Dramatic shifts have produced a fractured religion over time. Had it not been for the Emperor Constintine the Great, we might never have heard of the religion. Because Constintine from a position of power declared Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire in the late 300s, it has survived.
OK historians. What's wrong with this statement?
Richard:
Don't interrupt Jak's Rameumptom soliloquy with facts!
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei
(I lost access to my Milesius account, so I had to retrieve this one from the mothballs.)
JAK wrote: Canucklehead stated: Personally, I think that the stuff that guys like Plato, Rousseau and Nietzsche said is more interesting and neat than what Jesus said. (Rather, they asked more fundamental and interesting questions ... I don't always agree with their answers.)
Most of the ideas found in the Bible originated in human thought previously. Keep in mind (as I’m sure you do), the alleged Jesus of the New Testament never wrote a word. In addition, his reported words were not put to writing until 30 to 110 years after they were claimed to have been spoken. Yet in the Bible we have what are purported to be exact quotes from a single person.
JAK
The assumption here is that no one kept records of what Jesus said until Mark decided one day to sit down and write an account, which is erroneous. Mark and others incorporated earlier oral and written material that is no longer extant.
How would we know this if it wasn't written down?
Did you ever play the game Operator when you were a kid? Where you try to repeat what was said in a circle around the room?
Can you imagine how much harder it would be to keep the accurate, complete sayings of Jesus through 30 years of oral tranmission?
"What does God need with a starship?" - Captain James T. Kirk
Most people would like to be delivered from temptation but would like it to keep in touch. - Robert Orben
Calculus Crusader wrote: The assumption here is that no one kept records of what Jesus said until Mark decided one day to sit down and write an account, which is erroneous. Mark and others incorporated earlier oral and written material that is no longer extant.
How would we know this if it wasn't written down?
In his prologue, Luke states that he made use of earlier sources
ozemc wrote:Did you ever play the game Operator when you were a kid? Where you try to repeat what was said in a circle around the room?
Can you imagine how much harder it would be to keep the accurate, complete sayings of Jesus through 30 years of oral tranmission?
There are Hindu priests who have passed down their rites for thousands of years without having to commit them to writing.
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei
(I lost access to my Milesius account, so I had to retrieve this one from the mothballs.)
Calculus Crusader stated: The assumption here is that no one kept records of what Jesus said until Mark decided one day to sit down and write an account, which is erroneous. Mark and others incorporated earlier oral and written material that is no longer extant.
Absent evidence that anyone recorded exact words of anyone, it should not be assumed. At the actual time of the alleged Jesus, no one recorded any of the later alleged words for which we have established record.
The consolidation of biblical scripts and the attempt to purge them of contradictions and inconsistencies occurred later. The likelihood that a large number of actual words could be accurately transferred for 30 to 110 years prior to being hand-copied is virtually non-existent. (Reference to New Testament alleged words of Jesus)
But early embrace of Christianity was in large part for perpetuation of the power and influence of Rome. It was a useful tool and served emperors and kings well. The filtering of what was included and what was excluded from what is today’s Bible took place over a period of time to the present. Various translations of the Bible have been constructed toying with wording and words to perpetuate the doctrines.
Some more recent versions/translations include these:
Revised Version (England) - RV - 1881-1885
American Standard Version - ASV - 1901
Revised Standard Version - RSV - 1952, a revision of the American Standard Version
Amplified Bible - AB - 1965
New English Bible - NEB - 1970, includes the Apocrypha
Living Bible - LB - 1971, a paraphrase version
Today's English Version - TEV - 1976, a.k.a. Good News Bible
New American Standard Version - NAS - 1977
New International Version - NIV - 1978
New World Translation - NWT - 1984 (done by Jehovah's Witnesses)
New American Bible - NAB - 1987, includes the Apocrypha (a Catholic Bible)
New Revised Standard Version - NRS - 1989, the authorized revision of the Revised Standard Version
New King James Version - NKJ - 1990
The Message - TM - 1993, a.k.a. New Testament in Contemporary English
The New Living Translation - NLT - 1996
English Standard Version - ESV - 2001, a revision of the Revised Standard Version
Holman Christian Standard Bible - 2004
Today's New International Version - TNIV - 2005
Prior to the above are some others:
The Coverdale Bible (1535).
The Great Bible (1539).
The Geneva Bible (1560)
The Bishops' Bible (1568)
The Rheims-Douay Bible (1582-1610).
The King James Version (1611)
JAK wrote: Canucklehead stated: Personally, I think that the stuff that guys like Plato, Rousseau and Nietzsche said is more interesting and neat than what Jesus said. (Rather, they asked more fundamental and interesting questions ... I don't always agree with their answers.)
Most of the ideas found in the Bible originated in human thought previously. Keep in mind (as I’m sure you do), the alleged Jesus of the New Testament never wrote a word. In addition, his reported words were not put to writing until 30 to 110 years after they were claimed to have been spoken. Yet in the Bible we have what are purported to be exact quotes from a single person.
JAK
The assumption here is that no one kept records of what Jesus said until Mark decided one day to sit down and write an account, which is erroneous. Mark and others incorporated earlier oral and written material that is no longer extant.
How would we know this if it wasn't written down?
Did you ever play the game Operator when you were a kid? Where you try to repeat what was said in a circle around the room?
Can you imagine how much harder it would be to keep the accurate, complete sayings of Jesus through 30 years of oral tranmission?
How do we know this?
It’s Christian doctrine.
But of course we don’t know it. You are not supposed to asked that question. Understand that in religious mythologies, there are many questions which are off limits.
We have difficulty quoting short stories verbatim in a week.
But that is to apply rational thinking to religious myth.
Pray, believe, do not question
The method for religious mythology is Truth by assertion.
Calculus Crusader stated: The assumption here is that no one kept records of what Jesus said until Mark decided one day to sit down and write an account, which is erroneous. Mark and others incorporated earlier oral and written material that is no longer extant.
Absent evidence that anyone recorded exact words of anyone, it should not be assumed.
Luke specifically states in his prologue that he used earlier sources, and textual criticism has identified earlier accounts within the extant Gospels.
JAK wrote:At the actual time of the alleged Jesus...
"Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury..."
JAK wrote:The consolidation of biblical scripts and the attempt to purge them of contradictions and inconsistencies occurred later. The likelihood that a large number of actual words could be accurately transferred for 30 to 110 years prior to being hand-copied is virtually non-existent. (Reference to New Testament alleged words of Jesus)
That is a bogus assertion.
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei
(I lost access to my Milesius account, so I had to retrieve this one from the mothballs.)
Calculus Crusader stated: The assumption here is that no one kept records of what Jesus said until Mark decided one day to sit down and write an account, which is erroneous. Mark and others incorporated earlier oral and written material that is no longer extant.
Absent evidence that anyone recorded exact words of anyone, it should not be assumed.
Luke specifically states in his prologue that he used earlier sources, and textual criticism has identified earlier accounts within the extant Gospels.
JAK wrote:At the actual time of the alleged Jesus...
"Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury..."
JAK wrote:The consolidation of biblical scripts and the attempt to purge them of contradictions and inconsistencies occurred later. The likelihood that a large number of actual words could be accurately transferred for 30 to 110 years prior to being hand-copied is virtually non-existent. (Reference to New Testament alleged words of Jesus)