Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Philosophy/religion

Join our Philosophy forum to discuss religion and spirituality.

Who Wrote The Gospels?

940 replies

headinhands · 10/04/2014 08:53

"Matthew contains 606 of Markâ??s 661 verses. Luke contains 320 of Markâ??s 661 verses. Of the 55 verses of Mark which Matthew does not reproduce, Luke reproduces 31; therefore there are only 24 verses in all of Mark not reproduced somewhere in Matthew or Luke."

A good diagram here

OP posts:
HowardTJMoon · 11/04/2014 22:51

are you interested in the positive effects of their beliefs, as they report them?

To a certain extent but there isn't the same cognitive dissonance and, frankly, that makes it less interesting.

"My belief structure portrays my god as good, there isn't anything that contradicts that and this all makes me happy" is cool and great for the person concerned. If it's convincing enough I might even agree. But I've yet to find one that has such a coherent view.

"My belief structure portrays my god as capable of some monstrous acts but I try to ignore those bits and, instead, choose to perceive my god as good and that makes me happy" is something that piques my interest.

*Do you trust people's abilities to recognise the positive effects in their own lives?^

Yes and no. I think that if they realised those positive benefits could be - and are - gained purely through their own agency rather than ascribing them to some mythical "other" then they would have a stronger and more beneficial sense of self.

Or do you believe you know more about this, the effects of belief on their individual lives, than they do

I wouldn't say I know more about it, but I do think I may have a different perspective.

capsium · 11/04/2014 22:59

I think that if they realised those positive benefits could be - and are - gained purely through their own agency rather than ascribing them to some mythical "other" then they would have a stronger and more beneficial sense of self

On what authority do you say this? From your own experience? Are your experiences somehow more valid than mine?

HowardTJMoon · 11/04/2014 23:28

No authority, just my opinion.

BigDorrit · 12/04/2014 00:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

headinhands · 12/04/2014 04:08

holo if such protracted and lengthy biblical study make it palatable how so many people with as much learning as yourself reject the supernatural claims of the bible?

OP posts:
MrsLel · 12/04/2014 04:08

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

headinhands · 12/04/2014 08:10

Why does the bible, god, Jesus and the 'truth' need defending saints? Isn't god big enough to look after himself?

OP posts:
HolofernesesHead · 12/04/2014 08:22

Head, people reach different conclusions because they are free people with enough agency to think and decide what they believe! Religion is not about cloning or becoming mindless, it's about (I believe) the encounter of the human and the divine. Encounter which takes many forms and reaches into many areas of human life.

You seem to have a very absolutist view of the Bible, and possibly other texts too; do you think that's true? If so I'm not surprised you ditched the version of Christianity you were in - I couldn't live with it either. :)

headinhands · 12/04/2014 08:58

encounter of the human and the divine

I thought you were suggesting thorough biblical study would help that happen? Do you have any proof for this encounter taking place?

OP posts:
crescentmoon · 12/04/2014 09:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

capsium · 12/04/2014 09:27

Hi, crescentmoon start a separate thread on the article? Can do. It is very interesting, and mind boggling! I'll pitch in where I can...

headinhands · 12/04/2014 11:00

holo I'm not sure if I'm absolutist. I do feel I have a threshold of assurance that needs to be met before I am happy to believe something but I can't be sorry about that. I'd want my god's holy book to not make god sound like a violent ego maniac and for any of his claims to be made good such as provenance/healing.

OP posts:
BackOnlyBriefly · 12/04/2014 11:22

Still catching up, but last night Capsium you said to me "to come closer to understanding God, you have to get your head round viewing Him holistically, as He is in the whole of the Bible, in it's entirety, OT and NT. He remains the same, but the Bible shows us Him in different contexts"

And that is just words lined up like dominoes. I can do that, but it's meaningless.

We know roughly what happened. Jesus (or possibly he was an invention and it was all Paul) saw a chance to make a new religion based on the old tribal beliefs.

Claiming to be the result of prophecy gave him the credibility which a brand new religion would not. The Mormons did much the same thing. (The Muslims too I expect though I know less about their history)

Claiming ownership of a whole religion was a bold move and the others that tried it before him (quite a few I gather) couldn't quite make it. Jesus' claim to fame is simply that he was the one that pulled it off.

Jesus (or Paul) wasn't interested in the mass slaughter that characterised the primitive beliefs so had to phase out those parts. Thus the huge chasm that separates OT and NT that has pained every Christian since.

The reason it's hard to join them up is that they are nothing whatsoever to do with each other.

BigDorrit · 12/04/2014 11:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MooncupGoddess · 12/04/2014 11:39

"The other theory that has come up recently, is that the religion was put together by the Romans to help subjugate the Middle East. The pacifism, not to mention the whole "give unto Caesar" bit, made the region much easier to deal with."

Um. Really? Do you have any links to this? I can't quite see how it would work given the historical evidence for the spread of Christianity and the Roman persecutions. The Romans promulgated the emperor cult which was intended to unite and pacify the empire... Christians' rejection of the emperor cult was one of the main reasons they were persecuted, and why Christianity was seen as a threat.

capsium · 12/04/2014 11:47

Back the only way I can explain my views to you is that I do not experience the Cognitive Dissonance, with what you see as contradictory in the Bible, you would assume I do.

The only dichotomous element to my Faith is the element regarding the consequences of choosing to believe on Christ, since He was the fulfilment of the Law.

I believe ordinary human beings were not capable of fulfilling the Law because, which aspect of the Law was appropriate in which situation, is impossible to ascertain, from a human perspective. Only From God's perspective, is it possible to navigate through this. Believing on Christ allows us to ascertain God's perspective, as in Him we know all things.

There are paradoxes, which some would call contradictions and I would see as balance in the Bible. The motivation behind actions, rather than the actions themselves, is key.

The NT argues that with the Grace, that believing on Christ provides, everything is lawful but not everything is prudent. There is much mystery, but what I do not understand fully in the present and take in Faith and I have a continued Hope for greater Revelation.

Yes, I am the sort that is fascinated by paradoxes, finding the balance and context for apparently contradictory views. It is their mystery which I find inspiring and compelling. I am never bored, only sometimes weary of thinking too much.

headinhands · 12/04/2014 11:58

in him we know all things

What does this mean? If I said 'in Justin Bieber I know all things' would you disregard it as nonsense or seek proof that I knew all things or believe me?

OP posts:
capsium · 12/04/2014 12:08

head In Him refers to the element of myself that is the same as Christ, my Renewed spirit. So the same thing is in Christ, which is also part of me, hence I am in Him and He in me.

A similar natural example would be conceiving a child. What is in the mother contains part of the father of her child. The foetus is also part of the mother.

headinhands · 12/04/2014 12:19

What does any of that have to do with knowing though? How do you know all things. Really? You know all things caps?

OP posts:
capsium · 12/04/2014 12:20

What part of you head is the same as Justin Bieber? I'm not sure I'd want to admit that if I were you...

headinhands · 12/04/2014 12:21

Yeah but the mother has her own brain. The dad could study masters level mathematics but the mother would need to for herself?

OP posts:
capsium · 12/04/2014 12:21

head yep it's all in there somewhere, rattling around, waiting to come out.

headinhands · 12/04/2014 12:22

what part of you...?

Good point. What part of you is Jesus?

OP posts:
headinhands · 12/04/2014 12:25

it's all in there somewhere

Sorry?

OP posts:
capsium · 12/04/2014 12:27

Believe it or not I have my own brain head.....I thought you knew about scientific stuff?