The Gospels are Myths (and other obvious observations)

  • Thread starter Thread starter AntiTheist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, this means that your basis is founded on popular opinion today? As you did not live at that time, and you have to make decisions based on something…
The question is, should Jesus have chosen a different time period to reveal himself.

His mission was to get people to believe He was the Son of God and get people to join the Church He founded.

He did a pretty good job.
 
The question is, should Jesus have chosen a different time period to reveal himself.

His mission was to get people to believe He was the Son of God and get people to join the Church He founded.

He did a pretty good job.
He easily could have come before those who also taught the golden rule.
But, alas- he did not.
 
If there is any reason he came when he did, why would he come into a world that already had in place the golden rule?
Made it a bit easier for the teaching to be accepted?

I mean, the golden rule wasn’t the only thing he taught.
 
The main reason for Jesus to come was not to preach, so much as to act. By his death he redeemed us from our sins. The preaching was secondary, since the golden rule was already in place. He affirmed it by his death, and by proving that there is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for a friend. The greatest miracle of all was the Incarnation, God the Son entering the world. That was known and believed long before the epistles and the gospels were written. Without that miracle, Christianity would make no sense whatever.
 
The topic of this thread makes me wonder whether the Gospels were even meant to be “evidence” of anything…at least not in the legal/proof sense meant by AntiTheist.

Is a history book chapter on World War II really evidence that World War II actually took place? Sure it is, to some extent. It is “some evidence,” just like any hearsay is “some evidence” of its content, but it is not necessarily irrefutable evidence or conclusive evidence.

Certainly, that history chapter would be intended to teach people who are interested in studying history. Perhaps it would also be intended to be a reference for other leading historians. But, that history chapter would not be the type of conclusive evidence that a doubting poster named AntiWW2 would be looking for to believe the war occurred. He would doubt its content like he already doubts the accuracy of the historian who wrote it.

Similarly, it strikes me that the Gospels were written to record Church doctrine and Church history for other Church leaders, and as a teaching aid for the Catholic Church for new believers. Note, for example, that all the letters in the New Testament were written to Catholics, not for unbelievers.

Now, I know that that Bible is the foundational document for the Protestant religions, and that is probably why atheists attack it so much. Destroy the Bible, and what do the Protestants have to fall back on? Nothing. So, the Bible, as Scripture, is often viewed as the foundation of all of Christianity, and therefore a focus of atheists.

But isn’t that a strawman as far as Catholics are concerned?

After all, Jesus did not write a book. He established a Church. From the beginning, the Catholic Church had what it now calls its “Tradition” which came from its Christ-derived authority which existed apart from Scripture, which was not there in the beginning. The Catholic Church existed for several centuries without “the Bible.” The Bible is not the founding document of Catholicism—there is no such thing. Indeed, I think one could argue that Catholicism (guided by the Holy Spirit) is the foundation for the Bible, not the other way around. Heck, the 4 Gospels were not finally and canonically selected as “the 4” until late in the 4th century by a Catholic Council. Granted, they were the most commonly used by Christians (Catholics), but there were other gospels which were excluded.

Now, I’m probably not the proper person to respond to AntiTheist, because my faith is not based on a logical conclusion demanded by an analysis of evidence gathered in the past. Rather, my faith is a forward looking choice based on the type of person I want to be, and the best way to get there, although I do recognize the 2000 years of consistent group theology of the Magisterium which, after enough thought, tends to trump my few decades-worth of single-brained analysis. Even so, given the above, and perhaps just for me personally, the proper response to the OP seems to be, “So what?”

Thoughts?
 
Adding on to my contributions on the previous page which I highly recommend rereading. 😃 I will not alter my stance!😃 I don’t wish to debate the issue only add more to what I have already contributed to this topic. To me evidence is is highly important as I’ve already noted and so once again, the Bible itself is considered to be “The Gospels” as I have earlier shown. The Bible is not a myth or made of myths! I would not have a clear conscience if I didn’t defend the POPE! 😃 So here I go defending my sweet, loving Pope once again. 😃

From the *L’Osservatore Romano *on August 11, 2010, Pope Benedict XVI’s topic ‘The use of goods and the logic of love’ he said, " Dear Brothers and Sisters, In this **Sunday’s Gospel **passage Jesus continues his teaching to the disciples on the value of the person in God’s eyes and on the futility of mundane worries. This does not mean doing nothing. Indeed, on hearing Jesus’ reassuring invitation: “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom” (Lk 12: 32), our hearts open up to a hope which illumines and animates real life. We have the certainty that “the Gospel is not merely a communication of things that can be known it is one that makes things happen and is life-changing. The dark door of time, of the future, has been thrown open. Whoever has hope lives differently; the one who hopes has been granted the gift of a new life” (cf. Encyclical Spe Salvi, n. 2).

As we read in the passage from the Letter to the Hebrews in today’s Liturgy, Abraham with a trusting heart entered into the hope that God opened to him, the promise of a land and of “numerous descendants”, and left “not knowing where he was to go”, trusting only in God (cf. 11: 8-12). And **Jesus in today’s Gospel **illustrates through three parables how waiting for the fulfilment of the “blessed hope”, his Coming, should urge one more and more toward a profound life, rich in good works: “Sell your possessions, and give alms; provide yourselves with purses that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys” (Lk 12: 33). It is an invitation to use things unselfishly without thirsting for possession or dominion, but according to the logic of God, the logic of consideration for others, the logic of love: as Romano Guardini succinctly wrote, “in the form of a relationship: beginning with God, in view of God” (cf. Accettare se stessi, Brescia 1992, 44)."
vatican.va/news_services/or/or_eng/text.html#1

Also, what needs to be considered is the CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH INSTRUCTION - DONUM VERITATIS ON THE ECCLESIAL VOCATION OF THE THEOLOGIAN, which I present only a small fraction of the document.

INTRODUCTION
  1. The truth which sets us free is a gift of Jesus Christ (cf. Jn 8:32). Man’s nature calls him to seek the truth while ignorance keeps him in a condition of servitude. Indeed, man could not be truly free were no light shed upon the central questions of his existence including, in particular, where he comes from and where he is going. When God gives Himself to man as a friend, man becomes free, in accordance with the Lord’s word: «No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you» (Jn 15:15). Man’s deliverance from the alienation of sin and death comes about when Christ, the Truth, becomes the “way” for him (cf. Jn 14:6).
In the Christian faith, knowledge and life, truth and existence are intrinsically connected. Assuredly, the truth given in God’s revelation exceeds the capacity of human knowledge, but it is not opposed to human reason. Revelation in fact penetrates human reason, elevates it, and calls it to give an account of itself (cf. 1 Pet 3:15). For this reason, from the very beginning of the Church, the “standard of teaching” (cf. Rom 6:17) has been linked with baptism to entrance into the mystery of Christ. The service of doctrine, implying as it does the believer’s search for an understanding of the faith, i.e., theology, is therefore something indispensable for the Church.

Theology has importance for the Church in every age so that it can respond to the plan of God “who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2:4). In times of great spiritual and cultural change, theology is all the more important. Yet it also is exposed to risks since it must strive to “abide” in the truth (cf. Jn 8:31), while at the same time taking into account the new problems which confront the human spirit. In our century, in particular, during the periods of preparation for and implementation of the Second Vatican Council, theology contributed much to a deeper “understanding of the realities and the words handed on”(1). But it also experienced and continues to experience moments of crisis and tension. . . .
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19900524_theologian-vocation_en.html.

Look at all that evidence! The Internet can at times be extremely valuable. 😉 Even the FBI uses it to detect criminal behavior. Think of all the children that are protected by them!👍

p.s. The Pope will be visiting the UK in September. Please remember Richard Dawkins’ fanclub resides there. Mention of balloons and other stuff from his groupies attacking the Pope’s visit. I pray for his mission and safety along with his followers that will be residing at his activities. Please pray for the them. :gopray2: Thank you.
 
So there you have it. One poetic, dramatic account written a century after the event says a female image of Rome appeared and challenged Caesar’s crossing. A historical account written 170 years after the event says a male being played a reed, snatched a trumpet and triumphantly led the army across the river.
Right. So historical accounts of this event feature the appearance of ghosts and goblins. This is precisely the point I’m getting at: why is it that people accept that Caesar crossed the Rubicon but they do not accept the magical stories constructed around it and reported as history?

Is it simply a matter of the number of texts? Are you telling me that if four accounts based on the one missing eyewitness account featured only the male ghost playing a reed, then you’d think it likely that there really was a ghost who convinced Caesar to do it?

Come on now. Ascribing stories of magic to great men was something that happened back in those days.
And according to the This Rock article, “All of these evidently depended on the one published eyewitness account, that of Asinius Pollio (76 B.C.–c. A.D. 4)—which account has disappeared without a trace. No manuscript copies for any of these secondary sources is to be found earlier than several hundred years after their composition.”
Let’s say for the sake of argument that this is completely accurate (I’m not sure if it is or not). There’s plenty of evidence that Caesar crossed the Rubicon apart from that one supposed account (which may or may not have existed) – we have, for example, the entire history of Rome after this event, which reflects the crossing of the Rubicon. Even if the specific details are a little wrong, we know that this famous Roman general – whom we know existed because we have plenty of accounts of him, including things written in his own hand – successfully orchestrated a coup and became an emperor.

There’s no other evidence that a ghost convinced Caesar to do it, other than stories that got passed on and written down.

I’m saying that this is analogous to the magic stories attributed to Christ: there’s not sufficient reason to think that they actually happened.
 
There’s a difference between dying for one’s religious beliefs (which we do see in other religions) and dying for something known to be a lie (which the apostles did if the resurrection was a fraud).

Someone (I think it was AntiTheist) raised the point that we don’t have solid evidence from outside the church of the martyrdom of the apostles. But if we believe the consistent testimony of the church from the first centuries regarding their martyrdom, then that martyrdom is inconsistent with a fraudulent resurrection.
Emphasis added.

And actually, even if we did have evidence outside of church tradition for the martyrdom of the apostles, I still would not rule out fanatics willing to die for their cult. There are a whole host of psychological factors in play, including the notion that people who know they are going to be put to death as political subversives (regardless of what they say or what they recant) are likely to become extremely recalcitrant in their public claims, whatever they may be.

There is additionally the known fact of “false confessions” and “false memories” and a whole host of other problems that come with the testimony of cult members.

But still, the fact is that I’m not aware of any good evidence outside of church tradition for the fact that the apostles were martyrs.
 
Abstract::
The Bible describes the case of a woman with high fever cured by our Lord Jesus Christ. Based on the information provided by the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, the diagnosis and the possible etiology of the febrile illness is discussed. Infectious diseases continue to be a threat to humanity, and influenza has been with us since the dawn of human history. If the postulation is indeed correct, the woman with fever in the Bible is among one of the very early description of human influenza disease.

Infectious diseases continue to be a threat to humanity, and influenza has been with us since the dawn of human history. We analysed a case of high fever that happened 2000 years ago in Biblical time and discussed possible etiologies.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2918564/?tool=pmcentrez&report=abstract
That a story contains recognizable symptoms of a disease doesn’t mean that the story actually happened, and it certainly doesn’t mean that the magical parts of the story happened.

I’ve read a few comic books that perfectly described the symptoms of drug withdrawal, AIDs and other physiological problems. Does that fact make the story in the comic books any more likely to be true?

Come on, now.
 
From the previous page…😉
The Gospels, you see, are documents written by anonymous non-eyewitnesses decades (at the earliest) after the supposed events occurred. There’s not a single contemporary eyewitness account of Jesus, nor a single piece of evidence that confirms any of the magical parts of the story.
LogisticsBranch;6976395:
I’m bumping this again for AntiTheist.

Dear OP AntiTheist,

You really should rethink your position as stated above. Obviously, you don’t understand the importance of Biblical time and it’s value to Medicine - Virology.🙂

National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, Virology Journal, July 21, 2010
Kam LE Hon, Pak C Ng, and Ting F Leung (1Department of Paediatrics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China)
Influenza or not influenza: Analysis of case of high fever that happened 2000 years ago in Biblical time
Abstract::
The Bible describes the case of a woman with high fever cured by our Lord Jesus Christ. Based on the information provided by the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, the diagnosis and the possible etiology of the febrile illness is discussed. Infectious diseases continue to be a threat to humanity, and influenza has been with us since the dawn of human history. If the postulation is indeed correct, the woman with fever in the Bible is among one of the very early description of human influenza disease.

Infectious diseases continue to be a threat to humanity, and influenza has been with us since the dawn of human history. We analysed a case of high fever that happened 2000 years ago in Biblical time and discussed possible etiologies.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2918564/?tool=pmcentrez&report=abstract****

😃

The above document doesn’t invalidate a miracle(s). It strictly discusses the disease afflicted by many in ‘bible time’. Not all were healed by Jesus though many were. Please do keep in mind:
“It is in the New Testament, however, that the question of why illness also afflicts the just finds a complete answer. In the public activity of Jesus, his encounters with the sick are not isolated, but continual. He healed many through miracles, so that miraculous healings characterised his activity: «Jesus went around to all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the Gospel of the kingdom, and curing every disease and illness» (Mt 9:35; cf. 4:23). These healings are signs of his messianic mission (cf. Lk 7:20-23). They manifest the victory of the kingdom of God over every kind of evil, and become the symbol of the restoration to health of the whole human person, body and soul. They serve to demonstrate that Jesus has the power to forgive sins (cf. Mk 2:1-12); they are signs of the salvific goods, as is the healing of the paralytic of Bethesda (cf. Jn 5:2-9, 19-21) and the man born blind (cf. Jn 9).”

You also said AntiTheist , “Faith – by definition – is accepting claims without sufficient evidence.” forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=485473

Well, in a court of law you had better have eyewitness accounts.😃 There are Eyewitness testimonies to Christ which are valid so my faith is based on evidence.: vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19871111en.html

and The Fact and Significance of Christ’s Miracles:vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20001123_istruzione_en.html

I will end on this note, doctor’s don’t report miracles though many of them have seen them occur in hospitals and offices. It is amazing to see in a Cardiac Care Unit and throughout a hospital how much prayer does at times make a difference. By the grace of God!🙂
That a story contains recognizable symptoms of a disease doesn’t mean that the story actually happened, and it certainly doesn’t mean that the magical parts of the story happened.
AntiTheist, I noted in your most recent posting to me was taken from page 3 not from the previous page! And you have omitted on this page the “National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, Virology Journal, July 21, 2010
Kam LE Hon, Pak C Ng, and Ting F Leung (1Department of Paediatrics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China)
Influenza or not influenza: Analysis of case of high fever that happened 2000 years ago in Biblical time” which is from a highly reputable science journal. They don’t present magical stories. Any scientist in the world would know that!

By the way, you seem to be obsessed by comic books and magic. Nice entertainment for you I guess. Myself, I don’t waste my time posting here by presenting magical or fantasy stuff. I deal with reality.
 
AntiTheist
*
But still, the fact is that I’m not aware of any good evidence outside of church tradition for the fact that the apostles were martyrs. *

Well, the fact is that you’re not convinced of anything about Christianity except that it is a religion founded on lies. Anything founded on lies, however, does not usually survive for 2,000 years. The Nazi regime, for example, ruled only twelve years. It was a hateful, anti-theist regime so full of lies it devoured itself. Only truth lives on forever, even when the Devil and his legions hammer it constantly. 😉
 
But even that is not true since we’ve already uncovered the jail in which Peter was held captive, and I have bookmarked an article with the headline that they recently uncovered his bones. Church Tradition and Biblical history has, time and time again, been supported and proven by extrabiblical sources and archeology - never disproven. And discoveries are still being made.
 
Emphasis added.

And actually, even if we did have evidence outside of church tradition for the martyrdom of the apostles, I still would not rule out fanatics willing to die for their cult. There are a whole host of psychological factors in play, including the notion that people who know they are going to be put to death as political subversives (regardless of what they say or what they recant) are likely to become extremely recalcitrant in their public claims, whatever they may be.

There is additionally the known fact of “false confessions” and “false memories” and a whole host of other problems that come with the testimony of cult members.

But still, the fact is that I’m not aware of any good evidence outside of church tradition for the fact that the apostles were martyrs.
 
The Gospels are not myths per se but I think there are myths in the Gospels. Too many to note, but let me touch quickly on just two.
Code:
 Remember how Jesus is supposed to have cast demons out of two men and put them into pigs which rushed to their death over a cliff and into the sea? (Matt. 8:28-34). I've always had a serious problem with that sort of story. I don't see it as a lie but as an exaggeration that grew and grew as it was retold in those superstitious times. Jesus was so charistmatic and so admired that such myths quickly developed. 

 Or, not so much a myth but I can't believe Jesus said it: Luke 14:25. It's here that we find Jesus telling his disciples (and us?) that we can't be his disciples unless we hate our parents and children and siblings, etc. Wow! That not only contradicts the Ten Commandments but the very essense of the message of Christ which focused on love.

 That's all, folks!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top