@KingDavid403 saidFor my money, the most interesting gospel is that of Thomas, recovered as part of the Nag Hammadi Library. Thomas is mentioned in other gospels as one of the Twelve. The gospel of Thomas purports to be questions the Apostles put to Jesus, and Jesus's verbatim answers.
claims without evidence can be dismissed without counter-evidence.
And yet, life is all around you, and in you. 😉 Both spiritual, and physical. 🙂
pretty much ends any debate.
I agree. 😛 🙂
Of course, at this remove, we cannot now verify that whoever wrote the gospel of Thomas was the Thomas, actually one of the Twelve, or someone else who attributed the text to that Thomas--just as we cannot now verify that whoever wrote the gospel of John was the John, actually one of the Twelve.
Still, one has to wonder why the three synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke (who were not there) were chosen for canonization whereas a gospel from one of the Twelve was rejected.
@KingDavid403 saidLack of evidence that he did not write is not evidence that he did.
There is no evidence that the gospel attributed to the Apostle John was actually written by him.
There is circumstance-AL evidence that is linked to John writing his Gospel According to John. The Jewish people were extremely good at keeping track of their historical events. And most of their historical scribes such as Josephus, were not Christians.
Either w ...[text shortened]... evidence that the Apostle John did not write, or at least narrate his version, to a scribe, to copy.
If I thought the eternal fate of my soul depended on his having written something, I would want something better than circumstantial evidence that he did.
Suppose, for the sake of continuing this discussion beyond the silence of fideism, that someone told you he had been abducted by space aliens, transported to a space ship in orbit around a distant star, his brain surgically removed from his old body and transplanted into a new body, and then returned to Earth in this, his new, body. A thing for which there is no known scientific explanation or technological technique to accomplish such a feat. Something quite 'miraculous' for want of a better word. Would you believe that, simply on his say-so? I rather doubt it. You would want some pretty convincing evidence before believing such an extraordinary thing. We would want to examine his cranium, for signs of brain surgery; we would want to see credible proof that his 'old' body had been known to other people who could vouch for the personality which then 'inhabited' it, and that the same people would vouch for that same personality now 'inhabiting' the 'new' body--for example, friends and family would ask him questions which only he would know the answers to. We would want to see some object purloined from the alien space craft which could not possibly be of terrestrial origin. Such things would count as credible evidence.
Now, suppose someone told you someone else had been kidnapped by space aliens, had his brain transplanted, etc., etc., only you couldn't see this other person or interview anyone who ever knew him, because it all happened 2,000 years ago.
Some people do actually believe something as incredible as this, just on somebody's say-so, 2,000 years ago. But the evidence for it disappeared--
an empty tomb proves nothing; an empty tomb is no evidence that anyone was ever in it, much less that whoever might have been in it left it in an unorthodox manner
--and if anyone were ever to produce the body, the bones of the crucified Jesus, it would refute the narrative of a bodily resurrection. The narrative itself logically excludes the possibility of its ever being verified. We come full circle back to fideism as soon as we demand evidence or verification.
@moonbus saidI doubt Thomas wrote that.
For my money, the most interesting gospel is that of Thomas, recovered as part of the Nag Hammadi Library. Thomas is mentioned in other gospels as one of the Twelve. The gospel of Thomas purports to be questions the Apostles put to Jesus, and Jesus's verbatim answers.
Of course, at this remove, we cannot now verify that whoever wrote the gospel of Thomas was [i]the Thomas[ ...[text shortened]... o were not there) were chosen for canonization whereas a gospel from one of the Twelve was rejected.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidAnd I doubt that John wrote the Gospel of John. It was common in ancient times to attribute texts written by anonymous authors to noteworthy persons. Hence the Gospel OF n.n. need not have been written BY n.n.
I doubt Thomas wrote that.
Nonetheless, the Gospel of Thomas makes for interesting reading, whoever wrote it.
@moonbus saidWas a doubting Thomas joke. You normally catch those. 😲
And I doubt that John wrote the Gospel of John. It was common in ancient times to attribute texts written by anonymous authors to noteworthy persons. Hence the Gospel OF n.n. need not have been written BY n.n.
Nonetheless, the Gospel of Thomas makes for interesting reading, whoever wrote it.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidCaught me flat-footed on that.
Was a doubting Thomas joke. You normally catch those. 😲
😴
@Ghost-of-a-Duke saidI'll save that for a rainy day.
As an aside, if anyone wants to build an ark, I Noah guy.
@moonbus saidJust the other day I wondered: if Jesus of Nazareth (possibly the Son of God) had important messages to convey, why speak in parables instead of more directly?
Metaphors and figures of speech, it's all metaphors and figures of speech. Same with alchemy: the attempt to transmute lead into gold is a metaphor for the spiritual quest in humans. The attempt to interpret such things as literal facts is superstition (belief in magic, false causality).
@Arkturos saidIt was direct, for the people to whom he addressed himself.
Just the other day I wondered: if Jesus of Nazareth (possibly the Son of God) had important messages to convey, why speak in parables instead of more directly?
Theology was invented by bishops for bishops, and that is one of my chief objections against the religion which calls him its namesake. Jesus taught no theology, no doctrine, no dogma. Take the theology, doctrine, and dogma out of Christianity, and what've you got left? "Be nice to people." It just ain't that difficult to understand, is it?
@moonbus saidLack of evidence that he did not write is not evidence that he did.
Lack of evidence that he did not write is not evidence that he did.
If I thought the eternal fate of my soul depended on his having written something, I would want something better than circumstantial evidence that he did.
Suppose, for the sake of continuing this discussion beyond the silence of fideism, that someone told you he had been abducted by space aliens, transp ...[text shortened]... r being verified. We come full circle back to fideism as soon as we demand evidence or verification.
Yes it is if you're disputing the evidence that he did write it.
There is much evidence of the life of the Apostle John. The oldest physical writings of the New Testament that they have in a vault somewhere, are portions of the Gospel of John dating back to 125 A.D. That's just 25 years after the death of John. John also wrote other Biblical books in the New Testament.
Either way, I'm not here to argue or debate your spiritual belief's. You seem to have your mind made up on your beliefs on Christianity and I understand. You are also assuming a lot of my personal Christian beliefs. I currently do not attend a Christian church, nor am I currently a part of any Christian group or sect.
I do have a Bachelor's degree in "Christian Studies with an Emphasis in Biblical Studies." Ghost of a Duke has a similar Biblical degree. It is what it is. 🙂
I am still a student and nothing more. However, Jesus is my personal Lord and Savior and Whom I try to follow; and, sometimes I'm not very good at it. However, I keep striving for the upward call in Christ Jesus. It's much more than just being nice to people; it's about loving all others as we love ourselves. I personally believe that ANYONE who does this, or attempts to do this, that they will be saved no matter their current spiritual beliefs. "Love covers a multitude of sins."
I also personally think that all Apocrypha books should be studied; and that most of them have true spiritual meaning. That goes for other religions also. Jesus is usually considered as a major figure in most other religions also. 🙂
@KingDavid403 saidI have no objections to the teachings of Jesus. If people would actually follow them, there would be a lot less horror and misery in the world. My objection is to Christianity, which has perpetrated much horror and misery in the world, ever since it became the state religion of the Rome Empire.
Lack of evidence that he did not write is not evidence that he did.
Yes it is if you're disputing the evidence that he did write it.
There is much evidence of the life of the Apostle John. The oldest physical writings of the New Testament that they have in a vault somewhere, are portions of the Gospel of John dating back to 125 A.D. That's just 25 years ...[text shortened]... r religions also. Jesus is usually considered as a major figure in most other religions also. 🙂
It does not matter how old the oldest texts are--nothing in any of the gospels suggests that Jesus thought of himself as founding a new religion based on any writings at all. It speaks volumes that the Church tortured people to death and burnt heretics at the stake for so much as doubting Biblical texts. Jesus taught no doctrine, no dogma, no theology, and no list of Five Fundamentals--subtract all that from Christianity and what have you got left?
The message is pretty simple, really: welcome the stranger, feed the hungry, heal the sick, comfort the miserable. "Be nice to people." It's not so difficult, is it?
Not what I hear from preachers in Bible Belt pulpits these days, roaring about 'God hates gays' and Trump being the new messiah. Yup, Trump's the messiah--go to amazon and type in 'Donald J Trump The Christ', you'll see what I mean.
1 edit
@moonbus saidI agree 95% with everything that you wrote here.
I have no objections to the teachings of Jesus. If people would actually follow them, there would be a lot less horror and misery in the world. My objection is to Christianity, which has perpetrated much horror and misery in the world, ever since it became the state religion of the Rome Empire.
It does not matter how old the oldest texts are--nothing in any of the gospels ...[text shortened]... , Trump's the messiah--go to amazon and type in 'Donald J Trump The Christ', you'll see what I mean.
nothing in any of the gospels suggests that Jesus thought of himself as founding a new religion
Actually, I personally believe that Jesus full-filled an old religion.
The message is pretty simple, really: welcome the stranger, feed the hungry, heal the sick, comfort the miserable. "Be nice to people." It's not so difficult, is it? Change your word "nice" to love, and I think that you're on to something.
😉
became the state religion of the Rome Empire.
The Jews did their fair share also.
@KingDavid403
Actually, I personally believe that Jesus full-filled an old religion.
The Jews don't see it that way. And why should they?
Muslims say that Mohammed fulfilled and completed Christianity. Joseph Smith said that he (or Moroni) did that, too.
I personally don't believe that any of the above has any more street cred than then next claimant will have.
1 edit
@moonbus saidThe Jews don't see it that way. And why should they?
@KingDavid403
Actually, I personally believe that Jesus full-filled an old religion.
The Jews don't see it that way. And why should they?
Muslims say that Mohammed fulfilled and completed Christianity. Joseph Smith said that he (or Moroni) did that, too.
I personally don't believe that any of the above has any more street cred than then next claimant will have.
Christianity began from Jews.
Muslims say that Mohammed fulfilled and completed Christianity.
Muslims believe that Mohammed was a great Prophet with no Godly deity. They also believe the same with Jesus. They do not put Jesus or Mohammed above one or the other; they are equal to Muslims.
Joseph Smith said that he (or Moroni) did that, too.
A different sect of Christianity that's for-sure; however, they still follow Christ for the most part; as with All of us.