[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by glitch";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by apotropoxy";p="
Quote:
"I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep" - Jesus
"Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you" - Jesus
"Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said." - Jesus
|
You have offered us modernized NT quotes by people who were alive a generation(s) after their hero's death. They never met the man and only had the traditions of their community to pass on. Many "quotes" of Jesus were understood by those ancient contemporaries to be the sorts of things he would have said had he thought to say them. They were never meant to be understood as literal quotes. |
Actually they were written by his apostles and friends (John, Matthew, Mark) who walked, talked and lived with him. These are examples of what he actually said. |
Quote:
From a historical perspective, the vast majority of biblical scholars believe Mark’s Gospel to be the earliest written narrative about Jesus, written in or about 70 CE. Based largely on internal evidence, scholars give this date because of the references to the Temple’s destruction and the persecution of Christians in chapter 13. These events seem to correlate to known historical events: the second Temple was destroyed in the year 70 CE by the Roman general Titus during the Jewish Revolt, and Christians in Rome were killed in mid 60 CE by the Roman emperor, Nero. […]
Scholars date Matthew between 80 and 90 CE. If Matthew used material drawn from Mark, then some time would have elapsed while Mark was being circulated. In addition, Matthew highlights the Pharisees as Jesus’ chief opponents although this group did not become dominant until after the fall of the Temple. Possible evidence from 110 CE, a letter from a bishop in Antioch which appears to cite Matthew, suggests the Gospel text was known and circulated well before that time.
Although the author of Luke intends to write as a historian (see Luke 1:1-4) whom one might expect to give a date for his own work, Luke’s Gospel is still difficult to date. Since Luke places his writing after both the first generation of eyewitnesses and another generation of written witnesses, and since his Gospel was known and used by about 140 CE, according to other early Christian texts, a date sometime between the later decades of the first century and the first decades of the second, seems most likely.
John’s Gospel is even more complicated to date because scholars are divided on whether John draws on Mark’s Gospel, which would give a date after 70 CE. Even without a clear answer to this question, most scholars give a late first century date because of its references to Christian expulsion from the synagogue (hinted at in chapters 5 and 9) and its more elaborate theology–both developments that would seem to require some passage of time. The identity of the authors of the Gospels remains unknown: the earliest manuscripts lack any authorial identifications and the names that are associated with the respective texts seem to be ascribed by later Christians who connected the Gospels with either disciples of Jesus (Matthew; John) or followers of the apostles (Mark; Luke) in order to increase the authority of the texts.
http://www.bibleresourcecenter.org/v...method=display
|
Quote:
|
There are some today who don't like what he had to say and thus try to claim he must have had a different message than what his apostles wrote down. I trust his apostles over the modern-day revisionists. They were there.
|
It was common in the days of the gospel writers to assume the names of important recent religious figures. They did so out of respect for their heroes and out of a very practical fear of persecution. Everyone understood and accepted this literary device. The Romans, having tired of the Jewish unrest in that province, annihilation the Hebrew state and reduced the Temple to rubble. It was a very dangerous time to be a Jew or to be closely related to them.
The revisionist movement of which you speak began in the mid-1800's. It was then that literalism was embraced and notions that the synoptic gospels were authored by contemporaries of Jesus. There is 2,000 years of scholarship to back me up.
It is you who have absorbed these erroneous revisionist traditions.
Don't believe everything you hear in Sunday school.