Message from Outboarduniform in The Right Server #serious
We have no idea of who authored ANY of the four Gospels of the Canon. They are anonymous documents, with the words "according to" Matthew, Mark, Luke and John appended to them in the late 2nd century. The Gospels are not eyewitness accounts, for they are all written in the 3rd person. Moreover, it is indeed odd that Matthew (supposedly an apostle of Jesus) copied virtually verbatim from a non-apostle, Mark (who is unknown). We have no record of the sources of the Gospels.
In sum, the Gospel stories are HEARSAY acounts from unknown authors. They were also not written in the mother tongue of Jesus and the apostles (Aramaic), so Jesus' words are not preserved. We can be fairly confident that the NT documents did not undergo substantial change after the Council of Nicaea (325 CE) - that much is true - but that presents no evidence that the originals were reliable accounts.
they were not written in the mother tongue because the common language at that time was Koine Greek
the Apostles also used the Septuagint Bible despite speaking Aramaic as their primary language
I could grant that
You didn’t respond to my whole argument. I can continue this tomorrow, until then you can layout your complete response.
the eyewitness stuff doesn't really matter that much since we know that the core Gospel story was being taught by the Jerusalem Church very shortly after Jesus's death
which refutes the Muslim idea that the entire story of Jesus was corrupted from Jesus never dying or being crucified at all to Jesus dying on the cross
St Paul visited Jerusalem after three years
**Galatians 1:18 - New King James Version (NKJV)**
Contacts at Jerusalem
<18> Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days. ```
this is when he would have received the 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 creed
**1 Corinthians 15:3-5 - New King James Version (NKJV)**
<3> For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, <4> and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, <5> and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. ```
the keyword here is "received." Paul was taught this creed, he did not create it himself.
this has nothing to do with the Holocaust, this is about the reliability of the Gospels
Jerusalem is land stolen from Palestine, which was stolen with various reasons; one of them being the holobunga
I only saw Jerusalem
I love this
I do too
>normal conversation about theology
Followed by a typical
I-I wasn’t following the discussion !
I was merely pretending to be retarded !
@Outboarduniform Imagine my shock, someone who loves criminals like the fbi and cia who supports and defends jewry.
The problem is that "received" could be referring to revelation. There is also some clear tension between the "judaizers" and Paul, like the debate over circumcision. That clear gospel story doesnt exist in the didache nor in james. I dont think you have this coherent religion in early christianity.
Can we go for Meritocracy instead of Democracy?
Or Meritocratic democracy?
@John 313 The Greek language used in this passage is used in other philosophical traditions to denote important traditions passed from teacher to student. Paul never says he received this creed from Jesus, sayind that it's referring to revelation is speculative. Don't you think that's something he'd want to note? Receiving the creed from Peter or another member of the Jerusalem Church lines up perfectly with Paul's description of his life. We know that St. Paul visited St. Peter and stayed with him for 15 days. What do you think they were talking about?
Didache confirms an early Christian belief in the Eucharist and in eternal life through Jesus Christ. How does the Gospel story not exist in it? And James barely even mentions Jesus, though when it does he calls him the Christ. James was writing to people who were already Christian, there's no particular need for him to recount the Gospel story.
it would be a real shame if I just invalidated your little fantasy
whoops! did I just do that!
nobody tell him the reason that "africans" are so "diverse"
nobody tell him that it's because north africans (ie: not black) have an entirely different genetic heritage, and are mostly arab or caucasoid