I remember when I learned all the gospels were written decades after the “fact.”
I can’t remember what I ate for lunch yesterday, and we are supposed to believe people played a game of telephone for a few decades and got everything correct when writing it down?
Those events would have been centuries apart. This is like saying that because Romulus and Remus weren’t raised by a she-wolf you don’t believe in Rome.
I know this, but the entire Israeli story being based on a flat-out lie doesn’t cut it for me. The entire out of Egypt story is a complete fabrication, and that is a HUGE part of Israeli identity in the Bible.
First no you don’t know this otherwise you wouldn’t be making such an overtly ignorant claim.
We have no idea if it is a fabrication. We have no evidence that supports the idea that Hebrews and Judeans were enslaved by Egypt but we have nothing that refutes it either. Most of the forms of evidence you would expect to find would not survive thousands of years. We suspect it did not happen but we don’t know.
Why would it matter? Most nations and people have inaccurate understandings of themselves and theor neighbors unless you have a very specific axe to grind .
Your posts are proof you have an axe to grind and hold illogical views. You are writing off all the events of the Bible because you have decided that your bias is truth when we don’t know what the truth is. That’s not an indicator for being informed on a subject.
I think the majority consensus is that none of the Gospels were written by contemporaries of Jesus, and they were edited and changed up to 200 years after his death.
They were changed much, much longer than 200 years.
Hell, the book of Mark, the oldest version we have (that both Mathew and Luke are copied from) has a completey different ending and vibe than what he have now
A grumpy, almost cynical Jesus who gets annoyed pretty often that people don’t listen to him or his instructions. It’s hilarious.
None of the Gospels were written by the apostles. They didn’t even have names until much, much later. I’m talking centuries.
Life expectancy was also much shorter
Mathew and Luke are both just re-writes of Mark. Mark is the oldest out of them all, and the oldest surviving versions we have are not designated a name.
It was a marketing ploy much later to give each gospel a name of one of his apostles to give them more credibility.
Some parts of Mathew and Luke are even word for word copies from Mark, which suggests that they are revisions from a different party who decided to edit in their own ideas.
Hell, the original version of Mark actually has a different ending than the one we got in the modern Bible.
John comes much, much later which is why it’s so different than the other three. It’s Spaceballs.
None of the Gospels were written by anyone who personally knew him.
The life expectancy being shorter before modern medicine is missing context. People were more likely to die as infants, but if you made it to age 5, you would most likely live a modern life span of about 80 years, so infant mortality was greater, but if you were to survive past infancy, life expectancy is about the same as it is now.
What’s also wild to me is if these were buddies of Jesus, they had this story of his birth, then nothing for thirty years, then a couple things, then death.
Where are all the stories about teenage Jesus doing sick jumps off a camel or whatever? We are missing a few decades of knowledge about this supposed most important person ever.
There are about 30 gospels that didn’t make it into the final version of the Bible, some talk about a little about it.
Most were ordered destroyed and not rediscovered until pretty recently in Egypt.
I’m not a Christian, just someone with an interest in it. There’s pretty much no doubt Jesus was someone who actually was alive, but what we have concerning his “story” could possibly be an algamation of different people who led both a religious and social revolution at the time
One theory suggests that Jesus actually has a brother who looked strikingly similar (James) enough to actually pull off pretending to be him.
Which would explain after his death why people purported to have seen him. Possibly a tactic to keep the revolution alive
I remember when I learned all the gospels were written decades after the “fact.”
I can’t remember what I ate for lunch yesterday, and we are supposed to believe people played a game of telephone for a few decades and got everything correct when writing it down?
Sure, Jan.
The fact that the Egyptians never kept the Israelites as slaves negates the entire story IMO.
Those events would have been centuries apart. This is like saying that because Romulus and Remus weren’t raised by a she-wolf you don’t believe in Rome.
I know this, but the entire Israeli story being based on a flat-out lie doesn’t cut it for me. The entire out of Egypt story is a complete fabrication, and that is a HUGE part of Israeli identity in the Bible.
First no you don’t know this otherwise you wouldn’t be making such an overtly ignorant claim.
We have no idea if it is a fabrication. We have no evidence that supports the idea that Hebrews and Judeans were enslaved by Egypt but we have nothing that refutes it either. Most of the forms of evidence you would expect to find would not survive thousands of years. We suspect it did not happen but we don’t know.
Why would it matter? Most nations and people have inaccurate understandings of themselves and theor neighbors unless you have a very specific axe to grind .
Look, you’re free to believe whatever you want, even if it’s wrong.
In this case Im not though. You just have an axe to grind against Israel and take that to an extremely illogical and uninformed direction.
Again, no proof.
Your posts are proof you have an axe to grind and hold illogical views. You are writing off all the events of the Bible because you have decided that your bias is truth when we don’t know what the truth is. That’s not an indicator for being informed on a subject.
Surely it must be. Nothing really important except for the biblical events was going on back then! /s
The gospels were, while written decades after the fact, written by people who were alive at the time. It’s not really a game of telephone.
It turns out that when a guy dies in his early 30s, most of his buddies are still alive 30-50yrs later.
I think the majority consensus is that none of the Gospels were written by contemporaries of Jesus, and they were edited and changed up to 200 years after his death.
They were changed much, much longer than 200 years.
Hell, the book of Mark, the oldest version we have (that both Mathew and Luke are copied from) has a completey different ending and vibe than what he have now
A grumpy, almost cynical Jesus who gets annoyed pretty often that people don’t listen to him or his instructions. It’s hilarious.
None of the Gospels were written by the apostles. They didn’t even have names until much, much later. I’m talking centuries.
Life expectancy was also much shorter
Mathew and Luke are both just re-writes of Mark. Mark is the oldest out of them all, and the oldest surviving versions we have are not designated a name.
It was a marketing ploy much later to give each gospel a name of one of his apostles to give them more credibility.
Some parts of Mathew and Luke are even word for word copies from Mark, which suggests that they are revisions from a different party who decided to edit in their own ideas.
Hell, the original version of Mark actually has a different ending than the one we got in the modern Bible.
John comes much, much later which is why it’s so different than the other three. It’s Spaceballs.
None of the Gospels were written by anyone who personally knew him.
Source for life expectancy being much shorter?
The life expectancy being shorter before modern medicine is missing context. People were more likely to die as infants, but if you made it to age 5, you would most likely live a modern life span of about 80 years, so infant mortality was greater, but if you were to survive past infancy, life expectancy is about the same as it is now.
That’s my understanding for mostcultures outside of cultures like the Inuit who died younger due to the lack of plants in the extremes they lived in.
What’s also wild to me is if these were buddies of Jesus, they had this story of his birth, then nothing for thirty years, then a couple things, then death.
Where are all the stories about teenage Jesus doing sick jumps off a camel or whatever? We are missing a few decades of knowledge about this supposed most important person ever.
There’s a fantastic book called “Lamb” that is all about this from the perspective of Christ’s bestie Biff. It’s hilarious.
There are about 30 gospels that didn’t make it into the final version of the Bible, some talk about a little about it.
Most were ordered destroyed and not rediscovered until pretty recently in Egypt.
I’m not a Christian, just someone with an interest in it. There’s pretty much no doubt Jesus was someone who actually was alive, but what we have concerning his “story” could possibly be an algamation of different people who led both a religious and social revolution at the time
One theory suggests that Jesus actually has a brother who looked strikingly similar (James) enough to actually pull off pretending to be him.
Which would explain after his death why people purported to have seen him. Possibly a tactic to keep the revolution alive