i sense an anger in your reply mate with a few insults starting creep in, you really don't want to let your guard down now
i have never said a jesus did not exist,
i have never said mark is the most important gospel but matthew and luke use mark as source material(universally accepted)
i do know paul's letters were wrote in the 50's significantly paul never really talks about jesus being human more like a mythical figure
and as i keep saying and you keep ignoring not one contemporary writer mentions this man
the most fantastical man and events not written about but many less interesting people are
like i say i'm not saying a jesus did not exist but the discrepancies are there and need investigating
I have tried for several days not to become angry and have so far been successful, frustrated is how I’d describe my last post but I’ll try to cool it.
I am acknowledging that there weren’t necessarily present writers, alive when Christ was, who wrote about Him when Jesus was a man on Earth, well I admit that nothing has been found dated from 33AD or earlier, however I am merely saying that it not only happens with ancient figures but is common place.
I’ve just opened my Bible and have gone to Corinthians 1. You acknowledged this letter was written in 57AD:
15 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel(
A) I preached to you,(
B) which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved,(
C) if you hold firmly(
D) to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received(
E) I passed on to you(
F)as of first importance[
a]: that Christ died for our sins(
G) according to the Scriptures,(
H)4 that he was buried,(
I) that he was raised(
J) on the third day(
K) according to the Scriptures,(
L)5 and that he appeared to Cephas,[
b](
M) and then to the Twelve.(
N) 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep.(
O) 7 Then he appeared to James,(
P)then to all the apostles,(
Q) 8 and last of all he appeared to me also,(
R) as to one abnormally born.
So there we have a letter written in 57AD, discussing past “scripture” and “Gospel” being preached.
If the accuracy is true, that Mark is written around 70AD and it really is the first, then the Gospels have clearly got their information from “scripture” and accounts written many years earlier.
Paul is talking past tense too, he’s saying he has already preached scripture to these people, so let’s say a handful of months, maybe years earlier. This could have been only 20 years after the event. But he’s preaching scripture, where has that come from? Well obviously we don’t know but let’s presume he didn’t write it and he would have had to get a manuscript of such scripture, then it throws it even more into the past. He does clearly say “which I have passed on to you”, which means he received it and didn’t create it.
It wouldn’t be unreasonable to presume the scripture was written in a a very short space of time after 33AD. Maybe the 40’s or maybe even the 30’s.
As you know, the Gospels are a compilation of accounts and sources, well supposedly in your opinion, but they are relying on scripture that had been written many years earlier, to then compile it.
Paul is reminding people in 57AD that they know of the resurrection and they’ve seen the scriptures.
He’s also very much talking about the earthly Christ, who was “crucified” and “buried”.
Of course there are discrepancies to the stories but Matthew and Luke are thought to have had more sources to get information from. It’s also thought that certain sources may have placed themselves in a more significant role, such as who witnessed the Risen Christ. But what all or nearly all sources point to, is that many people saw Him and Paul, is actually calling himself the least of the Apostles. Why would he do that if he was out for personal gain in all of this?
Let’s not forget with Paul discussing the resurrection, we have a man who lived at the same time as Christ and then wrote about him, also claiming to see Him risen. Although yes, he wrote about him after his death.
Every time new evidence is found and every time you look deeper, it always leads to the result looking like the Gospels were biographical, even if you don’t believe the miracles or divinity.
www.theguardian.com
www.history.com