Did Any of the Authors of the Gospels Know Jesus?

[oldbadger]

Presumably. After all, he claims that some of the Gospel authors were family - a rather novel claim which bespeaks a rather laughable ignorance.

(It might be fun to find out just which author was mishpachah and just how they were related.)​

I just wanted to start at the beginning......... didn't want to presume anything.

He attributes some of the Gospel authors to family? They wrote J off as a nut and an embarrassment, surely? I even doubt that James was J's brother.... maybe Zebedee's son.....

EDIT:- In an earlier post this member denied the resurrection and ascendancy of Jesus Christ. I have never read a Creed that omitted this, hence.... start at the beginning. That's probably a better answer......

 

[Desert Snake]

I was right......
You can't answer a simple question, straight.

I thought so....
All I wanted to do, was start at the beginning, to see if we could agree on anything. What is the point of sharing posts with you if you can't do that?

Would you like to try again? (I didn't think so).

You're entertaining.....Yes, I'm a Christian...


so...what's your point..

 

[oldbadger]

I swear if I ever meet an HJ who can keep such raw ad hominem out of his Jesus debates, I believe I'll marry him.

Will you invite us all to the wedding? What would you like for a pressie?

Why not just stick with the issue itself?

Oh come on....... I was asked about Conan Doyle for some reason, so thought I would give an answer. Conan Doyle was a very good historian as well as a writer.

The distinguished member did not appreciate my chatter about C-D's brilliant book 'The White Company'. :sad4:

 

[oldbadger]

Rubbish

All of it? Even the 1st para about C-D's 'The White Company'?

Or the para about atheist HJ researchers (the scholarly ones) supporting the fact that J lived, picked up a mission, made a fuss in the Temple etc?

Question:-

Do you believe that Jesus, the Jesus of the Gospels, existed and lived in Galilee?

 

[oldbadger]

You're entertaining.....Yes, I'm a Christian...

so...what's your point..

My point is that you wrote earlier:-

No, I disagree. In fact, out of anything in the nt, the crucifixion/resurrection narrative rings the most fictional to me.
Likely, Jesus survived the cross one way or another, and the writers may have embellished the story.

........ and I have never met a Christian who did not believe in the resurrection. So you are a different kind of Christian, so I wanted to start at the beginning. You wrote that you think it is fictional!

Get my point?

 

[Desert Snake]

My point is that you wrote earlier:-



........ and I have never met a Christian who did not believe in the resurrection. So you are a different kind of Christian, so I wanted to start at the beginning. You wrote that you think it is fictional!

Get my point?

No, not really, because I'm talking about possible embellishments, ...which...shouldn't be a big deal to you since you state you're a non-Christian...

Anyways, not much to your criticism.
Different Christians interpret things differently all the time.

p.s. I don't care who you've met.

 

[oldbadger]

No, not really, because I'm talking about possible embellishments, ...which...shouldn't be a big deal to you since you state you're a non-Christian...

Anyways, not much to your criticism.
Different Christians interpret things differently all the time.

p.s. I don't care who you've met.

Well, what is your Creed? All Christians have a Creed. What is yours?

And Creeds declare that the Resurrection is fact.

And you wondered why I want to start at the beginning, asking you if you believed in Jesus! So ..... come on, what is your Creed?

I'll post the Apostle's Creed here.

1. I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth:

2. And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, our Lord:

3. Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary:

4. Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead and buried: He descended into hell:

5. The third day he rose again from the dead:

6. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty:

7. From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead:

8. I believe in the Holy Ghost:

9. I believe in the holy catholic church: the communion of saints:

10. The forgiveness of sins:

1l. The resurrection of the body:

12. And the life everlasting. Amen.

 

[Desert Snake]

Stop wasting my time. You can share your nonsense with someone else.

 

[oldbadger]

Stop wasting my time. You can share your nonsense with someone else.

Gotcha!

That was so easy. Your own posts catch you out for all to see.

 

[Desert Snake]

Gotcha!

That was so easy. Your own posts catch you out for all to see.

Lol not at all.

 

[oldbadger]

Lol not at all.

If this was not so sad it would be funny.........

You posted that you are a Christian.
In post 303 you wrote this, denying the resurrection:-
POST 303

No, I disagree. In fact, out of anything in the nt, the crucifixion/resurrection narrative rings the most fictional to me.
Likely, Jesus survived the cross one way or another, and the writers may have embellished the story.
You're incorrect about 'why' it would be embellished in such a manner, there are obvious reasons why.

Then, when asked, you can't confirm that you have a Creed.
I don't think you knew what a Creed was, even.

You can carry on now, writing your nonsense. I will be chuckling every time I see your name. :biglaugh:

 

[Alceste]

Nor would I put up with anyone promoting their bias

... anyone but you.

 

[outhouse]

... anyone but you.

Show my bias.

So I can they show you that opinion is backed by almost every college class in the USA.

I do stretch in some areas, but do make it known that is my opinion.


I have a sharper division between Hellenism and Judaism then traditional scholarships.

It is backed with cultural anthropology and a matter of opinion, and in that grey area, I tend to be off to one side a bit more then most.

Other then that, I follow modern scholarships right down the middle of the road.

A bit of minimal historicity compared to most though.

How about you?

 

[Alceste]

Show my bias.

So I can they show you that opinion is backed by almost every college class in the USA.

I do stretch in some areas, but do make it known that is my opinion.


I have a sharper division between Hellenism and Judaism then traditional scholarships.

It is backed with cultural anthropology and a matter of opinion, and in that grey area, I tend to be off to one side a bit more then most.

Other then that, I follow modern scholarships right down the middle of the road.

A bit of minimal historicity compared to most though.

How about you?

Me? I am biased, as is everyone. That is also something you can learn in any psychology class in the USA.

 

[steeltoes]

Me? I am biased, as is everyone. That is also something you can learn in any psychology class in the USA.

In your opinion the "academic consensus" whatever that is, is not biased, no Christian leanings there?

 

[outhouse]

Me? I am biased, as is everyone. That is also something you can learn in any psychology class in the USA.

I have no problem admitting it.

It strengthens my biblical scholarship. It gives readers the ability to understand and develop their own opinion on these topics.

 

[steeltoes]

Please stick to topic and refrain from debating the question of whether or not Jesus existed. If you want to debate that, start your own thread please.

What answer to your question is fair if the very question of the Son of God's existence comes into play? There may be reasons why the authors did not know the Son of God. That the Son of God is necessarily based on an historical figure might be no more than mere speculation or religious belief. How do you expect us to ignore the elephant in the room?

 

[DarrenR]

There is mystery to who even wrote the gospels, so it's pretty hard to say if they did or didn't know Jesus when we can't even say who they were. The names of the gospels (the ones in a Christian bible at least) are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but we have no evidence who actually wrote any of them. Not even a claim of who they were.

 

[outhouse]

There is mystery to who even wrote the gospels, so it's pretty hard to say if they did or didn't know Jesus when we can't even say who they were. .

There is no mystery here.

Its quite obvious the authors were far removed from any Galileans life.

Galilean jews, hated their Hellenistic oppressors and Roman oppression. They would not have been writing a non jewish version of their movement for Romans.

Mark was written to and and for a Roman audience, and jewish laws explained carefully for non jews.

Galilean peasant jews were known for the loyal obedience to their religion, not breaking all the laws that resemble what gentile Proselytes would write to Romans.

 

[gnostic]

I have only just visit this topic, so I have not read all the 300+ posts. I have only just read a few posts of the 1st page.

There were any names (of the authors) give in any of earliest extant copies of the gospels. They were all anonymously written or composed.

It is tradition(s) of the 2nd century that gave the names of the evangelists to these 4 canonical gospels.

Whoever these unnamed authors were, most people (Christians) actually believed the gospels were written by John, Luke, Mark and Matthew.

I find it doubtful these being the actual authors to be highly doubtful. And since we don't who were the real authors of the gospels were, then I don't think it is at all possible to know if any of them met Jesus.

The only possible sources of the authors come from church traditions, and church traditions - or any tradition for that matter - are not objective historical sources, and hardly reliable. Traditions are no better than superstitious legends and folklore.