quote:
Matthew redacted and edited Mark. Matthew is not a separate account obviously. Two independent people aren’t going to write two stories that are word for word copies of some verses… without actually copying.

Luke copied and redacted Matthew and Mark

Yes

quote:
John was less lazy than Matthew and Luke and he copied and redacted all the gospels but at least put it in his own words.

I think John came from a different source, as Raymond Brown writes about in his Community of the Beloved Disciple. It's not about not being lazy. It's an entirely different story. No parables. No mention of the kingdom of God, which is Jesus' central teaching in the Synoptics. No virgin birth, but rather a preexistent deity come to earth. All 7 I Am statements. The kingdom is in heaven not here on earth. And so on and so on

quote:
The gospels all disagree with each other and with Paul on the very basics of Jesus. None are historically accurate.

Which is why I cited none of that in my rationale for accepting the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth

quote:
Absolutely, but it’s because the majority are indoctrinated, uneducated, ignorant, unintelligent, or foolish.

I'm not talking about the majority of believers. I'm talking about the majority of scholars.

This post was edited on 12/12/23 at 8:11 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Squirrelmeister

Member since Nov 2021

1920 posts

Posted on 12/12/23 at 8:29 pm to L.A.

quote:
No virgin birth, but rather a preexistent deity come to earth.

The pre-existent deity gospel - similar to Paul’s Jesus - is the Ascension of Isaiah. Not sure if you’ve heard of it, but it matches much of Paul’s theology of Jesus wearing a body of sinful flesh and being killed in the heavens by the archons, who wouldn’t have done what they did if they’d have known it was Jesus. But that was the plan, to trick the archons into killing Jesus in heaven because he was disguised. I have a copy translated from Coptic that is pretty good (translated by Charles). You can find it on Amazon.

quote:
I'm not talking about the majority of believers. I'm talking about the majority of scholars.

Of course. Most legit scholars work for universities. To be gainfully employed as a professor of Jesus-related studies at most of these institutions, one must sign an agreement that they will never publicly deny or doubt the existence of an earthly Jesus. They don’t have to believe in the supernatural, but they have to acknowledge that a real man on planet earth was named Jesus that the gospels are based on in some form. Many of these people were very devout and spend their life studying Christianity only to figure out for themselves Jesus wasn’t real… they’re pot committed at that point to be a professor of religious studies now that they’ve got a PhD and spend all their money on tuition. They have to keep up the charade if they want to continue their research and to teach and write books and collect a paycheck.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Mo Jeaux

Member since Aug 2008

59505 posts

Posted on 12/12/23 at 8:30 pm to L.A.