You have to use the tools of literary criticism and scholarship to infer the historically reliable elements of the Gospel accounts - just like you would also have to do with Herodotus' Histories or the Norse Icelandic Sagas.
Ignorance and the Bible
- Thread starter domer76
- Start date
GIven that you don't understand the concept I'm surprised you could "crush" anything.
Ahhh, so the way to know if God is real is to get a degree in textual analysis.
Silly me, I thought God could talk to everyone directly.
(As for the Icelandic sagas: I don't believe there was a real dragon in Volsunga's saga. But it was written that Fafnir was defeated, so I guess I am wrong there too!)
I seem to inspire you to Google quite frequently. There is historical information in the Norse sagas that can be teased out. Legendary information and historical information can exist side by side in ancient and Medieval writing.
If you don't understand the methods and tools of literary criticism and historical scholarship, your opinions won't hold much weight. Just blurting out that all the apostles and evangelists are all lying and hallucinating is not convincing. You actually have to do the work of understanding the scholarship and literary criticism.
The first century bishop Papias wrote that John the apostle told him that Peter's companion Mark wrote the Gospel of Mark, and that Matthew wrote a testimonial in Hebrew which was later edited and transcribed into Greek. This is circumstantial evidence, but it's pretty good circumstantial evidence.
There is absolutely no propaganda value for the church in naming a canonical gospel after obscure low-ranking Christian like Luke.
What did I google?
Oh, I know! You didn't know anything about the Icelandic sagas so you had to google it which in turn made you think I had to google it. Bad reasoning there. But then you specialize in that sort of thing.
I do understand the concept...obviously more than you pretend you do.
Don't cry. Act like an adult. You should have enough thespian skills to do that.
If you understood the concept you'd realize you use it every single day without fail.
Yet here you are excoriating me for using the same logic as applied to God.
That's pitiful.
Nope. Nobody knows who wrote those gospels. Since nobody knows who they were, then nobody knows who they knew, heard, saw or talked to.
I know the concept.
YOU do not.
And you try to skirt around the issue rather than making an intellectual argument for your take on it...mostly because you are an intellectual coward.
Ball in your court, Fool.
That’s exactly what Ehrman says. He continues with “but that doesn’t make it true.”
Smart move. Laugh rather than challenge.
Leave the challenges and actual discussion for people who can handle it.
As I said...smart move.
I don't feel the need to challenge those whom natural has already done so on the mental level.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I remember on the old board, I think it was 'southern man', telling me that as a christian you cannot believe in God and the devil...............
What I've heard Ehrman say in the multiple podcasts and lectures I've seen him in is that he as a historian is not going to make a claim about seemingly miraculous events, but that it appears the apostles themselves believed they saw Jesus after the crucifixion.
Whether it was because of hallucination, miracle, or mistaken identity, Ehrman is agnostic and doesn't put forth a truth claim about it.
I've never heard him say the apostles conspired to lie about the resurrection.
That's good impartial historical scholarship
Okay, if that is the way you want to describe your cowardice.
No problem.
I enjoyed the laugh.
Well, there's your problem, Clem. You don't know how to read!
You are playing 7 - deuce off suit, boy. And you are playing it poorly.
Not conducive to a winning game.
Get your shit together, Boy. Or, continue to double down. This is actually fun.,
Ahhh, the joy of a simple mind. Simple entertainment is always available to you.
Look, Rossy, I am not going to discuss your vapid point. It's stupid, lame, moronic, <insert insult here>. And the fact that you can't allow others to have a philosophy you don't understand is all I need to know about debating with you.
Good move, Boy. Do anything but actually argue the point.
You probably do not even remember the point...or the questions that apply to the point.
Except for the point on your head...it must be all fog to you.
Continue to run away. I will continue to enjoy.