“The work of God”?

[Ban-jani]

Why wouldn't he do that? You only have to look at every terrorist incident to see how many people are willing to martyr themselves. But which part of the Old Testament specifically predicts Christ's crucifixion?

There’s absolutely shit loads mate, from several books.

Psalm 22:16 states, “My enemies surround me like a pack of dogs; an evil gang closes in on me. They have pierced my hands and feet.”

Isaiah 50:6 says, “I offered my back to those who beat me and my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard. I did not hide my face from mockery and spitting.” Psalm 22:14a, 15: “My life is poured out of me like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My strength has dried up like sun-baked clay, My tongue sticks to the roof of My mouth. Psalm 69:21b: “They offer me sour wine for my thirst.”

The soldier offered Jesus wine mixed with gall, rather than water for His thirst. Psalm 22:7-8a: “Everyone who sees me mocks me, they sneer and shake their heads saying, Is this the One who relies on God? Then let the Lord save Him!”

I could go on, there’s many more.

In total there is 361 accurate accounts of the life of Jesus from the OT.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Neither of those statements is true.

They’ve found a copy of the book of Acts (Luke part 2) dated to around 60AD.

If Luke was written before Acts, we can accurately predict it was at least in the 50’s AD, then Matthew and Mark written before then, with Mark considered the earliest, which could have been in the 30’s AD or 40’s. Christ was crucified between 28 AD and 33 AD.

This means the majority of the Gospels were written when St Peter, who was Christ’s closest disciple, was still alive and the authors were almost definitely alive.

St Paul was alive when Christ was crucified and he’s an author within the New Testament.

On your latter point, scholars who are maximalist (which means they believe the story to be accurate in terms of claims of divinity and crucifixion), are now in the majority because they’ve found a Roman letter describing Christians as followers of a man called Jesus, crucified for blasphemy.

Are there any contemporary sources from people without a clear interest in the story that Jesus was the son of God. Paul may have been alive, but he was also an apostle, so he would clearly have an interest in adding or emphasising details that would make Jesus' life fit in with a prophesies of pre-existing Jewish theology. In the same way that Muhammad is written to do the same thing in Islam.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

There’s absolutely shit loads mate, from several books.

Psalm 22:16 states, “My enemies surround me like a pack of dogs; an evil gang closes in on me. They have pierced my hands and feet.”

Isaiah 50:6 says, “I offered my back to those who beat me and my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard. I did not hide my face from mockery and spitting.” Psalm 22:14a, 15: “My life is poured out of me like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My strength has dried up like sun-baked clay, My tongue sticks to the roof of My mouth. Psalm 69:21b: “They offer me sour wine for my thirst.”

The soldier offered Jesus wine mixed with gall, rather than water for His thirst. Psalm 22:7-8a: “Everyone who sees me mocks me, they sneer and shake their heads saying, Is this the One who relies on God? Then let the Lord save Him!”

I could go on, there’s many more.

In total there is 361 accurate accounts of the life of Jesus from the OT.

I was hoping for something with a little more context than just a few quickly googleable bible quotes. For example just in that first one, who is "my" and why is it written in the past tense if it's a prediction of future events?

 

[Ban-jani]

Please could you provide any evidence for the authorship of any of the 4 official gospels.

Who Wrote the Gospels, and How Do We Know for Sure?

The closest we get to a claim of authorship is at the very end of the Book of John, where the author implies that the book was written by “the disciple…

zondervanacademic.com

Here’s a good article on it.

It’s a bit of a loaded question. If the Gospels were early enough to have eyewitness statements, and they’re obviously written by different people, why is it that important?

 

[Ban-jani]

Are there any contemporary sources from people without a clear interest in the story that Jesus was the son of God. Paul may have been alive, but he was also an apostle, so he would clearly have an interest in adding or emphasising details that would make Jesus' life fit in with a prophesies of pre-existing Jewish theology. In the same way that Muhammad is written to do the same thing in Islam.

Paul was very much a Jewish man who was persecuting Christians, he was going around attacking them. He completely u turned because Christ appeared to him when he was travelling to Damascus. He even writes about his past in Corinthians 1.

But yes, the scholars who think the Gospels are at least accurate about his life, not necessarily the miracles and divinity but that his life story was close to the truth, were vindicated by Roman letters who described Christians as being religious followers of a man called Jesus crucified in Jerusalem.

Someone in Rome wrote in the 2nd century that the local authority crucified this man called Jesus and he has followers who look at him as a religious figure.

The letter was from the administration and it acknowledged the event itself.

 

[blueish swede]

The earliest known surviving fragment of the new testament dates from 125-200 AD. It is a tiny fragment of St John's gospel




and it is on permanent display in John Rylands library on Oxford Rd.

 

[Ban-jani]

I was hoping for something with a little more context than just a few quickly googleable bible quotes. For example just in that first one, who is "my" and why is it written in the past tense if it's a prediction of future events?

Well “piecing hands and feet” is pretty profound. The gone off wine part is also very accurate as it’s in the Gospels, when He’s on the cross.

There’s many more, including an accurate description of who He was crucified with, two thieves either side.

The tense in which it’s described is common in the Bible, as it’s a statement of Christ being infinite. He also says “before Abraham was, I AM”.

The book of John does this a lot in its opening chapters.

The context around the statements is a prophecy being told, it’s not describing a past event.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Paul was very much a Jewish man who was persecuting Christians, he was going around attacking them. He completely u turned because Christ appeared to him when he was travelling to Damascus. He even writes about his past in Corinthians 1.

But yes, the scholars who think the Gospels are at least accurate about his life, not necessarily the miracles and divinity but that his life story was close to the truth, were vindicated by Roman letters who described Christians as being religious followers of a man called Jesus crucified in Jerusalem.

Someone in Rome wrote in the 2nd century that the local authority crucified this man called Jesus and he has followers who look at him as a religious figure.

The letter was from the administration and it acknowledged the event itself.

Well yes, that's not the controversial part of it. I don't think most non-Christians have trouble accepting the narrative that there was a man called Jesus who had a religious following and was executed by the Romans. The problem is everything else surrounding it.

 

[BimboBob]

Well yes, that's not the controversial part of it. I don't think most non-Christians have trouble accepting the narrative that there was a man called Jesus who had a religious following and was executed by the Romans. The problem is everything else surrounding it.

Indeed. Maybe not called Jesus as there's no record of that name in any roman texts of the time. But there are records of plenty of religious men who had followers and were executed. Jesus is probably a mash up of them when the first books were written.

The rest though? Utter nonsense aimed at the great unwashed and uneducated to show that this new God/ son of God was better than the pagan of choice that they worshipped.

 

[Ban-jani]

Well yes, that's not the controversial part of it. I don't think most non-Christians have trouble accepting the narrative that there was a man called Jesus who had a religious following and was executed by the Romans. The problem is everything else surrounding it.

Of course and there’s where faith comes in.

However, several of the 12, including St Peter, were executed for being Christians. St Peter was to be crucified for refusing to renounce his faith but he wouldn’t, he went to his death because he believed it.

His only request was that he be crucified upside down, because he wasn’t worthy of dying the same way as the Lord.

He saw the Risen Christ, that’s why he wouldn’t renounce it and that’s the reason he went to his death.