Christian Doctrine - Pop Quiz.

[eyeshaveit]

What is embryo adoption?

Spoiler

Embryo adoption is the 'pre-birth' adoption of children who are in a cryogenic (frozen) state, waiting to be thawed and transferred to their adopting (not genetically related) mother.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

"So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, ?How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.? Jesus answered them, ?I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one.? - John 10.

What was Jesus of Nazareth explaining in the above Bible verses?

Spoiler

Jesus was telling a group of Jews, that their lack of commitment to him was not due to too little information. But in truth some of them had "ears to hear?* him and some did not. Jesus was describing a dividing line; one that no middle course.

* Mark 4.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

"Salvific refers to having the intent or power to save or redeem" - Merriam-Webster.

So, why is God's salvific love conditional?

Spoiler

God exhibits goodwill and kindness toward all mankind, but God's salvific and saving love requires both repentance and faith:

"No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish." - Luke 13

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

Does Hell display the presence of God or absence of God?

Spoiler

Both:
God is present as concerning his judgment and wrath - God is absent as concerning his grace being lifted and removed.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

What is the Day-Age Theory of Creation?

Spoiler

The Day-Age Theory considers that the six days of creation as not normal 24 hour days (day/night-light/dark cycles):

"And God said, ?Let there be light,? and there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day." - Genesis 1.

"Day-age creationism, a type of old Earth creationism, is an interpretation of the creation accounts in Genesis. It holds that the six days referred to in the Genesis account of creation are not ordinary 24-hour days, but are much longer periods (of thousands or millions of years). The Genesis account is then reconciled with the age of the Earth. Proponents of the day-age theory can be found among both theistic evolutionists, who accept the scientific consensus on evolution, and progressive creationists, who reject it. The theories are said to be built on the understanding that the Hebrew word yom is also used to refer to a time period, with a beginning and an end and not necessarily that of a 24-hour day." - Wikipedia.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

"Epistemology studies the nature of knowledge, justification, and the rationality of belief." - Wikipedia.

What are the three (main) branches of epistemology?

Spoiler

1 - Rationalism - Truth through the mind.

2 - Empiricism - Truth through the senses.

3 - Idealism - Truth through (wired) innate intuition.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

Johann Sebastian Bach. wrote the initials SDG at the bottom of each piece of music he wrote. What means this 'SDG'?

Spoiler

Soli Deo Gloria = To God alone be the Glory.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

A Christian is:

1 - A citizen of a Christian country?

2 - A member of a Christian church?

3 - A follower of Jesus Christ?

4 - Other?

Spoiler

Other,
A Christian is one who possesses eternal life.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

List the four categories of Sins?

Spoiler

1 - Worship - idolatry, demonic, cult.

2 - Overindulgence - all things good made bad.

3 - Sexual - thoughts, words, actions.

4 - Relational - murder, theft, hate, jealousy, etc..

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

"Omniscience is the state of knowing everything" - Google.

The Bible describes God's omniscience as possessing what forms of knowledge?

Spoiler

All forms of infinite knowledge. There is nothing that Almighty God does not know. The Bible describes these things as:

1 - Perfect knowledge.

2 - Self knowledge.

3 - Possible knowledge.

4 - Immediate knowledge.

5 - Future knowledge.

6 - Eternal knowledge.

7 - Exhaustive knowledge.

8 - Penetrating knowledge.

9 - Etc.

"He determines the number of the stars; he gives to all of them their names." - Psalm 147.

Modern astronomers estimate, that there are 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in our Universe. Imagine the catalog-effort to name 100 sextillion stars; could it be done without numbers?

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

What is the etymology / meaning of 'zodiac'?

Spoiler

Zodiac literally means 'a circle of little animals' - a fish, crab, scorpion, etc., grouping of stars - Online Etymology Dictionary.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

?And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper*, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you. - John 14.

"The Greek word translated ?Helper? is 'paraclete'.  Thus if the "Spirit of truth" is "another Helper/Paraclete", who was the first; which Paraclete came before the Holy Spirit?

Spoiler

Jesus Christ, himself, was the 'first' Paraclete (Helper).

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

"Robin Dunbar is an anthropologist and evolutionary psychology professor at Oxford (UK). His research delves into the behavioral mechanics of social bonding. In the 1990s he postulated a hypothesis that has come to be known as Dunbar's Number. What is Dunbar's Number?

Spoiler

Dunbar's research found that, "each species of primate can manage to keep up a social bond with a certain number of other members of its own species. That number goes up as primates? brain size increases, from monkeys to apes. Humans, Dunbar found, are capable of maintaining significantly more social ties than the size of our brains alone could explain. He proved that each human is surprisingly consistent in the number of social ties we can maintain: About five with intimate friends, 50 with good friends, 150 with friends and 1,500 with people we could recognize by name.? - Washington Post quote - February 27, 2017.

[close]

What are the social factors that promote higher Dunbar Numbers?

Spoiler

The factors that trigger the most endorphins and promote social bonding and thus higher Dunbar Numbers:
1 - Laughter.
2 - Singing.
3 - Religion.
4 - Repetitive motions - dancing, bowing, applause, etc.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

"Herbert Spencer (1820 - 1903) was an English philosopher, biologist, anthropologist, sociologist, and prominent classical liberal political theorist." - Wikipedia.

Herbert Spencer proposed what five knowable categories of the natural sciences?

Spoiler

Spencer's five categories were: time, force, motion, space, matter.

"In the beginning [time], God [force] created [motion] the heavens [space] and the earth [matter]." - Genesis 1:1.

[close]

[GratefulApe]

?And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper*, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you. - John 14.

"The Greek word translated ?Helper? is 'paraclete'.  Thus if the "Spirit of truth" is "another Helper/Paraclete", who was the first; which Paraclete came before the Holy Spirit?

Spoiler

Jesus Christ, himself, was the 'first' Paraclete (Helper).

[close]

Father, Son and Holy Spirit always existed so in this case I would say that Jesus was speaking of giving them the Holy Spirit to live IN them where in the past the Holy Spirit was on them or guiding them in the Old Testament before Jesus came for the first time. Now all believers would have the Holy Spirit sealed IN them forever.

[GratefulApe]

A Christian is:

1 - A citizen of a Christian country?

2 - A member of a Christian church?

3 - A follower of Jesus Christ?

4 - Other?

Spoiler

Other,
A Christian is one who possesses eternal life.

[close]

A Christian is a follower of Jesus Christ who has been given eternal life in paradise. All people have an eternal life as the soul is eternal it's just a matter of where they spend that eternity.

[composer]

A Christian is:

1 - A citizen of a Christian country?

2 - A member of a Christian church?

3 - A follower of Jesus Christ?

4 - Other?

Spoiler

Other,
A Christian is one who possesses eternal life.

[close]

A Christian is a follower of Jesus Christ who has been given eternal life in paradise.

This miracle working person is a Historical MYTH!

(Source, e.g. - http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_nojesus.html)

All people have an eternal life as the soul is eternal

Apart from the fallible bible founded upon MYTHS (e.g. Prov. 30:25 & 30), your source of this current empty assertion is taken from what?

it's just a matter of where they spend that eternity.

More of your empty speculation based upon what?

[Francis]

A Christian is:

1 - A citizen of a Christian country?

2 - A member of a Christian church?

3 - A follower of Jesus Christ?

4 - Other?

Spoiler

Other,
A Christian is one who possesses eternal life.

[close]

A Christian is a follower of Jesus Christ who has been given eternal life in paradise.

This miracle working person is a Historical MYTH!

(Source, e.g. - http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_nojesus.html)

As usual Composer, to defend your position that Jesus never existed, you always pick sources that are not credentialed historians.... or legitimate Biblical scholars with degrees in Biblical studies anywhere... etc.   But it's a fact that it is the near unanimous consensus among all legitimate historians with degrees in history  and published Biblical scholars... ATHEISTS and theists... that Jesus was a real person.

That doesn't prove that Jesus was the Messiah or divine.  But the near unanimous opinion among the experts is that Jesus was a real person.

Vexen Crabtree is a hardcore atheist (he calls himself an explicit atheist) and isn't even a legit historian... and he doesn't offer any new arguments or information that hasn't been looked at by all the Biblical experts.

Respectfully

[composer]

That doesn't prove that Jesus was the Messiah or divine.  But the near unanimous opinion among the experts is that Jesus was a real person.

There were probably thousands of real people called by that name, so what?

NONE qualified as the biblical miracle working one!

Those like YOU are following a fabricated MYTH, which you apparently agree!

1. 'The Jesus of the Gospels is an artificial creation, a collective work of art who evolved through the combined consciousness of two generations of Christian worship.'

? A. N. Wilson (Paul, p144)


''Whether Jesus ever actually existed has long been debated. The argument (very well documented) is that there is absolutely no corroborating evidence of his existence in documents other than highly suspect Christian sources.'

? Riane Eisler (The Chalice & the Blade, p122)

Mormons have Professors with advanced Degrees, you better sign up with them! 

Many Catholic trinitarian priests have degrees also, you better choose between which ' degreed ' Cult you wish?

[eyeshaveit]

What is Pentecostalism?

Spoiler

"Pentecostalism is a renewal movement within Protestant Christianity that places special emphasis on a direct personal experience of God through the baptism with the Holy Spirit." - Wikipedia.

Pentecostalism is also known as 'Charismatic Renewal', and features personal revelation: such as prophecy, gifts-of-tongue and ecstatic experiences.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

How many of the dozen or more forms of writing, found in the Holy Bible, can you name?

Spoiler

Apocalypse.
Architectural Blueprints.
Gospels.
History.
Inventories.
Laws.
Letters.
Parables.
Poetry.
Prophecy.
Proverbs.
Sermons.
Travel Accounts.
Treaties (Covenant).
Etc.

[close]

[Francis]

1. 'The Jesus of the Gospels is an artificial creation, a collective work of art who evolved through the combined consciousness of two generations of Christian worship.'

? A. N. Wilson (Paul, p144)


''Whether Jesus ever actually existed has long been debated. The argument (very well documented) is that there is absolutely no corroborating evidence of his existence in documents other than highly suspect Christian sources.'

? Riane Eisler (The Chalice & the Blade, p122)

Composer....

First it was Vexen Crabtree. Now it is Riane Eisler  and A. N. Wilson. As usual Composer, to defend your position that Jesus never existed, you always pick sources that are not legitimate Biblical scholars or credentialed historians with degrees in Biblical studies anywhere.

Riane Eisler is not a biblical scholar or a biblical historian.  And her book "The Chalice & the Blade" is not a scholarly book and research about the Bible, but instead, it is about her perspective and opinion on the evolution of culture and social systems involving the sexes throughout history in general.  Indeed, even the statement that you quoted from her doesn't say that Jesus did not exist. In fact, on Amazon.com in the Editorial Reviews section,  Publishers Weekly said that she suggests that Jesus' teachings had a feminist bent. Well, how can she say that Jesus' teachings had a feminist bent if Jesus didn't exist?

And A. N. Wilson is an atheist writer, novelist and newspaper columnist. Yes, he sometimes does write biographies. And he wrote one about Jesus.  But he is not an accredited Historian or Biblical scholar with degrees in those areas. In fact, his biography about Hitler was heavily criticized in a review by the historian Richard J. Evans for significant factual inaccuracies, lack of original research and analysis, and personal biases (source: Wiki).  Wilson is simply not careful in his research as evidenced by him being duped by a hoax when he wrote a biography of Sir John Betjeman. (source: Wiki). This shows why he is not considered an expert in history... even about Jesus.

So everything I said about you is true. To defend your position that Jesus never existed, you always pick sources that are not legitimate Biblical scholars or credentialed historians with degrees in Biblical studies anywhere.

The fact remains that it is the near unanimous consensus among all legitimate historians with degrees in history... and published Biblical scholars... ATHEISTS and theists... that Jesus was a real person.

Respectfully

[composer]

1. 'The Jesus of the Gospels is an artificial creation, a collective work of art who evolved through the combined consciousness of two generations of Christian worship.'

? A. N. Wilson (Paul, p144)


''Whether Jesus ever actually existed has long been debated. The argument (very well documented) is that there is absolutely no corroborating evidence of his existence in documents other than highly suspect Christian sources.'

? Riane Eisler (The Chalice & the Blade, p122)

Composer....

First it was Vexen Crabtree. Now it is Riane Eisler  and A. N. Wilson. As usual Composer, to defend your position that Jesus never existed, you always pick sources that are not legitimate Biblical scholars or credentialed historians with degrees in Biblical studies anywhere.

Your accusation remains false, e.g. See below  - ***

&

You are attacking these people because they apparently don't conform as being ' degreed ', but you can't refute what they say!

Riane Eisler is not a biblical scholar or a biblical historian.  And her book "The Chalice & the Blade" is not a scholarly book and research about the Bible, but instead, it is about her perspective and opinion on the evolution of culture and social systems involving the sexes throughout history in general.  Indeed, even the statement that you quoted from her doesn't say that Jesus did not exist. In fact, on Amazon.com in the Editorial Reviews section,  Publishers Weekly said that she suggests that Jesus' teachings had a feminist bent. Well, how can she say that Jesus' teachings had a feminist bent if Jesus didn't exist?

Apparently she was remarking on the teachings as portrayed by the hearsay of those claiming to be its followers of this MYTHICAL person.

And A. N. Wilson is an atheist writer, novelist and newspaper columnist. Yes, he sometimes does write biographies. And he wrote one about Jesus.  But he is not an accredited Historian or Biblical scholar with degrees in those areas.

Accredited by whom?

In fact, his biography about Hitler was heavily criticized in a review by the historian Richard J. Evans for significant factual inaccuracies, lack of original research and analysis, and personal biases (source: Wiki).  Wilson is simply not careful in his research as evidenced by him being duped by a hoax when he wrote a biography of Sir John Betjeman. (source: Wiki). This shows why he is not considered an expert in history... even about Jesus.

Not considered an expert by whom?

So everything I said about you is true. To defend your position that Jesus never existed, you always pick sources that are not legitimate Biblical scholars or credentialed historians with degrees in Biblical studies anywhere.

The fact remains that it is the near unanimous consensus among all legitimate historians with degrees in history... and published Biblical scholars... ATHEISTS and theists... that Jesus was a real person.

I agree your own admission that YOU are ' not that bright! ".

You just wrote - " near unanimous consensus "   

You also said earlier -

" That doesn't prove that Jesus was the Messiah or divine. " (Source: http://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,62517.msg829433.html#msg829433)

&

HISTORICAL SCHOLARS

Many problems occur with the reliability of the accounts from ancient historians. Most of them did not provide sources for their claims, as they rarely included bibliographic listings, or supporting claims. They did not have access to modern scholarly techniques, and many times would include hearsay as evidence. No one today would take a modern scholar seriously who used the standards of ancient historians, yet this proves as the only kind of source that Christology comes from. Couple this with the fact that many historians believed as Christians themselves, sometimes members of the Church, and you have a built-in prejudice towards supporting a "real" Jesus.

In modern scholarship, even the best historians and Christian apologists play the historian game. They can only use what documents they have available to them. If they only have hearsay accounts then they have to play the cards that history deals them. Many historians feel compelled to use interpolation or guesses from hearsay, and yet this very dubious information sometimes ends up in encyclopedias and history books as fact.

In other words, Biblical scholarship gets forced into a lower standard by the very sources they examine. *** A renowned Biblical scholar illustrated this clearly in an interview when asked about Biblical interpretation. David Noel Freeman (the General editor of the Anchor Bible Series and many other works) responded with:

"We have to accept somewhat looser standards. In the legal profession, to convict the defendant of a crime, you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In civil cases, a preponderance of the evidence is sufficient. When dealing with the Bible or any ancient source, we have to loosen up a little; otherwise, we can't really say anything."

-David Noel Freedman (in Bible Review magazine, Dec. 1993, p.34)

The implications appear obvious. If one wishes to believe in a historical Jesus, he or she must accept this based on loose standards. Couple this with the fact that all of the claims come from hearsay, and we have a foundation made of sand, and a castle of information built of cards. "

i.e. Belief in a Historical jebus according to this ' reknowned scholar ' is founded upon hearsay, a foundation of sand and a castle o information built  of cards! ".

&

QUOTES FROM A FEW SCHOLARS:

Although apologist scholars believe that an actual Jesus lived on earth, the reasons for this appear obvious considering their Christian beliefs. Although some secular freethinkers and atheists accept a historical Jesus (minus the miracles), they, like most Christians, simply accept the traditional view without question. As time goes on, more and more scholars have begun to open the way to a more honest look at the evidence, or should I say, the lack of evidence. So for those who wish to rely on scholarly opinion, I will give a few quotes from Biblical scholars, past and present:

When the Church mythologists established their system, they collected all the writings they could find and managed them as they pleased. It is a matter altogether of uncertainty to us whether such of the writings as now appear under the name of the Old and New Testaments are in the same state in which those collectors say they found them, or whether they added, altered, abridged or dressed them up.

-Thomas Paine (The Age of Reason)


The world has been for a long time engaged in writing lives of Jesus... The library of such books has grown since then. But when we come to examine them, one startling fact confronts us: all of these books relate to a personage concerning whom there does not exist a single scrap of contemporary information -- not one! By accepted tradition he was born in the reign of Augustus, the great literary age of the nation of which he was a subject. In the Augustan age historians flourished; poets, orators, critics and travelers abounded. Yet not one mentions the name of Jesus Christ, much less any incident in his life.

-Moncure D. Conway [1832 - 1907] (Modern Thought)


It is only in comparatively modern times that the possibility was considered that Jesus does not belong to history at all.

-J.M. Robertson (Pagan Christs)



Many people-- then and now-- have assumed that these letters [of Paul] are genuine, and five of them were in fact incorporated into the New Testament as "letters of Paul." Even today, scholars dispute which are authentic and which are not. Most scholars, however, agree that Paul actually wrote only eight of the thirteen "Pauline" letters now included in the New Testament. collection: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon. Virtually all scholars agree that Paul himself did not write 1 or 2 Timothy or Titus-- letters written in a style different from Paul's and reflecting situations and viewpoints in a style different from those in Paul's own letters. About the authorship of Ephesias, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians, debate continues; but the majority of scholars include these, too, among the "deutero-Pauline"-- literally, secondarily Pauline-- letters."

-Elaine Pagels, Professor of Religion at Princeton University, (Adam, Eve, and the Serpent)



We know virtually nothing about the persons who wrote the gospels we call Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

-Elaine Pagels, Professor of Religion at Princeton University, (The Gnostic Gospels)



Some hoped to penetrate the various accounts and to discover the "historical Jesus". . . and that sorting out "authentic" material in the gospels was virtually impossible in the absence of independent evidence."

-Elaine Pagels, Professor of Religion at Princeton University



We can recreate dimensions of the world in which he lived, but outside of the Christian scriptures, we cannot locate him historically within that world.

-Gerald A. Larue (The Book Your Church Doesn't Want You To Read)



The gospels are so anonymous that their titles, all second-century guesses, are all four wrong.

-Randel McCraw Helms (Who Wrote the Gospels?)



Far from being an intimate of an intimate of Jesus, Mark wrote at the forth remove from Jesus.

-Randel McCraw Helms (Who Wrote the Gospels?)



Mark himself clearly did not know any eyewitnesses of Jesus.

-Randel McCraw Helms (Who Wrote the Gospels?)



All four gospels are anonymous texts. The familiar attributions of the Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John come from the mid-second century and later and we have no good historical reason to accept these attributions.

-Steve Mason, professor of classics, history and religious studies at York University in Toronto (Bible Review, Feb. 2000, p. 36)



The question must also be raised as to whether we have the actual words of Jesus in any Gospel.

-Bishop John Shelby Spong



Many modern Biblical archaeologists now believe that the village of Nazareth did not exist at the time of the birth and early life of Jesus. There is simply no evidence for it.

-Alan Albert Snow (The Book Your Church Doesn't Want You To Read)



But even if it could be proved that John's Gospel had been the first of the four to be written down, there would still be considerable confusion as to who "John" was. For the various styles of the New Testament texts ascribed to John- The Gospel, the letters, and the Book of Revelations-- are each so different in their style that it is extremely unlikely that they had been written by one person.

-John Romer, archeologist & Bible scholar (Testament)



It was not until the third century that Jesus' cross of execution became a common symbol of the Christian faith.

-John Romer, archeologist & Bible scholar (Testament)



What one believes and what one can demonstrate historically are usually two different things.

-Robert J. Miller, Bible scholar, (Bible Review, December 1993, Vol. IX, Number 6, p. 9)



When it comes to the historical question about the Gospels, I adopt a mediating position-- that is, these are religious records, close to the sources, but they are not in accordance with modern historiographic requirements or professional standards.

-David Noel Freedman, Bible scholar and general editor of the Anchor Bible series (Bible Review, December 1993, Vol. IX, Number 6, p.34)



It is said that the last recourse of the Bible apologist is to fall back upon allegory. After all, when confronted with the many hundreds of biblical problems, allegory permits one to interpret anything however one might please.

-Gene Kasmar, Minnesota Atheists



Paul did not write the letters to Timothy to Titus or several others published under his name; and it is unlikely that the apostles Matthew, James, Jude, Peter and John had anything to do with the canonical books ascribed to them.

-Michael D. Coogan, Professor of religious studies at Stonehill College (Bible Review, June 1994)



A generation after Jesus' death, when the Gospels were written, the Romans had destroyed the Jerusalem Temple (in 70 C.E.); the most influential centers of Christianity were cities of the Mediterranean world such as Alexandria, Antioch, Corinth, Damascus, Ephesus and Rome. Although large number of Jews were also followers of Jesus, non-Jews came to predominate in the early Church. They controlled how the Gospels were written after 70 C.E.

-Bruce Chilton, Bell Professor of Religion at Bard College (Bible Review, Dec. 1994, p. 37)



James Dunn says that the Sermon on the Mount, mentioned only by Matthew, "is in fact not historical."



How historical can the Gospels be? Are Murphy-O-Conner's speculations concerning Jesus' baptism by John simply wrong-headed? How can we really know if the baptism, or any other event written about in the Gospels, is historical?

-Daniel P. Sullivan (Bible Review, June 1996, Vol. XII, Number 3, p. 5)



David Friedrich Strauss (The Life of Jesus, 1836), had argued that the Gospels could not be read as straightforward accounts of what Jesus actually did and said; rather, the evangelists and later redactors and commentators, influenced by their religious beliefs, had made use of myths and legends that rendered the gospel narratives, and traditional accounts of Jesus' life, unreliable as sources of historical information.

-Bible Review, October 1996, Vol. XII, Number 5, p. 39



The Gospel authors were Jews writing within the midrashic tradition and intended their stories to be read as interpretive narratives, not historical accounts.

-Bishop Shelby Spong, Liberating the Gospels



Other scholars have concluded that the Bible is the product of a purely human endeavor, that the identity of the authors is forever lost and that their work has been largely obliterated by centuries of translation and editing.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "Who Wrote the Bible," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



Yet today, there are few Biblical scholars-- from liberal skeptics to conservative evangelicals- who believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John actually wrote the Gospels. Nowhere do the writers of the texts identify themselves by name or claim unambiguously to have known or traveled with Jesus.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The Four Gospels," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



Once written, many experts believe, the Gospels were redacted, or edited, repeatedly as they were copied and circulated among church elders during the last first and early second centuries.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The Four Gospels," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



The tradition attributing the fourth Gospel to the Apostle John, the son of Zebedee, is first noted by Irenaeus in A.D. 180. It is a tradition based largely on what some view as the writer's reference to himself as "the beloved disciple" and "the disciple whom Jesus loved." Current objection to John's authorship are based largely on modern textural analyses that strongly suggest the fourth Gospel was the work of several hands, probably followers of an elderly teacher in Asia Minor named John who claimed as a young man to have been a disciple of Jesus.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The Four Gospels," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



Some scholars say so many revisions occurred in the 100 years following Jesus' death that no one can be absolutely sure of the accuracy or authenticity of the Gospels, especially of the words the authors attributed to Jesus himself.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The catholic papers," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



Three letters that Paul allegedly wrote to his friends and former co-workers Timothy and Titus are now widely disputed as having come from Paul's hand.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The catholic papers," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)

*** Cnt'd

[composer]

 

*** Cnt'd (Comments by scholars)

The Epistle of James is a practical book, light on theology and full of advice on ethical behavior. Even so, its place in the Bible has been challenged repeatedly over the years. It is generally believed to have been written near the end of the first century to Jewish Christians. . . but scholars are unable conclusively to identify the writer.

Five men named James appear in the New Testament: the brother of Jesus, the son of Zebedee, the son of Alphaeus, "James the younger" and the father of the Apostle Jude.

Little is known of the last three, and since the son of Zebedee was martyred in A.D. 44, tradition has leaned toward the brother of Jesus. However, the writer never claims to be Jesus' brother. And scholars find the language too erudite for a simple Palestinian. This letter is also disputed on theological grounds. Martin Luther called it "an epistle of straw" that did not belong in the Bible because it seemed to contradict Paul's teachings that salvation comes by faith as a "gift of God"-- not by good works.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The catholic papers," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



The origins of the three letters of John are also far from certain.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The catholic papers," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



Christian tradition has held that the Apostle Peter wrote the first [letter], probably in Rome shortly before his martyrdom about A.D. 65. However, some modern scholars cite the epistle's cultivated language and its references to persecutions that did not occur until the reign of Domitian (A.D. 81-96) as evidence that it was actually written by Peter's disciples sometime later.

Second Peter has suffered even harsher scrutiny. Many scholars consider it the latest of all New Testament books, written around A.D. 125. The letter was never mentioned in second-century writings and was excluded from some church canons into the fifth century. "This letter cannot have been written by Peter," wrote Werner Kummel, a Heidelberg University scholar, in his highly regarded Introduction to the New Testament.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The catholic papers," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



The letter of Jude also is considered too late to have been written by the attested author-- "the brother of James" and, thus, of Jesus. The letter, believed written early in the second century.

-Jeffery L. Sheler, "The catholic papers," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)



According to the declaration of the Second Vatican Council, a faithful account of the actions and words of Jesus is to be found in the Gospels; but it is impossible to reconcile this with the existence in the text of contradictions, improbabilities, things which are materially impossible or statements which run contrary to firmly established reality.

-Maurice Bucaille (The Bible, the Quran, and Science)

The bottom line is we really don't know for sure who wrote the Gospels.

-Jerome Neyrey, of the Weston School of Theology, Cambridge, Mass. in "The Four Gospels," (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)


Most scholars have come to acknowledge, was done not by the Apostles but by their anonymous followers (or their followers' followers). Each presented a somewhat different picture of Jesus' life. The earliest appeared to have been written some 40 years after his Crucifixion.

-David Van Biema, "The Gospel Truth?" (Time, April 8, 1996)


*** Cnt'd

[composer]

 

*** Cnt'd (Comments by scholars)


So unreliable were the Gospel accounts that "we can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus."

-Rudolf Bultmann, University of Marburg, the foremost Protestant scholar in the field in 1926



The Synoptic Gospels employ techniques that we today associate with fiction.

-Paul Q. Beeching, Central Connecticut State University (Bible Review, June 1997, Vol. XIII, Number 3, p. 43)



Josephus says that he himself witnessed a certain Eleazar casting out demons by a method of exorcism that had been given to Solomon by God himself-- while Vespasian watched! In the same work, Josephus tells the story of a rainmaker, Onias (14.2.1).

-Paul Q. Beeching, Central Connecticut State University (Bible Review, June 1997, Vol. XIII, Number 3, p. 43)



For Mark's gospel to work, for instance, you must believe that Isaiah 40:3 (quoted, in a slightly distorted form, in Mark 1:2-3) correctly predicted that a stranger named John would come out of the desert to prepare the way for Jesus. It will then come as something of a surprise to learn in the first chapter of Luke that John is a near relative, well known to Jesus' family.

-Paul Q. Beeching, Central Connecticut State University (Bible Review, June 1997, Vol. XIII, Number 3, p. 43)



The narrative conventions and world outlook of the gospel prohibit our using it as a historical record of that year.

-Paul Q. Beeching, Central Connecticut State University (Bible Review, June 1997, Vol. XIII, Number 3, p. 54)



Jesus is a mythical figure in the tradition of pagan mythology and almost nothing in all of ancient literature would lead one to believe otherwise. Anyone wanting to believe Jesus lived and walked as a real live human being must do so despite the evidence, not because of it.

-C. Dennis McKinsey, Bible critic (The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy)



The gospels are very peculiar types of literature. They're not biographies.

-Paula Fredriksen, Professor and historian of early Christianity, Boston University (in the PBS documentary, From Jesus to Christ, aired in 1998)



The gospels are not eyewitness accounts

-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School



We are led to conclude that, in Paul's past, there was no historical Jesus. Rather, the activities of the Son about which God's gospel in scripture told, as interpreted by Paul, had taken place in the spiritual realm and were accessible only through revelation.

-Earl Doherty, "The Jesus Puzzle," p.83



Before the Gospels were adopted as history, no record exists that he was ever in the city of Jerusalem at all-- or anywhere else on earth.

-Earl Doherty, "The Jesus Puzzle," p.141



Even if there was a historical Jesus lying back of the gospel Christ, he can never be recovered. If there ever was a historical Jesus, there isn't one any more. All attempts to recover him turn out to be just modern remythologizings of Jesus. Every "historical Jesus" is a Christ of faith, of somebody's faith. So the "historical Jesus" of modern scholarship is no less a fiction.

-Robert M. Price, "Jesus: Fact or Fiction, A Dialogue With Dr. Robert Price and Rev. John Rankin," Opening Statement



It is important to recognize the obvious: The gospel story of Jesus is itself apparently mythic from first to last."

-Robert M. Price, professor of biblical criticism at the Center for Inquiry Institute (Deconstructing Jesus, p. 260)



CONCLUSION

Belief cannot produce historical fact, and claims that come from nothing but hearsay do not amount to an honest attempt to get at the facts. Even with eyewitness accounts we must tread carefully. Simply because someone makes a claim, does not mean it represents reality. For example, consider some of the bogus claims that supposedly come from many eyewitness accounts of alien extraterrestrials and their space craft. They not only assert eyewitnesses but present blurry photos to boot! If we can question these accounts, then why should we not question claims that come from hearsay even more? Moreover, consider that the hearsay comes from ancient and unknown people that no longer live.

Unfortunately, belief and faith substitute as knowledge in many people's minds and nothing, even direct evidence thrust on the feet of their claims, could possibly change their minds. We have many stories, myths and beliefs of a Jesus but if we wish to establish the facts of history, we cannot even begin to put together a knowledgeable account without at least a few reliable eyewitness accounts.

Of course a historical Jesus may have existed, perhaps based loosely on a living human even though his actual history got lost, but this amounts to nothing but speculation. However we do have an abundance of evidence supporting the mythical evolution of Jesus. Virtually every detail in the gospel stories occurred in pagan and/or Hebrew stories, long before the advent of Christianity. We simply do not have a shred of evidence to determine the historicity of a Jesus "the Christ." We only have evidence for the belief of Jesus.

So if you hear anyone who claims to have evidence for a witness of a historical Jesus, simply ask for the author's birth date. Anyone whose birth occurred after an event cannot serve as an eyewitness, nor can their words alone serve as evidence for that event.

(Source: http://nobeliefs.com/exist.htm)

[eyeshaveit]

"Vellum is a fine parchment made originally from the skin of a calf." - Google.

How many calf skins were necessary to produce a Gutenberg Bible?

Spoiler

According to the British Library, it took the skins of about 170 calves for each Gutenberg Bible printed.

[close]

[eyeshaveit]

Why did Jesus of Nazareth heal the sick and disabled?

Spoiler

Christ's healings were exhibitions of his power and his compassion. They were proof of his deity; as they demonstrated his divine authority. The healings also displayed Christ's ability to free mankind from sin: both sin's bondage and sin's penalty, the wrath of God.

[close]

[composer]

Why did Jesus of Nazareth heal the sick and disabled?

Spoiler

Christ's healings were exhibitions of his power and his compassion. They were proof of his deity; as they demonstrated his divine authority. The healings also displayed Christ's ability to free mankind from sin: both sin's bondage and sin's penalty, the wrath of God.

[close]

Only in a Story book! 

[eyeshaveit]

Why is the illumining work of the Holy Spirit necessary?

Spoiler

Without the Holy Spirit, one cannot come to 'know' or truly comprehend the scriptures. One's understanding, knowledge and wisdom gained remains limited:

"These things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God." - 1 Corinthians 10.

[close]

[composer]

Why is the illumining work of the Holy Spirit necessary?

Spoiler

Without the Holy Spirit, one cannot come to 'know' or truly comprehend the scriptures. One's understanding, knowledge and wisdom gained remains limited:

"These things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God." - 1 Corinthians 10.

[close]

Another fabricated mentality!