Before Mark's Gospel
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-04-2017, 08:30 AM
Before Mark's Gospel
I was watching this video by Evid3nc3 (no need to watch it):





At around 10m 22s he mentions that 1 Thessalonians, Galatians and 1 Corinthians were all written before Mark's gospel and that they were written by Paul.

Paul mentions the crucifixion and resurrection, around 22 years after the event. But apparently, as the other books are added (Mark, Matthew, Luke etc), they become more miraculous in content.

Not sure what point Evid3nc3 was trying to make here because, of all the miracles performed, surely the greatest would be the rising from the dead, which Paul speaks of in the earlier letters mentioned above.

I thought the earliest accounts we had of Jesus was Mark's gosepl which was about 40 (?) years after Jesus' death but with Paul's above letters, we're looking at just over 20 years. That said, Paul never actually met Jesus in the flesh.

Just spitballing here, but anyone familiar with any of this, opinions?

“I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.” ~ Oscar Wilde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2017, 08:41 AM (This post was last modified: 18-04-2017 08:46 AM by OakTree500.)
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
In my mind, it's plausible to say there was a man whose name translates as "Jesus", despite there being not a lot of a actual real evidence for it. And with this plausibility, it's most likely that he was a good man, who did good deeds, whose tales where told around the campfire, which got slightly more embellished every time they were told. [turning water into wine = he had good connections and got some wine in for people, this came across as him doing something like a miracle...when it's physically impossible to do that].

With not many people reading and writing at this time, those that did write it down only have their own tales [that they've heard] to tell, thus why everybody's story seems more and more miraculous as we get 20 years further down the line. And also why the story's are pure garbage to begin with.

Having problems with your computer? Visit the Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like OakTree500's post
18-04-2017, 08:49 AM
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
I realize it's a "minority" view, but I dispute the fact that the words Paul uses, mean "resurrection" (as "risen from the dead"). Paul was a Jew, and apocalyptic heroes were said to be "raised up" ("exalted"), not physically risen from the dead. Bart Ehrman's book also supports this, (my paper predated his book), and I got the ideas from elsewhere, confirmed by Scott, (a Christian Professor of NT), in "The Trouble With Resurrection".
http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keyword...ulm4xpuh_e
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-look

The first version of Mark's Gospel had no resurrection.
It ended with the empty tomb.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
18-04-2017, 08:56 AM
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
(18-04-2017 08:49 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I realize it's a "minority" view, but I dispute the fact that the words Paul uses, mean "resurrection" (as "risen from the dead"). Paul was a Jew, and apocalyptic heroes were said to be "raised up" ("exalted"), not physically risen from the dead. Bart Ehrman's book also supports this, (my paper predated his book), and I got the ideas from elsewhere, confirmed by Scott, (a Christian Professor of NT), in "The Trouble With Resurrection".
http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keyword...ulm4xpuh_e
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-look

The first version of Mark's Gospel had no resurrection.
It ended with the empty tomb.

Re- Ending with an empty Tomb: This makes for a much better story, I have to say. In terms of "real life", would grave robbing be big during this time? Would it be fair to say, somebody could have cleared out his tomb, and dumped the body elsewhere, thus giving the illusion he's "risen up" ?

Having problems with your computer? Visit the Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2017, 08:57 AM
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
(18-04-2017 08:30 AM)SeaJay Wrote:  I thought the earliest accounts we had of Jesus was Mark's gosepl which was about 40 (?) years after Jesus' death but with Paul's above letters, we're looking at just over 20 years.

The dates are problematical. Theologians like to quote the figures you mention, but the fact is that we do not have the original texts that were written on those dates. We have handwritten, partial copies from a century later.

How many times were they re-copied? How many changes? Accidental, deliberate? We know for a fact that there are forgeries in the bible. We know things were changed and can guess reasons why.

So much for the inspired word of god...

(18-04-2017 08:30 AM)SeaJay Wrote:  That said, Paul never actually met Jesus in the flesh.

Paul didn't write all of the letters attributed to him either.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2017, 09:10 AM
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
(18-04-2017 08:56 AM)OakTree500 Wrote:  
(18-04-2017 08:49 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I realize it's a "minority" view, but I dispute the fact that the words Paul uses, mean "resurrection" (as "risen from the dead"). Paul was a Jew, and apocalyptic heroes were said to be "raised up" ("exalted"), not physically risen from the dead. Bart Ehrman's book also supports this, (my paper predated his book), and I got the ideas from elsewhere, confirmed by Scott, (a Christian Professor of NT), in "The Trouble With Resurrection".
http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keyword...ulm4xpuh_e
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-look

The first version of Mark's Gospel had no resurrection.
It ended with the empty tomb.

Re- Ending with an empty Tomb: This makes for a much better story, I have to say. In terms of "real life", would grave robbing be big during this time? Would it be fair to say, somebody could have cleared out his tomb, and dumped the body elsewhere, thus giving the illusion he's "risen up" ?

I doubt that. All crucified criminal's corpses were allowed to rot on their crosses, thus making (for a Jew) the worst part of the whole thing, ... public humiliation and a rotting, unburied corpse, which were then all tossed into common graves, eventually. There are SO many contradictions and errors in the passion stories, it's pretty obvious they were just all made up.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
18-04-2017, 09:13 AM
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
(18-04-2017 09:10 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(18-04-2017 08:56 AM)OakTree500 Wrote:  Re- Ending with an empty Tomb: This makes for a much better story, I have to say. In terms of "real life", would grave robbing be big during this time? Would it be fair to say, somebody could have cleared out his tomb, and dumped the body elsewhere, thus giving the illusion he's "risen up" ?

I doubt that. All crucified criminal's corpses were allowed to rot on their crosses, thus making (for a Jew) the worst part of the whole thing, ... public humiliation and a rotting, unburied corpse, which were then all tossed into common graves, eventually. There are SO many contradictions and errors in the passion stories, it's pretty obvious they were just all made up.
Ok, so they wouldn't have taken him down to bury him either? That's interesting to know.

Having problems with your computer? Visit the Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2017, 09:19 AM
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
I don't understand the question. HuhHuh

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2017, 09:51 AM
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
(18-04-2017 09:19 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  I don't understand the question. HuhHuh
I didn't pose a question so much as I was just making a few observations and putting them out there.

“I am so clever that sometimes I don't understand a single word of what I am saying.” ~ Oscar Wilde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SeaJay's post
18-04-2017, 10:01 AM
RE: Before Mark's Gospel
(18-04-2017 08:30 AM)SeaJay Wrote:  Paul mentions the crucifixion and resurrection, around 22 years after the event. But apparently, as the other books are added (Mark, Matthew, Luke etc), they become more miraculous in content.

Not sure what point Evid3nc3 was trying to make here because, of all the miracles performed, surely the greatest would be the rising from the dead, which Paul speaks of in the earlier letters mentioned above.

I thought the earliest accounts we had of Jesus was Mark's gosepl which was about 40 (?) years after Jesus' death but with Paul's above letters, we're looking at just over 20 years. That said, Paul never actually met Jesus in the flesh.

Just spitballing here, but anyone familiar with any of this, opinions?

He was illustrating how the concept of Jesus changed in early Christianity. Stating that Paul spoke of the resurrection is not saying much, many of the things that were credited to him weren't written by him, other things are later interpolations put there by pious frauds.

The things that Paul wrote about Jesus are odd and don't line up with the tangible, Earthly Jesus.

The earliest writings of Christianity create a Jesus that's bigger and more spectacular at each retelling, it's legendary accretion and it exposes how the gospel stories are just a bunch of stories that build the legend of Jesus.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheInquisition's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: