Matthew, Peter, John and James sound very english names to me.
Where did they come from?
If they were locals, are there many people from the same area with those names today?
real life wrote:Matthew, Peter, John and James were first hand, not second hand, witnesses.
To be fair, they could not possibly have been firsthand witness to all events in Jesus' life. His birth, for instance. Those moments would have to have been described to them by someone else, and could have been open to embelishment as such.
real life wrote:Not 'freaking' at all. Just pointing out that timber's argument is circular and completely built on faulty assumptions. I'm assuming you don't want to argue otherwise, since you didn't say so.
I freely admit that I don't know much about theological history. I do know that people don't rise from the dead, oceans don't get parted, and Noah didn't save everything from the flood (because **** like that just doesn't happen, ever). But I don't know much about the accuracy of non-magical historical events as described by old texts. So I'm asking questions about those.
I will have to evaluate the answers I see from various people based on references and multiple sources (and normal logic).
real life wrote:Matthew, Peter, John and James were first hand, not second hand, witnesses.
And how do you know this?
real life wrote:Yes, they are *written* texts. How would you have preferred they transmit their observations to succeeding generations?
My point was that there is no physical evidence to support the claims.
real life wrote:Your mention of 'omission' is an odd one. Exactly how would an 'omission' be proof of anything? Your post this morning omitted your shirt color and your zip code, as well as the weather conditions. Does that mean we should doubt your veracity?
Omission means lack of detail, especially if they are *selected* omissions which lead to changes in interpretation (I was thinking of these recent Judas gospels which seem to have shown up as just one example).
material girl wrote:Matthew, Peter, John and James sound very english names to me.
Where did they come from?
If they were locals, are there many people from the same area with those names today?
I dont know much about this, Im a believer not an historian. But Matthew Peter John and James are probably anglisised versions of the names in Hebrew or Arameic or whatever language it was.
For example just take John out of context to french. its completely different: 'Jean'. Peter becomes 'Pierre'. So take it to the Middle-East, its probably going to be even more different. especially since they used a different alphabet.
Yep, I realised that after Id posted.
I wonder what they are in their original form.
Was Jesus' name changed?
Also, where are all the stories of Jesus as a child? As a teenager?
Maybe. in Mel Gibson's Film 'The Passion of The Christ' (Where the languages spoken are Aramaic and Latin) Jesus is refered to as 'Yeshua' Also the prefigurations in the OT by the prophet Josue (Joshua) suggest that Jesus was known as something slightly different.
In Latin Jesus it the same although sometimes the 'S' gets left out (Latin's strange like that). The sign above Jesus' head on the cross written in Latin, greek and Hebrew, said 'Jesus Nazarenus Rex Judeorum' (Jesus of Nazerath, King of the Jews)
Love the name Yeshua!!
King of the Jews.
So he was a king.
Bella Dea wrote:Also, where are all the stories of Jesus as a child? As a teenager?
"And when he was twelve years old, they going up into Jerusalem, according to the custom of the feast, And having fulfilled the days, when they returned, the child Jesus remained in Jerusalem. And his parents knew it not." -- Luke 2:42-3
nick17 wrote:Bella Dea wrote:Also, where are all the stories of Jesus as a child? As a teenager?
"And when he was twelve years old, they going up into Jerusalem, according to the custom of the feast, And having fulfilled the days, when they returned, the child Jesus remained in Jerusalem. And his parents knew it not." -- Luke 2:42-3
A pure case of neglect.Can you imagine what would happen to parents if they did that today!!!
nick17 wrote:Bella Dea wrote:Also, where are all the stories of Jesus as a child? As a teenager?
"And when he was twelve years old, they going up into Jerusalem, according to the custom of the feast, And having fulfilled the days, when they returned, the child Jesus remained in Jerusalem. And his parents knew it not." -- Luke 2:42-3
He gets one passage for like 25 years?
Quote:
Estimates for the dates when the canonical Gospel accounts were written vary significantly; and the evidence for any of the dates is scanty. Because the earliest surviving complete copies of the Gospels date to the 4th century and because only fragments and quotations exist before that, scholars use higher criticism to propose likely ranges of dates for the original gospel autographs. Conservative scholars tend to date earlier than others while liberal scholars usually date as late as possible. The following are mostly the date ranges given by the late Raymond E. Brown, in his book An Introduction to the New Testament, as representing the general scholarly consensus in 1996:
* Mark: c. 68-73
* Matthew: c. 70-100 as the majority view; the minority of conservative scholars argue for a pre-70 date, particularly those that do not accept Mark as the first gospel written.
* Luke: c. 80-100, with most arguing for somewhere around 85
* John: c. 90-110. Brown does not give a consensus view for John, but these are dates as propounded by C K Barrett, among others. The majority view is that it was written in stages, so there was no one date of composition.
Traditional Christian scholarship over most of the last 2 millennia has generally come to different conclusions assigning earlier dates. Here are the dates given in the modern NIV Study Bible:
* Mark: c. 50's to early 60's, or late 60's
* Matthew: c. 50 to 70's
* Luke: c. 59 to 63, or 70's to 80's
* John: c. 85 to near 100, or 50's to 70
SOURCE
Ok. First hand witnesses? Even by the most conservative christian estimates, the earliest of the gospels was not written until 50 years after the putative death of christ. These 'first hand witnesses' must have had impressive lifespans, even by todays standards.
He hadnt started His ministry yet, but if you want the whole lot...
"And the child grew and waxed strong, full of wisdom: and the grace of God was in him.
And his parents went every year to Jerusalem, at the solemn day of the pasch. And when he was twelve years old, they going up into Jerusalem, according to the custom of the feast, And having fulfilled the days, when they returned, the child Jesus remained in Jerusalem. And his parents knew it not.
And thinking that he was in the company, they came a day's journey and sought him among their kinsfolks and acquaintance.
And not finding him, they returned into Jerusalem, seeking him.
And it came to pass, that, after three days, they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, hearing them and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his wisdom and his answers.
And seeing him, they wondered. And his mother said to him: Son, why hast thou done so to us? Behold thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
And he said to them: How is it that you sought me? Did you not know that I must be about my father's business?
And they understood not the word that he spoke unto them.
And he went down with them and came to Nazareth and was subject to them. And his mother kept all these words in her heart.
And Jesus advanced in wisdom and age and grace with God and men." -- Luke 2:41-52
There you go, little is known about Jesus' childhood because he didn't have apostles who could pass on what they saw. some things are known because "his mother kept all these words in her heart" and she could tell people.
That is the part of the bible that always bothered me. This is supposed to be the son of God, and no one bothered to record what he did while growing up? His mother must have had some incredible stories, if he was who they said he was. Instead, we get, one day he's hanging out in the temples, impressing the teachers, and the next thing we know he's 30?
'incredible stories' -- you mean like miracles?
Jesus wouldnt have performed any miracles as a child. When he was 30 at the wedding at Cana, they had no wine:
"And Jesus saith to her: Woman, what is that to me and to thee? My hour is not yet come" -- John 2:4
ros wrote:Timber, just out of curiosity, how detailed is our general understanding of the events and people of that time period from other, non-bibilical, writings?
Are there lots of non-biblical documents from that time, or are there very few. Are the biblical sources just one document among hundreds, or is it the only one?
Thanks,
The Roman, Greek, Egyptian, and Jewish writings of the period are voluminous - museums and libraries full of them, everything from handbills and advertisements, pay records, military rosters and the cast and production crews of plays, loan documents, market receipts, and other financial records, through letters and diaries to news reports and detailed records of official proceedings, both secular and religious. Included among this body of writings are any number of contemporary diaries and histories which would be expected to corroborate at least some of the Gospel account, but no such corroboration exists. It is possible, as I said, that merely means none has survived to be passed to this time, but in that so much else has, and there is no reference in that surviving body of writing to anything which would be connected to contemporary writings corroborative of the Gospel account, the evidence suggests strongly that no such writings existed.
.jpg)
