How do we know certain details about stories from the Bible?

[SonOfMan]

For example, the story written about Jesus’ agony in the garden. If all the apostles fell asleep on him and Jesus was the only one awake as it is written, how did they know that he experienced agony or cried blood if they werent awake to have witnessed it?

Or

When Jesus went into the wilderness to fast for 40 days. If no one was with Jesus for those 40 days, how did they know that Satan tempted him if they werent there to witness it?

Or

Before Jesus ever had any apostles and before the apostles ever knew of Jesus’ existence, how did they know so much about him being born in a manger and all the details regarding the wisemen etc?

 

[Genesis315]

They were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

 

[SonOfMan]

They were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Usually when making distinctions between other faiths, for example, Islam, Christians say they do not die for what they have personally witnessed but die for what they have been told or taught, in an attempt to discredit their martyrdoms in comparison to Christian martyrs.

So the answer you have supplied is weak and kind of a cop out, because that means there is a strong possibility that the Apostles died for what they were taught and did not necessarily die for what they witnessed personally… And since dying for a cause doesnt automatically make that cause true, this is problematic for Christians whos’ entire logical basis for believing in Christianity is founded on the alleged martyrdoms of the apostles.

Or, your answer may also be problematic for arguments against Islamic martyrs because one can claim that the Holy Spirit also inspired them, so they didnt need to personally witness anything, just like the Apostles.

 

[Genesis315]

Usually when making distinctions between other faiths, for example, Islam, people say they do not die for what they have personally witnessed but die for what they have been told or taught, in an attempt to discredit their martyrdoms in comparison to Christian martyrs.

So the answer you have supplied is weak and kind of a cop out, because that means there is a strong possibility that the Apostles died for what they were taught and did not necessarily die for what they witnessed personally… And since dying for a cause doesnt automatically make that cause true, this is problematic.

Or, your answer may also be problematic for arguments against Islamic martyrs because one can claim that the Holy Spirit also inspired them, so they didnt need to personally witness anything, just like the Apostles.

They witnessed Christ’s miracles, but most importantly His Resurrection. If he did not rise, then everything else is in vain and not worth dying for. That’s the key thing witnessed and what validates everything else. That’s why they went happily to their deaths rather than recant. Plus, some of the Apostles were martyred before the Gospels were even written.

There’s plenty in the Bible like what you are objecting to. Moses didn’t witness the act of Creation, or other events that preceded him, so he was either inspired and taught about these things by the Holy Spirit or someone else. The Prophets all received direct knowledge from God.

Christ promised the Holy Spirit would teach them all truth, and He did.

Here’s what St. Augustine says:
St. Augustine:

Accordingly, He who sent the prophets before His own descent also dispatched the apostles after His ascension. Moreover, in virtue of the man assumed by Him, He stands to all His disciples in the relation of the head to the members of His body. Therefore, when those disciples have written matters which He declared and spoke to them, it ought not by any means to be said that He has written nothing Himself; since the truth is, that His members have accomplished only what they became acquainted with by the repeated statements of the Head. For all that He was minded to give for our perusal on the subject of His own doings and sayings, He commanded to be written by those disciples, whom He thus used as if they were His own hands.

newadvent.org/fathers/1602135.htm

 

[DavidFilmer]

For example, the story written about Jesus’ agony in the garden. If all the apostles fell asleep on him and Jesus was the only one awake as it is written, how did they know that he experienced agony or cried blood if they werent awake to have witnessed it?

Or

When Jesus went into the wilderness to fast for 40 days. If no one was with Jesus for those 40 days, how did they know that Satan tempted him if they werent there to witness it?

Maybe Jesus told them?

Before Jesus ever had any apostles and before the apostles ever knew of Jesus’ existence, how did they know so much about him being born in a manger and all the details regarding the wisemen etc?

There’s an ancient tradition that St. Luke knew the Blessed Mother (and there’s no reason to doubt this). She could have told him about those events. Even if she didn’t reveal this to Luke personally, she could have told the Apostolic community. What Jewish mama doesn’t like talking about the birth of her son?

 

[SonOfMan]

Maybe Jesus told them?

Being told isnt the same as having witnessed something. The Muslims that die for their faith were told too, but does that make it true?

There’s an ancient tradition that St. Luke knew the Blessed Mother (and there’s no reason to doubt this). She could have told him about those events. Even if she didn’t reveal this to Luke personally, she could have told the Apostolic community. What Jewish mama doesn’t like talking about the birth of her son?

So they were just told? Dont a lot of people rest their entire faith in the perception that the Apostles were eyewitnesses?

 

[SonOfMan]

They witnessed Christ’s miracles, but most importantly His Resurrection. If he did not rise, then everything else is in vain and not worth dying for. That’s the key thing witnessed and what validates everything else.

Thats just the thing now, how do you know for a fact that they witnessed that? Perhaps they were just told about that too and simply wrote what they heard, as opposed to writing about what they personally saw?

Might I add, that personally seeing something and writing about it doesnt automatically make that fact either, but that it appears they wrote what they were simply told is even weaker, unfortunately.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Being told isnt the same as having witnessed something.

Being told by Jesus is better. People get confused in their testimony (consider, for example, the differences between synoptic Gospels).

So they were just told? Dont a lot of people rest their entire faith in the perception that the Apostles were eyewitnesses?

I don’t think anyone believes that the Apostles witnessed the Agony in the Garden or the fast in the desert. It’s clear from the Gospels that Jesus was alone. So it would be irrational to rest your faith in eyewitness accounts of something that clearly had no eyewitnesses.

So, i would say, no. Nobody rests their faith on that. At least nobody who has read those accounts.

 

[SonOfMan]

Being told by Jesus is better.

If Jesus is God as depicted in the Bible, then yes. If the depiction of who Jesus is, is incorrect, then it is very weak. Furthermore, appealing to authority isnt taking an objective approach.

I don’t think anyone believes that the Apostles witnessed the Agony in the Garden or the fast in the desert. It’s clear from the Gospels that Jesus was alone. So it would be irrational to rest your faith in eyewitness accounts of something that clearly had no eyewitnesses.

So, i would say, no. Nobody rests their faith on that. At least nobody who has read those accounts.

If the Apostles werent eyewitnesses to those examples I gave yet had lots of details to write about those things, how can I be so sure that the things they did claim to have seen are not just more “They were told” instances?