What's the oldest, dated version of a New Testament gospel and what's the evidence that it was written by one of the alleged Christ's original (but alleged) disciples?
Historical Records of the Bible and Jesus.
- Thread starter EmptyForceOfChi
- Start date
What's the oldest, dated version of a New Testament gospel and what's the evidence that it was written by one of the alleged Christ's original (but alleged) disciples?
Hi Dr nick
Yes that is more solid evidence actualy, although jesus does have as many writtings about him from his era.
I don't see how that is true, even if he was fictional he has impacted billions even as a story legend today even.
Remains of the original scripts of one of his disciples survives still today in england, that would be documents of an eye witness to jesus.
I have not concluded that yet.
Battles and events recorded in the biblical scripts were found to be true matching the time period and discription of geographical locations. of the New testament stories of jesus I have not found any eventual evidence that took place, apart from references to a group of people who sound very much like his disciples and followers being crucified and tourtured.
His impact seemed localized by word of mouth int he time of his life, if he existed. later on after the gospels were written it seemed to have spread like wild-fire.
maybe some can and some can't I cannot speak for so many individuals.
We do have writings from the hand of jesus disciples with pieces of the originals still in our hands today. I have not found as many references to plato after a little looking.
peace.
125 A.D I believe is one of the oldest dates of original gospel scriptures, well somebody could have pretended they were a disciple and wrote it. What is the proof of any philosopher actualy writting his work and not under a false guise.
peace.
*************Robin Hood
M*W: A farce on the RCC! Robin (red) hood (cap) as in cardinal, Maid Marian, Friar Tuck... all RCC symbolism. Myth.
The earliest layers :
* Paul
* pseudo-Paul
* Hebrews
* James, John, Peter, Jude
* Clement
* Barnabas
all show no mention of the life of Jesus or the Gospel events - just spiritual references to a risen Christ.
Later, mid-early 2nd century the Gospels appear, and after that everyone starts talking about the life of Jesus.
But before that, the earliest Christians seem to know the LEAST about Jesus. Have a look at this fabulous
table :http://members.iinet.net.au/~desmodeu/Christianity/Table.html
Note how knowledge of the Gospel stories are absent from the early writings, then turn into a flood after the Gospels appear.
Iasion
Hiya,
John99 wrote :
All we have to do is produce ONE such person and your claim is proven false.
More than one of us has listed several such examples.
This claim is thus clearly shown false.
Why do you think I put "(Carlos Castaneda)" in brackets.
So readers would know WHICH Don Juan I meant.
You ignored that key fact and then got the WRONG one.
D'oh.
Competely serious.
Because for a good MILLENIUM or so, they WERE believed as actual persons - the mainstream did indeed "pass them off as actual persons". There are STILL people who believe so - some on THIS very forum.
I see you just ignored my other examples.
Because they showed you wrong.
Iasion
John99 wrote :
John99 said:
All we have to do is produce ONE such person and your claim is proven false.
More than one of us has listed several such examples.
This claim is thus clearly shown false.
Why do you think I put "(Carlos Castaneda)" in brackets.
So readers would know WHICH Don Juan I meant.
You ignored that key fact and then got the WRONG one.
D'oh.
Competely serious.
Because for a good MILLENIUM or so, they WERE believed as actual persons - the mainstream did indeed "pass them off as actual persons". There are STILL people who believe so - some on THIS very forum.
I see you just ignored my other examples.
Because they showed you wrong.
Iasion
Hi all,
Please don't play silly games.
The issue is whether we have contemporary historical evidence for Alexander, as compared to Jesus - NOT whether we do, or should have, coins showing Jesus.
We DO have contemporary historical evidence (e.g. coins and other things) for Alexander.
We do NOT have ANY contemporary historical evidence for Jesus of any kind (while coins are probably not applicable to Jesus, other normal items of history certainly are.)
Oh, you haven't heard of the Gospels?
They are full of stories of supernatural powers of Jesus.
Nearly all of the Christian writings attribute all sorts of supernatural, magic, even divine powers to Jesus.
Our stories of the Life of Jesus come 99% from the Gospels.
The Gospels have a Jesus with supernatural powers, nothing like a normal human - THAT is why we doubt his existance more than someone normal.
You have yet to produce any evidence for his existence,
nor evidence of any fallacies by me.
No, stop this silly talk.
We accept Plato because on balance the evidence argues for it, including CONTEMPORARY historical evidence, including writings FROM Plato.
The situation with Jesus is completely different.
Yup.
But,
there IS a minority view he did not exist - did you know that?
There is actually little contemporary hard evidence for him.
But on balance, I would say he did.
Iasion
Please don't play silly games.
The issue is whether we have contemporary historical evidence for Alexander, as compared to Jesus - NOT whether we do, or should have, coins showing Jesus.
We DO have contemporary historical evidence (e.g. coins and other things) for Alexander.
We do NOT have ANY contemporary historical evidence for Jesus of any kind (while coins are probably not applicable to Jesus, other normal items of history certainly are.)
Oh, you haven't heard of the Gospels?
They are full of stories of supernatural powers of Jesus.
Nearly all of the Christian writings attribute all sorts of supernatural, magic, even divine powers to Jesus.
Our stories of the Life of Jesus come 99% from the Gospels.
The Gospels have a Jesus with supernatural powers, nothing like a normal human - THAT is why we doubt his existance more than someone normal.
You have yet to produce any evidence for his existence,
nor evidence of any fallacies by me.
No, stop this silly talk.
We accept Plato because on balance the evidence argues for it, including CONTEMPORARY historical evidence, including writings FROM Plato.
The situation with Jesus is completely different.
Yup.
But,
there IS a minority view he did not exist - did you know that?
There is actually little contemporary hard evidence for him.
But on balance, I would say he did.
Iasion
Hiya,
I cited several.
Another poster cited several.
Clear evidence your claim is wrong.
You just simply IGNORED the evidence that showed you wrong!
Then proclaimed victory!
What a shockingly dishonest cad you are.
I am sure readers will understand if I stop talking with this fool.
Iasion
I cited several.
Another poster cited several.
Clear evidence your claim is wrong.
You just simply IGNORED the evidence that showed you wrong!
Then proclaimed victory!
What a shockingly dishonest cad you are.
I am sure readers will understand if I stop talking with this fool.
Iasion
Hiya,
None of the NT was written by any eye-witness.
That is the consensus of modern NT scholars (Brown, Ehrman, Metzger, etc.)
None of which stands up to scrutiny.
If you refer to my post, you will see all these "sources" debunked.
Riiiight.
Tampered and corrupt (and forged.)
But still "very solid documentation".
Very convincing.
None of the NT is by eye-witnesses.
That is the consensus of modern NT scholars.
If you think otherwise, feel free to present a case.
None of which stands up to scrutiny.
SOME do. Many don't. So what?
James Bond has some real places etc.
Harry Potter has real places.
So what?
False.
There is NO EVIDENCE of ANY kind for King Solomon.
None. Zip. Zero. Nada.
Note that (as usual) EmptyForce fails to present any evidence for his claims - if there WAS evidence for King Solomon it would be WORLD FAMOUS as the very FIRST to be found. There is no such evidence.
My prediction - EmptyForce will fail to produce any actual evidence for this claim - if he comes up with ANYTHING, it will a web-site of some crack-pot who claims some rock or something or other is from King Solomon.
The NT makes numerous errors of geography, culture, chronology.
Really?
Why can't you ever cite any evidence?
Just vague stories.
Iasion
None of the NT was written by any eye-witness.
That is the consensus of modern NT scholars (Brown, Ehrman, Metzger, etc.)
None of which stands up to scrutiny.
If you refer to my post, you will see all these "sources" debunked.
Riiiight.
Tampered and corrupt (and forged.)
But still "very solid documentation".
Very convincing.
None of the NT is by eye-witnesses.
That is the consensus of modern NT scholars.
If you think otherwise, feel free to present a case.
None of which stands up to scrutiny.
SOME do. Many don't. So what?
James Bond has some real places etc.
Harry Potter has real places.
So what?
False.
There is NO EVIDENCE of ANY kind for King Solomon.
None. Zip. Zero. Nada.
Note that (as usual) EmptyForce fails to present any evidence for his claims - if there WAS evidence for King Solomon it would be WORLD FAMOUS as the very FIRST to be found. There is no such evidence.
My prediction - EmptyForce will fail to produce any actual evidence for this claim - if he comes up with ANYTHING, it will a web-site of some crack-pot who claims some rock or something or other is from King Solomon.
The NT makes numerous errors of geography, culture, chronology.
Really?
Why can't you ever cite any evidence?
Just vague stories.
Iasion
Hi all,
Rubbish.
We have NO original copies of any Binle works.
False.
They do NOT exist.
We have NO originals of any kind for NT or OT.
The oldest essentially intact Bibles would be the famous 4th century codexes like Aleph, A, and B. Although they are not quite 100% like our modern bibles.
Have a look at this lovely facsimile of Vaticanus (B) :
http://www.linguistsoftware.com/codexvat.htm
Yours for under $10K.
Iasion
Rubbish.
We have NO original copies of any Binle works.
False.
They do NOT exist.
We have NO originals of any kind for NT or OT.
The oldest essentially intact Bibles would be the famous 4th century codexes like Aleph, A, and B. Although they are not quite 100% like our modern bibles.
Have a look at this lovely facsimile of Vaticanus (B) :
http://www.linguistsoftware.com/codexvat.htm
Yours for under $10K.
Iasion
Hi all,
No they don't.
Why do you keep saying things like this which are demonstrably false?
Don't you ever check?
You appear to be just regurgitating apologetics without checking the facts.
*sigh*
No.
We do NOT.
Please stop making a fool of yourself.
Anyone who has done the slightest study on this subject would know this is complete nonsense. It's almost like claiming we have the true cross, or the staff of Aaron, or the 1/2 eaten apple of Adam and Eve.
Iasion
No they don't.
Why do you keep saying things like this which are demonstrably false?
Don't you ever check?
You appear to be just regurgitating apologetics without checking the facts.
*sigh*
No.
We do NOT.
Please stop making a fool of yourself.
Anyone who has done the slightest study on this subject would know this is complete nonsense. It's almost like claiming we have the true cross, or the staff of Aaron, or the 1/2 eaten apple of Adam and Eve.
Iasion
Hi all,
Firstly,
it is NOT original.
Secondly,
it is not accurate to say baldly "125A.D.".
The famous P52 is dated variously:
* 2nd century (100-199)
* early 2nd century (100-149)
* 170 +/- 25 (145-195)
MSS can NOT be dated to a single year, but a range - typically 100, or sometimes 50 years.
P52 could be as late as 195.
Finally,
P52 is a tiny fragment no bigger than a hand. Here is a picture of it :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_52
Iasion
Firstly,
it is NOT original.
Secondly,
it is not accurate to say baldly "125A.D.".
The famous P52 is dated variously:
* 2nd century (100-199)
* early 2nd century (100-149)
* 170 +/- 25 (145-195)
MSS can NOT be dated to a single year, but a range - typically 100, or sometimes 50 years.
P52 could be as late as 195.
Finally,
P52 is a tiny fragment no bigger than a hand. Here is a picture of it :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_52
Iasion
w1z4rd
Valued Senior Member
Everything mr chi.. that you are writing, is basically wrong. Couple of examples offhand. The Josephus reference is a fake, Tacitus (I have all his work) wrote about "Christos" (annointed one).. no mention of the big J there anywhere (and there where dozens of "Christos" walking around back in those days), and he referred to a specific group.
The disciples didnt write the Gospels, the first one was written after the deaths of the disciples. Jesus didnt need or endorse a Bible, and neither did the Christians for the first couple of hundred years of Christianity.
Please research your information more carefully. Its terribly wrong.
The disciples didnt write the Gospels, the first one was written after the deaths of the disciples. Jesus didnt need or endorse a Bible, and neither did the Christians for the first couple of hundred years of Christianity.
Please research your information more carefully. Its terribly wrong.
Who is Dr. Nick?
Iason, pick one person to concentrate on. So far all the people mentioned where either easily proven to be actual people who had stories built around them or entirely fictional characters.
All i am saying is that it is conceivable to build a myth that is meant to be taken as literal fact around an actual person and actual events and not from a fictional character. This is being borne out as this thread progresses. The reason i am so sure about this is because this is because that is historically how things work.
Again, you cannot ask me to prove that Adam and Eve existed. If i could do that then I would declare myself to be God and we would be finished here.
Followers Of Jesus Christ were called Christians from the onset. Where do you think the name came from?
Another thing is that people who were\are considered to be spiritually on another level have existed throughout history. I can name dozens of them off the top of my head. The main thing is that your premise is without merit because it does not follow historical precedence and is not even logical.
What do you base that on? and "yup" is not very convincing.
Like i said i have no reason to doubt he existed but you are just picking and choosing based on how you feel.
Do you honestly think that out of nowhere someone can say that "before you were born there was this person named Muhammad and now you have to follow everything he said." One thing that needs to be considered is that these things develop throughout generations and they always begin with an actual person.
And if i criticize a post you make dont take it personally and call me names because that is just childish.
Last edited:
You have been trawling through some ancient documents here. 2006! that was ages ago.
Before I was ever thought of on sf.
Can anyone remember why IceageCivilisations was banned? (link one)
6000+ posts and then banned?
Maybe he murdered someone.
Iason,
At this time i would like to add one more name to the discussion.
Lucretius
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucretius
At this time i would like to add one more name to the discussion.
Lucretius
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucretius
Yes, and still not refuted.
Friday April 18, 2003
Scholars excavate proof of Kings David and Solomon
JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH
Jerusalem Post Service
JERUSALEM -- The existence of a united Israelite monarchy headed by King David and his son, King Solomon, in the 10th century BCE has been affirmed by laboratory tests on archeological samples from excavations near Beit She'an.
The findings, reached through carbon dating by scientists at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, have particular significance to the running debate among archeologists about the authenticity of the biblical account of the two kings, and the period and extent of their reign.
The distinguished Hebrew University archeologist, the late Professor Yigael Yadin, argued more than 40 years ago that a series of monumental structures and particularly the city gates of Hatzor, Megiddo and Gezer as well as certain Megiddo palaces were founded by Solomon, as recorded in the First Book of Kings (9:15). However, in the 1990s various scholars criticized this view, claiming that the United Monarchy of David and Solomon was not a real historical period of any value in the history of Israel. Indeed, these critics even argued that Yadin's findings were relevant only from the ninth century BCE, the period of the Israelite kings Omri and Ahab.
Writing in the April 11 issue of Science Magazine, Hebrew University Professor Amihai Mazar, Ben-Gurion University archeology and ecology expert Hendrik Bruins and Professor Hans Van der Plicht of Groningen describe their findings from excavations at Tel Rehov, located about five kilometers south of Beit She'an in the Beit She'an Valley. The scholars argue that these findings conclusively prove that they found at Tel Rehov signs of an urban society from the 10th century BCE that can be compared with finds from other Israeli sites such as Megiddo, Hatzor and Gezer, which were attributed in the past to the United Monarchy.
The authors wrote that "the issue of chronology in the Near East and Eastern Mediterranean region is not just of historical interest, but relates to various applied fields in the realm of risk assessment, including climate change, drought, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions."
The excavations at Tel Rehov have been carried out over the past six years under the direction of Mazar, with the financial support of John Camp of Minneapolis, Minn. The digs revealed several strata from the time of the Book of Judges (12th to 11th centuries BCE) until the Assyrian conquest of Israel in the eighth century BCE.
In the article in Science, Mazar, Bruins and Van der Plicht write of radiometric carbon 14 tests that were carried out at Groningen on charred grain and olive pits found in various strata at Tel Rehov. The dates achieved in this research were particularly precise, making it one of the best sets of radiometric dates based on stratigraphic sequence from any site related to the biblical period.
The results show that two strata at Tel Rehov are safely dated to the 10th century BCE. One stratum was destroyed in heavy fire. The date of this destruction fits very well with the reign of Shishak, the Egyptian Pharaoh who invaded the Land of Israel around 925 BCE. Shishak's invasion is mentioned both in the Bible (Kings I 14:25) and in his monumental inscription at the temple of Amun at Karnak in Upper Egypt, where Rehov is mentioned among many other places conquered at that time.
Shishak's military campaign was recorded in stone relief on the southern wall of the Amun temple, listing the names of the places he raided in ancient Israel and the Levant. The name Rehov appears on this list after the term "The Valley," most likely referring to the Beit She'an/Jordan Valley, and before the name Beit She'an. This sequence of place names at Karnak fits the local geography in the region of Tel Rehov very well indeed, according to the Science article.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Until the summer of 1971 archaeology had failed to conclusively prove the historical basis of the Bible. The walls of Jericho had fallen from grace, the dream of Biblical Archaeologist William Foxwell Albright was still just a theory. That summer Yigael Yadin would complete the first proof of a Biblical Passage by finding the city gate of Gezer which King Solomon built circa 960 BC, and the Bible described in 1 Kings 9:15
"Now this is the way King Solomon conscripted the Labor Corps to build the house of the Lord, his house, the Millo, the wall of Jerusalem, Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer"
The Holy Bible 1 Kings 9:15
The Solomonic Gate at Gezer was the third Solomonic Gate discovered. Combined with the discoveries of the Solomonic Gates at Megiddo in the 1930's and Hazor in the 1950's, the Gezer Gate completed the first proof of a biblical passage in history with rocks on the ground. It was the long sought after historical nexus where scientific theory
peace.
Give me a chance to reply then?, it's difficult to keep up with replying to everyone on multiple threads, also I can't just sit at the computer all day long s sometimes you got to be patient and wait a day or two?, I am trying to answer your questions and present good information to support it but it's not instantanious so relax yourself.
peace.
peace.