Hi Everybody...I'm Seeking Biblical Knowledge...

[Riverwolf]

If I can be of help yes!

Not "am I right or wrong," but, what do you think? Agree? Disagree? Reasons?

 

[Deeje]

Who wrote the Bible?

Can someone produce just 'ONE' verse from the Bible that mentions who wrote the Bible???

I searched and searched (Google) I can't find anything!!!!

One verse that authenticates authorship!
One verse that commands that author/prophet to write that book by GOD

Thanks in advance, will read enlightened answers later....

1 Thessalonians 2:13: "Indeed, that is why we also thank God incessantly, because when you received God’s word, which you heard from us, you accepted it, not as the word of men, but, just as it truthfully is, as the word of God, which is also at work in you believers."

Will that do?

Deeje

 

[Oberon]

I dunno. The Gospels are beautiful stories, but the narrative is so heavily borrowed from other myths (the myth of focus being the Osiris myth of Egyptian mythology)

This is a commonly touted and absolutely false statement. See, for example, my post here. The similarities between the mythic traditions cited are VERY slim.

that it's pretty clear that it is fiction, even though most scholars agree that there was a man named Jesus (Yeshua) who went around teaching some of the things that the gospels record.

Most scholars go well beyond that. There are next to no scholars around who argue that the Jesus tradition borrowed from greek myth. Even skeptical NT scholars are prepared to go well beyond what Bultmann said we could know, and he thought we could know quite a bit.

The gospels are not fiction. They certainly contain mythic elements, but all of greek history does.

However, the Trojan War was an historical event; it's just that they were fighting over trade routes instead of some woman.

There is no evidence that the trojan war as described in the Illiad ever took place. Archaeological excavations of troy show evidence of many such wars.

 

[VinDino11]

Not "am I right or wrong," but, what do you think? Agree? Disagree? Reasons?

If you are referring to Iliad I have not read that book and so I cannot comment.

If you're referring about the points you made about the Bible, I would agree!

 

[Brotownious'_87]

Why not?



So?



Extremely dishonest.

Why not, if thats the case we may as well start reading weatchmen, get a whole heap of followers and make a religion out of it and call it watchmenism.

the bible is more than a book, in it contains what a large group of people around the world regard the begining and purpose of life, with a divine creator.

 

[Oberon]

I dunno. The Gospels are beautiful stories, but the narrative is so heavily borrowed from other myths (the myth of focus being the Osiris myth of Egyptian mythology) that it's pretty clear that it is fiction

I have posted a relevent post I wrote earlier on a different forum to address this here

 

[Aslinitato]

I know that, but I was worried that my post would run too long. Thanks for posting this.



Seems like several authors is a Biblical trademark. lol



Thank you for the correction.



Thank you for the extension. I actually don't know much about Paul's letters, which is why I wasn't able to portray much detail. Would you mind citing some sources, because I'd like to read more on the subject.

(Being unable to post websites makes citations rather difficult.

I use Early Christian Writings for various texts, and Bible Gateway for my biblical quotes. I will give you the books I utilize.

Hebrews-


You can also use "Exploring Hebrews (Revised)" by John Phillips and Kenneth Hagan's "Hebrews Commenting
from Erasmus to Beze."

On Ephesians-

"Key to Ephesians" by E.J. Goodspeed
"The Epistle to the Ephesians" by C.L. Milton

Titus-

Here I was admittedly limited to a single source, something I try to avoid

"An Introduction to the New Testament" by Raymond E. Brown


In addition, to see early Christian thoughts on Titus, you can utilize Early Christian Writings

Timothy Epistles-

"The New Testament, an Introduction: Proclamation and Parenesis, Myth and History." by Normal Perrin


On Q-

I located two PBS articles on Q and if you want criticism of the Q hypothesis you can purchase

"The Case Against Q" by Mark Goodacre,

While technically accurate the negative semantic load of this term would not have been in the minds of the authors' audience. Copying, with or without citation, paraphrasing or no, was very common.

You are correct that plagiarism was the wrong term to use, considering differences in syntax, word choice, etc. in addition to the context. "Borrowing" might be a more proper term that doesn't fall victim to hyperbole.

Not entirely correct. For one, evidence from research into the reliability or oral transmissions makes it possible (and some scholars have argued for it) that Q was an "oral text" so to speak.

Very possible, I concur. The hypothesis would certainly explain why no manuscripts of Q have been located thus far.

Second, both Matthew and Luke have material unique to each (often called M and L in NT scholarship).

Dang, how did I miss that? I stand corrected.

That is almost certainly part of it. However, each author not only had his/her own opinions, they also had an audience. John's gospel is the most theological in nature, and shows perhaps the most redaction of the Jesus tradition. He was clearly addressing specific issues which were present in either his community or in the christian community at large (some have postulated his work addresses a proto-gnostic christology/theology/cosmology).

The synoptics on the other hand show more interest in preserving the tradition as is (Matthew being the most likely to show redaction of the three). Mark's gospel does rather resemble a work such as the one Papias describes John Mark as writing (whereas our matthew is clearly not the one he was talking about, being originally written in greek, not hebrew). Luke is the most self-consciously historical, and his comments in the prologue to luke and acts place him squarely in the greek historical tradition.

Quite interesting, thank you for the information.

In other words, the gulf between John and the synoptics is partly to be explained by their respective dates, audience, and styles, not just beliefs and access to particular traditions.

Very true, beliefs could not be the sole factor in such radical differences.

The typo here makes it difficult to understand you (I hate to point out such mistakes, particularly since I make them constantly, but I would like to know what you are trying to say here).

:sorry1:

Preview is your friend.... preview is your friend...

I was basically saying that we did not know the identity of the person who added the ending to Mark, and that Q, if is indeed a written text, would have a multitude of authors.

I would like to note that as OT textual criticism isn't your forte, I'm not an expert in the NT, although it is a small side-hobby, and that my priority was in discussing the Pauline works, and therefore I didn't spend a colossal amount of time drudging through the books I've collected when it comes to analyzing Synoptics/John.

I would like to apologize for mindlessly wandering through what appears to be your domain, and thank you for the corrections, they were most edifying. :clap

 

[McBell]

No it hasn't in your case. You either forgot to address the OP or don't know the answer, and you couldn't have made your disposition any clearer!!!

Your lies and deception got old the first page.

 

[VinDino11]

Your lies and deception got old the first page.

Whatever! Your attitude and accusations are signs of psychotic illness.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Whatever! Your attitude and accusations are signs of psychotic illness.

Back off newbie ...

 

[VinDino11]

Your lies and deception got old the first page.

Back off newbie ...

Back-off? What is there a conspiracy on this Forum.

He makes accusations and displays a psychotic disposition, "and I'm in the wrong?"

Mind your own business, nobody likes snoops meddling in other peoples affairs.

 

[Breathe]

VinDino, allow me to explain a few things.

The way you have been on here, though I don't believe you've meant to, has come across quite aggressive and condescending and as though you are not interested in the answers but being rude. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt right now.

However, saying things like "mind your own business" to some of the elder members when as I write you have 15 posts is not going to make you very popular and may get you banned quickly, which would suck, because this is a great place to hang out.

I know it's difficult to keep a cool head when it seems as though people are "against" you, yet many of the members here have answered you, but you seemed uninterested in their replies from their perspectives.

 

[McBell]

Whatever! Your attitude and accusations are signs of psychotic illness.

Interesting.
You ask a question.
Said question gets answered by more than one post.
You claim your question was not answered.
That makes you a liar.

So as you can see, you are STILL being dishonest.
I made no accusation.
I stated a fact.

Your dislike of the fact is completely irrelevant.

 

[Oberon]

On Q-

I located two PBS articles on Q and if you want criticism of the Q hypothesis you can purchase

"The Case Against Q" by Mark Goodacre,

Just to add some other criticisms by scholars that are around (although they are by far the minority):

-Flusser, D. Jesus. Jerusalem: Magnes, 1969, revised 1998.

He concludes Luke is the oldest gospel, and there is no Q.

-Hengel, M. The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus Christ. London: SCM, 2000.

Hengel also argues that Luke is the oldest, and against Q.

On the other hand:

Farmer, William. The Synoptic Problem. New York: Macmillan, 1964
Mann, C. S. Mark. Anchor Bible 27; Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1986

Both of these argue Matthew was written first, and that there is no Q.

Goulder, M. D. Midrash and Lection in Matthew. London: SPCK, 1974.

Goulder accepts Markan priority, but rejects the idea that Q may be reconstructed.

"Borrowing" might be a more proper term that doesn't fall victim to hyperbole.

I agree.

I would like to apologize for mindlessly wandering through what appears to be your domain,

Please don't apologize, and I have no demain. I just thought I should add a bit to what you were adding

 

[VinDino11]

Interesting.
You ask a question.
Said question gets answered by more than one post.
You claim your question was not answered.
That makes you a liar.

So as you can see, you are STILL being dishonest.
I made no accusation.
I stated a fact.

Your dislike of the fact is completely irrelevant.

Where was it answered?

That someone expresses an opinion doesn't resolve the question posed absolutely.

You have yet to learn manners let alone skills of debating because the latter necessitates intelligence as you clearly lack by your sociopathic behavior. What confirmation does this Forum offer that its members are credited in theology? None! They could all be social outcasts with little intelligence too offer. You see to me everyone could be a freak, like you!

 

[DallasApple]

I don't understand where this statement comes from.

But thank-you anyways for your input.

Are you a robot?

Love

Dallas

 

[TheKnight]

Where was it answered?

That someone expresses an opinion doesn't resolve the question posed absolutely.

You have yet to learn manners let alone skills of debating because the latter necessitates intelligence as you clearly lack by your sociopathic behavior. What confirmation does this Forum offer that its members are credited in theology? None! They could all be social outcasts with little intelligence too offer. You see to me everyone could be a freak, like you!

From what I have seen in your posts....it would appear as if you aren't interested in the answers that people have already given. In fact, it seems as if you aren't even reading peoples' posts. If you are, then it appears as if your reading comprehension skills are lacking. I suggest that you go back through the thread and read the posts that have answered your question already. Because as it appears, all you've done is skip over those posts and respond to the ones that you've felt like responding to. A debate also necessitates calmness and listening skills. If you are unwilling to listen to what others are proposing to answer your question then you are not debating, but preaching instead.

 

[Riverwolf]

Where was it answered?

That someone expresses an opinion doesn't resolve the question posed absolutely.

You have yet to learn manners let alone skills of debating because the latter necessitates intelligence as you clearly lack by your sociopathic behavior. What confirmation does this Forum offer that its members are credited in theology? None! They could all be social outcasts with little intelligence too offer. You see to me everyone could be a freak, like you!

From my experience, social outcasts are some of the smartest people on the planet, especially nerds. (Like myself.)

Now here's what you're doing right now: you're judging someone's entire character just by their posts here. That is very dangerous, and hardly ever leads to an accurate conclusion. For example, judging by some of your posts, I'd assume that you're either in junior high or in high school. Is that right?

Here's another example. There's a Mormon here(or was, I haven't seen him around recently) who is vehemently against gay marriage. From some of his posts, he came across as a Bible-thumping Christian who spends his entire time working or studying the Bible.

Turns out he also plays World of Warcraft, which is something I'd never have guessed from someone like him.

My point is, don't judge someone by a few words they may share with you. Mestemia doesn't take lightly to people who choose to insult him or ignore answers which are given, and when he doesn't like someone's attitude, he lets that person know.

And if you're looking for an absolute answer, well... there's no such thing, in any field of any kind.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You have yet to learn manners let alone skills of debating because the latter necessitates intelligence as you clearly lack by your sociopathic behavior.

Such grammar!

 

[slave2six]

Who wrote the Bible?

Can someone produce just 'ONE' verse from the Bible that mentions who wrote the Bible???

Why are you searching Google rather than the Bible?

Paul to the Galatians
Paul to the Collosians

Many books are written in the first person as well although that isn't exactly evidence.

Now, the question is why you should believe that the contents of the Bible are true or accurate. The problem is that the Bible was compiled 300 years after Christ our of letters and documents that had be re-written many times over. There is not a single document that can be traced back to the original authors. In the case of the Gospels, those authors never wrote anything until 2-3 decades after the alleged events occurred. So, do you have good reason to doubt the authenticity and accuracy of the Bible? Yes.

(Am I the only person who read the original question?)