Matthew, gMark and gLuke were known to Justin.

It must be noted that Mark and Luke were not Apostles and that Justin only referred to Memoirs of the Apostles.

So, the Gospels called Mark and Luke are not likely to have been originally part of the Memoirs of Apostles as found in Justin's writings.

It is absolutely false that I was shown plenty of evidence. No such thing ever happened. There were numerous speculative suggestions but no real evidence.

sschlichter

I have heard that as well. It is un-necessary. However, I disagree with you.

Greek was spoken in Palestine for 400 years before Peter. If he was illiterate as a fisherman, I suspect 30 years as an apostle is plenty of time to become literate. regardless, the book reflects the churches view of inspiration.

Deus Ex

No surprise there. We will just have to agree to disagree. The Nativity stories are but one example of the discrepancies and contradictions found between our four canonical gospels. There are enough differences to convince me that inerrancy is a pipe dream.

It is my understanding that only the wealthy generally became literate in that time and location; somewhere around 90% of the population was not. Further, 2 Peter carries no authoritative weight at all; it was simply a second century forgery. Besides, internal bible verses that self attest to inerrancy or divine inspiration would be proof of nothing to me.

sschlichter

yes, I guess so, however, many Christians would agree with you. I do not think the Bible's claims to inspiration necessarily dictate inerrancy as it would be defined today.

well, anyone that ever spoke to a gentile would have done so in greek and I expect a fisherman in Capernaum would have. Besides, Capernaum was a wealthy city and there is no reason to assume Peter was a bad fishermen.



You asked me whether I believed the gospels were inspired or written by men, I explained both. I was not offering proof, just answering your question.

If you post your contradictions, I would be glad to respond to them. I expect I have seen them and you have heard the responses I may have, though.

~Steve

Deus Ex

Acts 4:13
Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

Even the Christian text of Acts shows that Peter and John were uneducated. They most likely would have spoken Aramaic, and would not have known how to write in either Aramaic or Greek.

[Late Edit: I am granting, for the sake of discussion, that Peter and John were not simply literary inventions of the early church; something that is not established beyond reasonable doubt.]

sschlichter

That's a good point. They only mentioned it however because they
Were impressed with his speech and noted
That they had been disciples of jesus for three
Years. I think a disciple of an itinerant rabbi
Is likely to be learning to read.

I think a fisherman in hellenized palestine is
Likely to speak greek.

He also had thirty years afterward to learn
To write. I think he gave up fishing.

-steve

Doug Shaver

Would you give us an example of what you would consider a disharmony? Make up two statements about any event you'd care to imagine, such that if you read both of them in any publication, you would infer that at least one of them had to be a mistake.

aa5874

But, it is not true at all that they were impressed with their speech it was their BOLDNESS.

Acts 4:13

sschlichter

well, here are some snippets of news from news articles. None of them aredis-harmonious if you understand the context of the author and his audience.

* 19 hijackers.
* the "20th hijacker" who was snagged.
* 2 planes involved in the attack.
* 4 planes hijacked.
* Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11.

Someone reading these articles looking for errors will be quick to note that one reporter said there were 2 planes and another saif there were 4. One reporter said there were 19 hijackers and named them, while another said Osama Bin Laden clamed responsibility. Was he a 20th hijacker? No, there was a separate 20th hijacker. All those who do not either know the context or take the time to learn the context (culture, time, geography) will assume they are dis-harmonious.

I happen to know the context here, so I know the reporter that said there were 2 planes was a NY reporter and was only concerned about the twin towers. the other reporter looked at the entire incident. Osama Bin Laden may have claimed responsibility but he was not directly invlolved in the context of the report that claimed 19 hijackers, nor was he the 20th hijacker - which is only called a hijacker because we all know the reporter is referring to a would-be hijacker. We are not calling the reporter a liar because we all understand that he / she meant would-be hijacker. This is easy for us to understand because we live in the context. Wait 2000 years and you will think all these reporters were full of crap because you do not understand.

I had this conversation before and used this same example. the long version is here. http://www.freeratio.org/showthread....47#post5503447



if we only had to worry about math, I could give you an easier example of dis-harmony like 2 + 2 = 4 and 2 + 2 = 5.

sschlichter

ok, they were impressed by how bold and the speech made them marvel and realize that they had been with Jesus.

Is 3 years with an itinerant rabbi and 30 years post-fisherman give you enough time to learn to write fluent greek? I am sure it is.