Who wrote the gospels?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-08-2015, 02:15 PM
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(11-08-2015 01:47 PM)Free Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 01:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  He had no idea who composed them, or where they came from, and he didn't say he receved anything in written form. If he "received" them, the statement is a faith claim. We know the apostles didn't write gospels. The "gospel" is the "good news", not (necessarily) a written scroll. When Paul says the gospel he gave was the gospel he recieved", it was not a written one.

You're not "keeping anyone on their toes". It's al very simple to refute faith claims, such as you make. Tongue

Okay so now we watch how the goal posts are moved from the point of "no one cited anything from the Gospels, " to "no one mentioned a written Gospel," and now we move them again to "no one stated who wrote them." Laughat

Don't you see how you make the exact same logically fallacious errors as the theists do? If this is what Jesus does to you, might I suggest you live your life away from this topic?

Big Grin

YOU : "the context itself still states that the Gospels were in written form."

If the goal posts were moved, maybe the mouse did it.

Weeping

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
11-08-2015, 02:33 PM
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(11-08-2015 02:15 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 01:47 PM)Free Wrote:  Okay so now we watch how the goal posts are moved from the point of "no one cited anything from the Gospels, " to "no one mentioned a written Gospel," and now we move them again to "no one stated who wrote them." Laughat

Don't you see how you make the exact same logically fallacious errors as the theists do? If this is what Jesus does to you, might I suggest you live your life away from this topic?

Big Grin

YOU : "the context itself still states that the Gospels were in written form."

If the goal posts were moved, maybe the mouse did it.

Weeping

Follow the evidence, Bucky Boy:

Here we have Minimalist saying Justin never even knew a gospel in written book form existed:

Minimalist Wrote:Justin, writing to Emperor Antoninus Pius c 160, has never heard of any of these books.

And here you are ssuggesting an oral tradition as opposed to a written Gospel:

Bucky Ball Wrote:If there was a "content element" (the content of the quote), it could have been made up and repeated, and that's how it ended up in the gospel.


And aside from Clement, I then demonstrate with evidence from Justin Martyr that there were indeed written gospels circulating long before the late 2nd century:

Free Wrote:ST. JUSTIN MARTYR -DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO

"This is what we are amazed at," said Trypho, "but those things about which the multitude speak are not worthy of belief; for they are most repugnant to human nature. Moreover, I am aware that your precepts in the so-called Gospel are so wonderful and so great, that I suspect no one can keep them; for I have carefully read them."

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...rypho.html

In the one above Trypho not only says the Gospels were in existence, but also they were in existence in written form.

And now for the icing on the cake ...

Justin Martyr - CHAPTER LXVI -- OF THE EUCHARIST.

For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone.


Big Grin

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-08-2015, 02:37 PM
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(11-08-2015 12:34 PM)Free Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 11:29 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  3. In spite of all the damage she has done to the mythicist cause with her conspiracy bullshit, Acharya is right. The first to name the gospels is Irenaeus, c 185 AD. Justin, writing to Emperor Antoninus Pius c 160, has never heard of any of these books. For that matter, he never mentions anyone named 'paul' which is even more astounding.

I could easily dispute everything you said, but i will pick out the above to demonstrate how mythicists so very much like to cherry pick to establish a point.

You mentioned that Justin Martyr had never heard of any of the books known as the Gospels. Oh but ... how easy that is to dispute is just ridiculous.

Here:

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR -DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO

"This is what we are amazed at," said Trypho, "but those things about which the multitude speak are not worthy of belief; for they are most repugnant to human nature. Moreover, I am aware that your precepts in the so-called Gospel are so wonderful and so great, that I suspect no one can keep them; for I have carefully read them."


http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...rypho.html

In the one above Trypho not only says the Gospels were in existence, but also they were in existence in written form.

And now for the icing on the cake ...

Justin Martyr - CHAPTER LXVI -- OF THE EUCHARIST.

For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone.


http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...ology.html

Absolutely baffled at how far you mythicists will go to deny the truth about this issue to people who are simply curious.

Give them the truth, for fucks sakes. It won't kill you I promise.

Drinking Beverage



Hey, dummy. He never once mentions your fucking 'gospels.' Never heard of Matty, marky, Lukey and the other fuckhead. Not once. Although, he does know of Marcion who DID include a so-called gospel - "the gospel of the Lord" which was later added on to and re-named "Luke." Get your head out of your ass and pay attention. You'll look less stupid.

And I couldn't help but notice that you gave the Paul problem a great big leaving alone.

Go blow jesus out your ass.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-08-2015, 03:08 PM (This post was last modified: 11-08-2015 05:47 PM by Free.)
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(11-08-2015 02:37 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 12:34 PM)Free Wrote:  I could easily dispute everything you said, but i will pick out the above to demonstrate how mythicists so very much like to cherry pick to establish a point.

You mentioned that Justin Martyr had never heard of any of the books known as the Gospels. Oh but ... how easy that is to dispute is just ridiculous.

Here:

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR -DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO

"This is what we are amazed at," said Trypho, "but those things about which the multitude speak are not worthy of belief; for they are most repugnant to human nature. Moreover, I am aware that your precepts in the so-called Gospel are so wonderful and so great, that I suspect no one can keep them; for I have carefully read them."


http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...rypho.html

In the one above Trypho not only says the Gospels were in existence, but also they were in existence in written form.

And now for the icing on the cake ...

Justin Martyr - CHAPTER LXVI -- OF THE EUCHARIST.

For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, "This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;" and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, "This is My blood;" and gave it to them alone.


http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...ology.html

Absolutely baffled at how far you mythicists will go to deny the truth about this issue to people who are simply curious.

Give them the truth, for fucks sakes. It won't kill you I promise.

Drinking Beverage



Hey, dummy. He never once mentions your fucking 'gospels.' Never heard of Matty, marky, Lukey and the other fuckhead. Not once.

Hey fuckwad, welcome to the conversation.

But now we must destroy you. Tsk Tsk!

You responded to f stop's statement listed below ...

f stop Wrote:In a You Tube video D. M. Murdock (Acharya S) says that no one cited the gospels until late in the second century. That suggests that the gospels did not even exist until the late second century.

Notice above that f stop specifically said "cited," which means to "recite from" or "provide reference to."

And you responded to that with the following statement:

(11-08-2015 11:29 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  3. Justin, writing to Emperor Antoninus Pius c 160, has never heard of any of these books.

Please show me in the above quote of you or f stop where anyone said anything about Matty, marky, Lukey, or that other fuckhead? (Hint: moving the goal posts?)

In response to f stop, you claimed that Justin Martyr never even heard of the gospels, and therefore by necessity could not cite anything found in them.

You've been proven fucking wrong on every fucking level for the simple fact that "cite' does not mean "naming the authors," and the fact that Justin does refer to the Gospels in his works at least twice.

So eat it, fuck wad.

Big Grin

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-08-2015, 09:57 PM
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(11-08-2015 11:29 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  
(10-08-2015 03:45 AM)f stop Wrote:  I can't help but wonder how these dates were determined.

In a You Tube video D. M. Murdock (Acharya S) says that no one cited the gospels until late in the second century. That suggests that the gospels did not even exist until the late second century.

Backwards dating, really. No one aside from fundie nuts thinks that "jesus" made an actual prediction that Jerusalem would be leveled. So scholars try to shoehorn the earliest possible date around 70 when Titus sacked the city and burned the temple. This so-called "Little Apocalypse" is thus assumed to be the earliest date that 'mark' or whoever would have written and then they arbitrarily tack on years for the other 3 which were derived from 'mark.'

There are three obvious problems with this.

1. From 70-130 Jerusalem sat there as a burned out ruin occupied only by the 10th Legion which moved its permanent base there from Syria. They cleared off what they needed to clear off and built themselves a typically Roman legionary camp. There are scads of bricks stamped "Legio X" all over the place. 'mark' could have been written at any time during that 60 year period and, no one in the first century seems to have heard of any 'jesus' in the Greco Roman literature of the time. Lucian of Samosata mentions the xtians following a crucified man c 160 but he never mentions anyone named 'jesus.' Celsus, c 180, finally mentions 'jesus' but makes it clear that he is commenting on xtian tales....which he finds absurd.

2. Around 130 Hadrian, who had initially allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem, decided to level the ruined old city and build a new one, called Aelia Capitolina, on top of it. Construction began c 132 which kicked off the bar Kochba revolt. However, it could be said that around this time the stories of the Little Apocalypse did come true.

Quote:13 And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!

2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

mark 13: 5

Mark does not have jesus say "the temple will be a burned out shell" which would have been the case between 70 - 130. He has him say that all the buildings would have been leveled which did happen sometime after 132. Now, I ask you, what is more likely? That mark "foresaw" what Hadrian would do in the future or that he wrote after the Roman urban renewal project had gotten underway. I'll leave that one to you.

3. In spite of all the damage she has done to the mythicist cause with her conspiracy bullshit, Acharya is right. The first to name the gospels is Irenaeus, c 185 AD. Justin, writing to Emperor Antoninus Pius c 160, has never heard of any of these books. For that matter, he never mentions anyone named 'paul' which is even more astounding.
Minimalist, this is great stuff. Absolutely great!!ThumbsupThumbsup

Can you cite sources? I'm certain that if I use it I will be challenged on that point.

Sapere aude
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2015, 10:04 AM (This post was last modified: 12-08-2015 12:29 PM by Free.)
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(11-08-2015 09:57 PM)f stop Wrote:  
(11-08-2015 11:29 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  Backwards dating, really. No one aside from fundie nuts thinks that "jesus" made an actual prediction that Jerusalem would be leveled. So scholars try to shoehorn the earliest possible date around 70 when Titus sacked the city and burned the temple. This so-called "Little Apocalypse" is thus assumed to be the earliest date that 'mark' or whoever would have written and then they arbitrarily tack on years for the other 3 which were derived from 'mark.'

There are three obvious problems with this.

1. From 70-130 Jerusalem sat there as a burned out ruin occupied only by the 10th Legion which moved its permanent base there from Syria. They cleared off what they needed to clear off and built themselves a typically Roman legionary camp. There are scads of bricks stamped "Legio X" all over the place. 'mark' could have been written at any time during that 60 year period and, no one in the first century seems to have heard of any 'jesus' in the Greco Roman literature of the time. Lucian of Samosata mentions the xtians following a crucified man c 160 but he never mentions anyone named 'jesus.' Celsus, c 180, finally mentions 'jesus' but makes it clear that he is commenting on xtian tales....which he finds absurd.

2. Around 130 Hadrian, who had initially allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem, decided to level the ruined old city and build a new one, called Aelia Capitolina, on top of it. Construction began c 132 which kicked off the bar Kochba revolt. However, it could be said that around this time the stories of the Little Apocalypse did come true.


Mark does not have jesus say "the temple will be a burned out shell" which would have been the case between 70 - 130. He has him say that all the buildings would have been leveled which did happen sometime after 132. Now, I ask you, what is more likely? That mark "foresaw" what Hadrian would do in the future or that he wrote after the Roman urban renewal project had gotten underway. I'll leave that one to you.

3. In spite of all the damage she has done to the mythicist cause with her conspiracy bullshit, Acharya is right. The first to name the gospels is Irenaeus, c 185 AD. Justin, writing to Emperor Antoninus Pius c 160, has never heard of any of these books. For that matter, he never mentions anyone named 'paul' which is even more astounding.
Minimalist, this is great stuff. Absolutely great!!ThumbsupThumbsup

Can you cite sources? I'm certain that if I use it I will be challenged on that point.

Sure looks like "good stuff" doesn't it?

However, if you are ever going to debate with theists you cannot assume that they are uneducated in respect to the history of the Gospels and the NT in general. Nor should you assume that persons such as Minimalist are actually educated, and even if they are, you need to evaluate whether or not they are biased for or against Christianity.

Minimalist and Bucky Ball are both Jesus Mythicists. They completely deny the existence of a central figure- Jesus of Nazareth - who was at the heart of the Christian religion. They will deny that evidence is actually evidence, and when there is something they cannot dispute, they always throw in some unsupported assertion against it in some vain effort to provide the illusion that they are actually disputing the evidence.

The reality is, their Jesus Mthicist position is not tenable, not realistic, and simply not truthful.

Let me show you something else Minimalst posted, which will demonstrate how the mindset of Jesus Mythicists actually works, in contrast to actual history. I will post something else Minimalist said in his quote:

Minimalist Wrote:Justin, writing to Emperor Antoninus Pius c 160, has never heard of any of these books. For that matter, he never mentions anyone named 'paul' which is even more astounding.

You will notice how he includes Paul in his position that Justin doesn't mention the Gospels (he actually does), giving you the impression that nobody mentions Paul until the late 2nd century either. He makes it looks incredible by using the word "astounding."

The fact of the matter is that in AD 95 Clement of Rome, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, not only mentions Paul, but also references Paul's previous letter to the Corinthians:

Clement of Rome Wrote:Take up the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul. What did he write to you at the time when the Gospel first began to be preached? Truly, under the inspiration of the Spirit, he wrote to you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos, because even then parties had been formed among you.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/te...berts.html

My point here is that people like Minimalst have a biased agenda, which is very comparable to the bias of any religionist. You will not get the real information you need from any mythicist, for they only want you to learn their belief system, as opposed to what history can actually demonstrate.

As far as I am concerned, Jesus Mythicism is just another fucking religious belief system.

Big Grin

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2015, 04:13 PM
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(12-08-2015 10:04 AM)Free Wrote:  You will notice how he includes Paul in his position that Justin doesn't mention the Gospels (he actually does), ...
Minimalist says "The first to name the gospels is Irenaeus, c 185 AD."

Justin quotes the gospels but he does not name them. My position is that the gospels are anonymous. We don't know who wrote them.

Sapere aude
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2015, 05:01 PM
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(12-08-2015 04:13 PM)f stop Wrote:  
(12-08-2015 10:04 AM)Free Wrote:  You will notice how he includes Paul in his position that Justin doesn't mention the Gospels (he actually does), ...
Minimalist says "The first to name the gospels is Irenaeus, c 185 AD."

Justin quotes the gospels but he does not name them. My position is that the gospels are anonymous. We don't know who wrote them.

Yes, that's how Minimalist responded to your question of, "In a You Tube video D. M. Murdock (Acharya S) says that no one cited the gospels until late in the second century. That suggests that the gospels did not even exist until the late second century."

The definition of "cite" is obvious, but ...

Cite:

1. to quote

2. to mention in support, proof, or confirmation; refer to as an example:


http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cite

What it doesn't refer to is "naming the authors of the gospels."

The gospels were actually cited many times before the late 2nd century.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2015, 05:34 PM
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
I don't care what f stop wrote or what Acharya said. I said in the sentence preceding the one you are trying to hang your hat on, that it was Irenaeus who was the first to name your stupid fucking gospels c 185. Obviously, you have trouble holding a thought from one sentence to the next. One might almost think you were Rick Perry!

Now, either produce evidence that Irenaeus was not the first to name these books or STFU. Because right now you are just making a fool out of yourself...which must be commonplace for you.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-08-2015, 07:40 PM (This post was last modified: 12-08-2015 08:20 PM by Free.)
RE: Who wrote the gospels?
(12-08-2015 05:34 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  I don't care what f stop wrote or what Acharya said. I said in the sentence preceding the one you are trying to hang your hat on, that it was Irenaeus who was the first to name your stupid fucking gospels c 185. Obviously, you have trouble holding a thought from one sentence to the next. One might almost think you were Rick Perry!

Now, either produce evidence that Irenaeus was not the first to name these books or STFU. Because right now you are just making a fool out of yourself...which must be commonplace for you.

Here is your quote again:

Quote:Justin, writing to Emperor Antoninus Pius c 160, has never heard of any of these BOOKS.


You did not say, "Justin, writing to Emperor Antoninus Pius c 160, has never heard of any of these AUTHORS." In addition to this, you make the positive claim that Justin never heard of these books, and you do so just because he didn't name the authors of these Gospels?

How the fuck can you possibly make a positive claim that Justin never heard of these Gospels just because he never named the authors, and when he quotes verbatim from these same fucking Gospels?

Are you that fucking stupid?

Obviously, YOU have trouble holding a thought from one sentence to the next, since you speak about Irenaeus naming the AUTHORS in the preceding sentence, and then follow it up with saying Justin never even heard of the BOOKS ie Gospels at all, a wholly unsupported assertion since he does indeed mention the Gospel in general and fucking well quotes from it.

Can you not even tell the difference between AUTHORS and BOOKS, you stupid fucking mythicist retard? Nah, your fucking intention is obvious; you so totally intended to make f stop believe that nobody even heard of the gospels unto the late 2nd century.

And that's the reality here, you dumb fuck.


Drinking Beverage

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: