That’s why I said it’s like Talksport, you’ve got know nothing hosts and people calling from places in America where I doubt there’s any formal education.
once you move away from what's literally written, you are into the world of interpretation, so its a matter of debate to what those interpretations are.
It isn't about Christianity. The show asks for people to call in with what they believe and why. They ask WHY they should believe in any god. The hosts seem very knowledgable but admit when they don't know. They have guest hosts that are experts in certain subjects.
That’s all well and good but people like Dillahunty don’t even want to attempt to understand the Bible. It’s like Hitchens, who was a comedian as far as I’m concerned, he just picks the odd line, takes it out of context of the whole passage, makes up his own definition and uses hyperbole to attack a straw man.
I was talking about Dillahunty generally, his entire act is mostly against Christianity.
I disagree. As the show is American, it's mainly American Christians that call in...and as Matt is an ex-Christian, it's obvious that Christianity is the most debated religion on the show. But it's open to all beliefs....they all get debated. There's many "polytheists" that call in. Muslims too. One of the main subjects that gets debated is the cosmological argument.
but surely you have to decide if the 4 gospels are to be taken literally, thats what was in the authors mind i'e a blow by blow account of jesus's life
Afternoon Paul. I’ve been thinking after we had a brief chat on here last week and wanted to question you on something.
Fair point on why Christianity is debated the most, I still maintain Dillahunty isn’t worth listening to on the subject.
Well...I maintain that he IS ;)
See my post to Paul Simpson above. I don’t think we can take them literally as historical fact. There are inconsistencies across all four gospels. There’s a good chance things like the Sermon on the Mount happened as it’s covered multiple times with similar dialogue but then as an example we cannot be confident on some quotes attributed to Jesus in John.
I’d push you towards actual scholars and to listen to Christian and Non-Christian ones.
so this is the issue and we've been around this circle a few times now, what is fact if there is any and how do we know
Well just to come away from the Gospel’s slightly.. within the New Testament I think Paul’s Letters are mostly close to fact. The Gospels themselves, we can never be 100% but where something is mentioned several times across all four, either with exactly the same quotes or even better ever so slightly different quotes, just because I think if Matthew and Mark for example have Jesus saying the same thing, with just slightly different words, that gives authenticity that they’re not just copying each other.
"It’s never going to be black and white and it’s a lot of grey."
It’s my belief the other 3 are copying mark for their own reasons( the crowd they were writing for)
On a personal level I think you do the man an injustice.
The book has been a major part of different civilisations across the world, sometimes shaping them. It’s the most important book in the world.
Matthew and Luke both copied Mark but then they also share a lot of scripture with one another that’s not in Mark, hence Q being the source(s) spoken about in scholarly. Matthew is clearly writing to convince the Jewish to follow Jesus so his has a big slant.