How do we really know how reliable the Gospels are

  • Thread starter Thread starter Help_me_please_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Help_me_please_1

Guest
I need some proof that oral tradition is reliable. I mean the followers of Jesus who actually knew him could easily have given accurate accounts and set things straight. Although what keeps bothering me is that what if His miracles were just urban legends. And how do we know what writings were destroyed during one of the persecutions of Christians? There could have been many early writings validating the gospels. But I just want solid faith. But I need something to start me off. Thank you for reading
 
There’s a movie I watched called The Case For Christ. They have it on netflix and I strongly suggest watching it. It talks about how we know the Gospels are accurate, is Jesus real, did Jesus really heal the blind, raise the dead etc, from the point of view of a very dedicated atheist. This atheist is a Christian today.
 
I don’t know if you can still get them but when I did my research before reverting (not converting) from Lutheran I read the early Church Fathers- Origen, Tertullian and others- Catholic Answers had these tracts and publications available for anyone who wanted to learn- and very inexpensive for the series. I wish they would promote it now for all to read. It was only about 15$ for the 5 or 6 publications but they were PRICELESS.
 
Please read the Instruction on the Historical Truth of the Gospels by the Pontifical Biblical Commission and Pope Paul VI (available online). This document explains what the gospels represent and why they were written. It also explains the way they were put together, how they were used, and why they are NOT literal history or eye witness accounts. The church requires literal belief in only a handful of the gospel accounts. It is quite normal to think of stories such as the Infancy Narratives as fictional accounts written to teach people familiar with such literary forms who Jesus was.
 
I need some proof that oral tradition is reliable. I mean the followers of Jesus who actually knew him could easily have given accurate accounts and set things straight. Although what keeps bothering me is that what if His miracles were just urban legends. And how do we know what writings were destroyed during one of the persecutions of Christians? There could have been many early writings validating the gospels. But I just want solid faith. But I need something to start me off. Thank you for reading
No supernatural event can be proven conclusively-many historical natural events can’t even be conclusively substantiated, for that matter. You need to study scripture and the faith from a variety of perspectives-the Catechism, books on theology and books written by the better Catholic apologists, concilliar docs, etc, and pray-and it will begin to click as you discern a voice of integrity-a voice of Truth- resounding through scripture and Church teachings. The gift of faith, itself, will validate the doctrine as you seek.
 
There’s a movie I watched called The Case For Christ. They have it on netflix and I strongly suggest watching it. It talks about how we know the Gospels are accurate, is Jesus real, did Jesus really heal the blind, raise the dead etc, from the point of view of a very dedicated atheist. This atheist is a Christian today.
You might actually get more from the book. It was an easy read, kept you interested and learning the whole way through.
 
Please read the Instruction on the Historical Truth of the Gospels by the Pontifical Biblical Commission and Pope Paul VI (available online). This document explains what the gospels represent and why they were written. It also explains the way they were put together, how they were used, and why they are NOT literal history or eye witness accounts. The church requires literal belief in only a handful of the gospel accounts. It is quite normal to think of stories such as the Infancy Narratives as fictional accounts written to teach people familiar with such literary forms who Jesus was.
Thank you very much for posting this. 👍 This should be required knowledge in Cathechism classes as I never knew until now that this document existed.

To the OP: they certainly aren’t word for word reliable. St. Bridget of Sweden’s Diary explains why there are contradictions between them. Third question. ”If your Holy Spirit has spoken through the evangelists, why is there so much variance in the Gospels?”
Answer to the third question. ”As to why, if the Holy Spirit has spoken through them,
there is so much variance among the evangelists, I answer: It is written that the Holy Spirit
is various in his operations in that he distributes his gifts to his chosen people in varied
ways. Indeed, the Holy Spirit is like a man with a balance in his hand, measuring and
balancing the scales until the balance reaches equilibrium and comes to rest. A balance is
handled in different ways by a person who is used to it and by one who is unused to it, by
one who is strong and by one who is weak.
So the Holy Spirit now rises like a balance in human hearts, and then sinks again. He
rises when he uplifts the mind through keenness of understanding and through the soul’s
devotion and through the inflaming of spiritual desire. He sinks when he allows the mind to
fall into difficulties and to be anxious about trifling vanities and upset by tribulation.
Therefore, just as the balance cannot reach equilibrium unless the weights are adjusted,
and it is controlled by a guiding hand, so too measure and a good life, a simple intention,
and discretion in works and virtues are necessary for the operation of the Holy Spirit.
When I, the Son of God, visible in the flesh, preached different things in different
places, I had different kinds of followers and listeners. Some followed me out of love,
others in order to have an occasion for fault finding or out of curiosity. Some of my
followers had a keener intellect, others a simpler. Accordingly, I spoke simply to instruct the
simple. I also spoke deeply to awaken the wonder of the wise. Sometimes I spoke darkly
in parables, which gave some people an occasion for commenting. At other times I
repeated things said earlier and sometimes added to or simplified them. So it is no wonder
that those who arranged the gospel narrative recorded different but still true things, for
some of them wrote it down word for word, others captured the sense but not the exact
words. Some wrote things they had heard but not seen; others placed earlier events later;
others wrote more about my divinity; yet all of them as the Spirit gave them to speak.
However, I want you to know that only those evangelists are to be accepted whom
the church accepts. Many people attempted to write who had zeal but not in accordance
with my knowledge. Recall what I said in today’s reading: ‘Destroy this temple and I shall
rebuild it.’ Those who testified to what they heard were truthful regarding the words they
495
heard, but they were false witnesses because they did not consider the sense of my
words, for I spoke concerning my body. Likewise when I said: ‘Unless you eat my flesh,
you shall not have life.’ Many hearers went away, because they did not consider the
conclusion that I added: 'My words are spirit and life, that is, they have a spiritual meaning
and force. It is not remarkable that they went astray, inasmuch as they did not follow me
out of love. Thus the Holy Spirit rises in human hearts like a balance, at one time speaking
corporeally, at another spiritually. And he sinks when the human heart is hardened against
God or falls into heresies or worldliness and is darkened.”
 
I need some proof that oral tradition is reliable. I mean the followers of Jesus who actually knew him could easily have given accurate accounts and set things straight.
I don’t think so. You know, it’s not like any of them were thinking “We should write this down for people to read 2000 yrs from now.” In fact, most of them thought Jesus was coming back within their lifetimes. Luke tried to get a really good record and I think he did a good job with Luke/Acts. In fact, when you read Acts you see no one was talking about anybody acting like a scribe and writing anything down they were so busy evangelizing the world.

We have so many records now, I think we forget that it was pretty unusual then. I will tell you what I was told. That a lot of Mark was written during Jesus’ lifetime on earth. That it’s mostly from letters one of His disciples wrote home that were copied and passed around. Mark is oldest, and the ending, the Crucifixion/Resurrection, was kind of added on. It also reads kind of like a travelogue. Try reading it in that light and see what you think.

One of the ways you can trust Scripture though, I think, is to see those miracles repeated in the lives of great Saints like Saint Francis. Or Padre Pio. Or that “flying friar.” Certainly if regular humans not God can do these things, what could Jesus not do?

I don’t know. Pray for faith and guidance, do some Lectio Divina and I have a feeling God will give you what you need.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top