Jesus: Connections to Eyewitnesses and Extrabiblical Sources

[blue taylor]

"We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity."


Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2.



"Do you see the advantage of deceit? ...

For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind ...

And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."

Chrysostom, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1.



"Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since – as already it has been often proved – these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their assumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them."

Faustus of Mileve (Manichean opposer of Augustine)

Early Christian fathers were notorious liars. There is no historical evidence for Papias, except in comments made by church historians. Eusebius was made the first church historian by Constantine, a pagan who murdered his wife and son. Such great credentials.

 

[metis]

Metis, your academic background prompted my assumption that you were aware of how holy sites can be preserved and remodeled with inscriptions, etc. (e. g. the first century Nazareth house celebrated in tradition as the home of Joseph and Mary; the Upper Room, etc.). The tombs discussed in my post are clearly referring to the tombs in the Jerusalem church. Capernaum is not near Jerusalem. The nearby synagogue in Capernaum is irrelevant because it was constructed in the 4th-5th century.

Certainly wasn't clear to me, but communication is never a matter of perfection.

The Capernaum synagogue is unclear as to when it may have originally was constructed, especially since it was rebuilt several times. It is referred to in Mark's gospel (see below). What sometimes makes the archaeology difficult is the pattern of leveling a structure and then building over the top of it, which was customary in eretz Israel.

Mark.1 [21] "And they went into Caper'na-um; and immediately on the sabbath he entered the synagogue and taught."

Also: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Archaeology/capesyn.html

 

[Berserk]

No, Metis, later excavations suggest that what underlies the present synagogue ruins is not a first century synagogue, but an open, paved market place:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capernaum

Blue Taylor's post illustrates the same sort of stereotypes that give rise to racism and anti-Semitism. True, there were many later forgeries. For a representative survey of these documents, see Hennecke-Schneemelcher's "Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the New Testament." But slandering orthodox church fathers in general is ludicrous bias prompted by how threatened skeptics are about reliable eyewitness connections that point to remarkable miracles. Early church fathers strove to identify such forgers and hold them accountable.

For modern day testimonies of equally compelling miracles, see my ongoing threads in the Paranormal section of this site. People like Blue need to leave the myopic Ghetto of intellectually stifling naysayers and breathe the fresh air of honest and open inquiry. Put simply, they just need to get out more.

 

[metis]

No, Metis, later excavations suggest that what underlies the present synagogue ruins is not a first century synagogue, but an open, paved market place:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capernaum

Sorry but that's not what the article says as far as I can see, plus this is not what our tour guide, who was a Israeli historian working on his ph.d. told us. The article I posted refutes what you say, and there were other such sources that I didn't post.

How is it that there are several times in the gospels that refer to the synagogue at Capernaum but you say otherwise? Can you quote and link me to your source?

Another verse that mentions the synagogue at Capernaum that you say didn't exist:
John.6 [59] "This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caper'na-um."

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

People like Blue need to leave the myopic Ghetto of intellectually stifling naysayers and breathe the fresh air of honest and open inquiry.

Nice word-smithing.

 

[Berserk]

For the benefit of Metis: "while Loffreda claimed to have found a paved surface, others are of the opinion that this was an open, paved market area." Metis, I want this 4th-5th century synagogue to be cite of the first century synagogue where Jesus taught. The evidence is simply not there, but Jesus' synagogue may have been elsewhere in Capernaum.

 

[blue taylor]

" Early church fathers strove to identify such forgers and hold them accountable"

They did not strive to identify all forgers, and forgeries, only the ones that did not fit their theology.


"Virtually all scholars agree that seven of the Pauline letters are authentic: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon,"

"Individuals claiming to be Paul wrote 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians and Colossians."

"The Bible not only contains untruths of accidental mistakes. It also contains what almost anyone today would call lies."

"Thus Christians aiming to authorize views they wanted others to accept wrote in the name of the Apostles, "fabricating, falsifying and forging documents."

Bart Ehrman (former evangelical Christian, until he read the historical origins of the NT)

Bart is probably the best authority on the historical accuracy of the NT. And he believes that a historical Jesus did exist. You can hate him for his views, but you cannot dispute his knowledge.

 

[metis]

For the benefit of Metis: "while Loffreda claimed to have found a paved surface, others are of the opinion that this was an open, paved market area." Metis, I want this 4th-5th century synagogue to be cite of the first century synagogue where Jesus taught. The evidence is simply not there, but Jesus' synagogue may have been elsewhere in Capernaum.

The is in reference to Peter's house: "One block of homes, called by the Franciscan excavators the sacra insula or "holy insula" ("insula" refers to a block of homes around a courtyard) was found to have a complex history. Located between the synagogue and the lake shore... Later excavation work was attempted underneath the synagogue floor, but while Loffreda claimed to have found a paved surface, others are of the opinion that this was an open, paved market area."

IOW, there's no slam-dunk one way or the other, but here's what you wrote in your post #40: "The nearby synagogue in Capernaum is irrelevant because it was constructed in the 4th-5th century."

You have jumped to an conclusion while claiming I was wrong, and a serious theologian doesn't do that because they know the limitations of doing the archaeology back that far in history coming from mainly subjective sources. Because of your willingness to run fast and loose on "facts", and because you prefer to throw out insults when it suits your fancy, I'm gonna leave this "discussion" as I simply have other people I'd rather deal with who don't do what you have been doing.






"

 

[Berserk]

Metis, you made my point for me: no slam dunk case. In any case, the synagogue is irrelevant to my point about the holy sites of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

 

[Berserk]

(10) Acts 16 begins the famous "we" passages in which Luke was an eyewitness to events recorded. Luke is present with Paul when Paul's companions meet with Jesus' brother James and the Jerusalem "elders," including the surviving eyewitnesses (see Acts 21). It is during these encounters that Luke evidently gains eyewitness sources for his own Gospel. Luke discusses his access to eyewitness testimony in the prologue to his Gospel (Luke 1:1-4). It is likely during this trip to Jerusalem that Luke gains access to Mark's Gospel, Q, and unique materials originally in Aramaic (called L by scholars).
Most intriguing is Luke's reference to "several" earlier Gospels. We can only be sure that uses Mark and Q. He apparently does not use Matthew or John. His allusion suggests the existence of other Gospels from eyewitnesses that got lost and might yet be discovered by archaeologists. This prospect is in my view the most exciting possibility for modern archaeological digs and searches.

 

[McBell]

(10) Acts 16 begins the famous "we" passages in which Luke was an eyewitness to events recorded. Luke is present with Paul when Paul's companions meet with Jesus' brother James and the Jerusalem "elders," including the surviving eyewitnesses (see Acts 21). It is during these encounters that Luke evidently gains eyewitness sources for his own Gospel. Luke discusses his access to eyewitness testimony in the prologue to his Gospel (Luke 1:1-4). It is likely during this trip to Jerusalem that Luke gains access to Mark's Gospel, Q, and unique materials originally in Aramaic (called L by scholars).
Most intriguing is Luke's reference to "several" earlier Gospels. We can only be sure that uses Mark and Q. He apparently does not use Matthew or John. His allusion suggests the existence of other Gospels from eyewitnesses that got lost and might yet be discovered by archaeologists. This prospect is in my view the most exciting possibility for modern archaeological digs and searches.

Not familiar with the "Royal We" concept?

 

[Berserk]

Irrelevant here because we now from other sources that Luke was Paul's physician and travel companion. Moving on...

(11) In 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 Paul lists the sequence of resurrection appearances that he "in turn had received." Received from whom? Well, the answer can be found in Galatians 1:11-17 and 2:1-10. There Paul makes it clear that he made 2 trips to Jerusalem to consult first with Peter and Jesus' brother James, and then with Peter, James, and John, to validate His Jesus' story with eyewitness testimony. Paul notes that they made no corrections in his version of the Gospel. We can safely assume that the series of Easter appearances that Paul reports found confirmation in their testimony. More importantly, Paul is the last witness of the Risen Jesus and his resurrection appearance transforms him from a guilt-free hitman for the Pharisees into the greatest and most effective apostle. 3 times Paul celebrates his life-changing resurrection appearance, thus giving support to his travel companion, Dr. Luke's accounts in the Book of Acts.