Theological Stew

[Bibleinvestigations]

I did not say anything about that ,did I?

Sorry if I took the reference to 2 Peter as a claim of me presenting heresy, because I consider everything outside of scripture to be heresy, because it is all second hand at best information and that is not evidence.

 

[Bibleinvestigations]

Ok. Well that would be another discussion in and of itself.

But let me ask, why do you think the Lord would allow the church throughout the last 2 millennium to believe the Gospels were written by those who didn't actually write them? And if it were true, why would it be spiritually significant? Again, I have my own view, but I'm searching for what you think is the spiritual import in needing to know this information, assuming it is true.

That’s in the second investigation, “A Gospel Naming Fraud”. Incidentally, everything was prophesized. That’s the beauty of it all, God predicted the whole future of the church 2,600 years ago to Daniel and reaffirmed it and provided more details in John’s Revelation.

 

[Free]

It has everything to do with scripture verse tradition. What is the truth? I’m an investigator who searches and reports on the truth. The truth is scripture and that points to Jesus!!!

The point is, there is no evidence for the authors you claim and some evidence for the names that are on the gospels, not to mention church tradition from fairly early puts the names to them. In the very least there is as much evidence for the traditional names versus the names you gave, although Nicodemus is a stretch to say the least; Matthew is a far more likely candidate behind that he was an actual disciple and apostle. And if the majority of reputable and relevant scholars say there is no reason to doubt the names of the books, then there is no reason to believe otherwise.

It has nothing to do with scripture versus tradition. In the end, if the apostles and close companions of them wrote the gospels, it is irrelevant which ones.

 

[Hidden In Him]

That’s in the second investigation, “A Gospel Naming Fraud”

Ok, maybe you're not doing it intentionally, but despite saying you are not here to sell books, your answer appears to suggest you are. You need to give others answers to their questions, not direct them to yet another of your works.

 

[Bibleinvestigations]

Again, I don't wish to sound confrontational - just trying to understand - but why can people not find Jesus by simply accepting that tradition that the Gospels were written by the four men the church said wrote them? Is it that timing thing again? I don't think I've heard of anyone professing that this was an obstacle to believing before.

I hope to never sound confrontational and I don’t see your question as that either. The goal is to worship only Jesus. If you find Jesus and focus only on him amongst the tradition in the church, than my message does not matter to you, and you are blessed. However, tradition has a very damaging effect on many people like it did to me. The Lord has me addressing tradition for people like me.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I hope to never sound confrontational and I don’t see your question as that either. The goal is to worship only Jesus. If you find Jesus and focus only on him amongst the tradition in the church, than my message does not matter to you, and you are blessed. However, tradition has a very damaging effect on many people like it did to me. The Lord has me addressing tradition for people like me.

Ok.

There are certainly a lot of people who have problems with church traditions, and some are justified in it. I just don't believe I've heard this one before.

 

[Bibleinvestigations]

The point is, there is no evidence for the authors you claim and some evidence for the names that are on the gospels, not to mention church tradition from fairly early puts the names to them. In the very least there is as much evidence for the traditional names versus the names you gave, although Nicodemus is a stretch to say the least; Matthew is a far more likely candidate behind that he was an actual disciple and apostle. And if the majority of reputable and relevant scholars say there is no reason to doubt the names of the books, then there is no reason to believe otherwise.

It has nothing to do with scripture versus tradition. In the end, if the apostles and close companions of them wrote the gospels, it is irrelevant which ones.

Tradition is not evidence - it is stories. Actually, my wife is a lifetime 60 year Baptist and thought I was crazy until she saw the evidence in the book for Nicodemus. The evidence for Nicodemus as the author of Matthew is actually overwhelming and explains the reason why so much of Matthew was copied from Mark.

 

[Free]

Tradition is not evidence - it is stories.

But they were significant closer to the events and writings than you or I.

I just don’t see the relevance at all, so I’m going to bow out.

 

[Bibleinvestigations]

Tradition is not evidence - it is stories. Actually, my wife is a lifetime 60 year Baptist and thought I was crazy until she saw the evidence in the book for Nicodemus. The evidence for Nicodemus as the author of Matthew is actually overwhelming and explains the reason why so much of Matthew was copied from Mark.

BTW, I’m open to all evidence. The words of those who came after the disciples are especially suspect considering that John claimed that everyone they were selecting to run tair over the church from them were false teachers.

 

[Bibleinvestigations]

BTW, I’m open to all evidence. The words of those who came after the disciples are especially suspect considering that John claimed that everyone they were selecting to run tair over the church from them were false teachers.

I’ll close tonight by welcoming any and all theologians to join in and have an open, honest, and friendly debate on the subject.

 

[hawkman]

In general, i compared accounts of stories to look for eyewitness details then backed out the authors based on who could have née present to witness events. There are enough variations in the stories with eyewitness details to indicate different writers and when I took into account who copied from who and why, the answers were revealed. There are certain events captured in Matthew that only a Pharisee could witness. Acts is clearly Peter telling his story to Silas who tags along with Paul for a good while.

Consider this , not everyone knows how to write even now and back then very few could write , but unless they are blind they can be an eyewitness . Matthew could have copied the scribes notes that were present with Jesus and the Pharisees .

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Hello Everyone,

three years ago I nearly died from a stroke during surgery and the Lord reached out to me as I was dying. Since then I’ve dedicated myself to investigating scripture to find the truth. the Holy Spirit has revealed to me that the story of Jesus is real. Amen and praise the Lord. However, the Holy Spirit also has provided me messages to share - mainly the theological stew created by people that muddies up the word of God. I’ve been kicked off three forums for simply opening up a discussion on the subjec, bu5 I hope I found a h9me here to have an open, hon, and completely facts based discussion about the Word of God!

I welcome discussion but a dose of humility would be better than the lofty “the Holy Spirit himself has been teaching me truth and I’m here to impart it to you poor souls stuck in the muck of mere man’s thinking. “

Now what occurred to me as I read your testimony, is that while that sounds impressive and I am very glad you’ve come to know the truth, I came to know that same truth as a grade school child. I didn’t need a stroke to realize the truth. So your realization of Jesus being true took a major act on Gods part whereas many simply believed being more teachable.

Can you, oh learner direct from God, take that kind of gentle rebuke?

Make no mistake, this is a test.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Jesus (God) handpicked twelve disciples, commissioned them to start the church, then people named Matthew, Mark, and Luke and one of the disciples waited years to write them? This was the source of my doubts I had to address. The story of a Jesus is great but the story of the authors lacks credibility when considering God is in charge.

If the Holy Spirit is personally teaching you, He ought to know the complexities of God’s ways with man and that God is not micromanaging the world.

I have the Holy Spirit but I don’t claim everything I think and know came from Him. But He gives wisdom to those who ask.

The gospels were written within the lifetimes of those men, that is before 65 AD. That’s 30+ years after the events, well within correct memory allowance. The men who wrote them would have needed time for their understanding to mature. I don’t see why this is a problem.

And that’s not a theological matter. It’s a historical one, except, of course, the assumption that God is controlling everything everyone does. That’s a theological error.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

God is all knowing in charge of everything.

Then why do people refuse to do the will of God?

He is all knowing but He is not “in charge” of what WE CHOOSE to do. This is obvious if you look around or even inside.

The Gospel author story put the start of the church in the hands of men who ‘helped’ the eyewitnesses?

Who are these? Never heard that. The Gospels were written by those it says, eyewitnesses of much of it.

Did Jesus pick eyewitnesses who needed help?

No. Solved that one easily.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

So tell me what qualified Matthew, Mark, and Luke to write Gospels? We know very little about these men, but we know a lot about the inner circle disciples. How can you suggest it isn’t an issue, when it kept me damned to hell until I found the truth and became a solid believer? The only proof of authorship is in the Gospels, anything other claims are heresey.

They didn’t claim qualifications. They just recorded what they knew. They didn’t know they were writing the Bible. Others read it found it inspired. Why do you, who supposedly heard from the Holy Spirit, doubt these works? That’s the question. If you were filled with faith from the H Spirit, why is doubting the Word of God a fruit?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I think the Gospels are eyewitness testimony but the names are inaccurate.

Why is this important to you?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I only believe scripture and take everything in context.

RBDERRICK, see? Everyone claims they only teach scripture. Even this guy who doubts the authorship of some gospels. His whole faith rests on the authenticity of the gospels and he doubts their authenticity. He saws off the branch he is sitting on and nevertheless claims to “only believe scripture.”

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Sorry if I took the reference to 2 Peter as a claim of me presenting heresy, because I consider everything outside of scripture to be heresy, because it is all second hand at best information and that is not evidence.

You need to study what heresy is. But by your definition here, your extra biblical revelations are heresy. They are outside of scripture. You again saw off the branch your sitting on or in this case, you saw off the whole tree.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Tradition is not evidence - it is stories. Actually, my wife is a lifetime 60 year Baptist and thought I was crazy until she saw the evidence in the book for Nicodemus. The evidence for Nicodemus as the author of Matthew is actually overwhelming and explains the reason why so much of Matthew was copied from Mark.

Why is this important? Jesus said those who keep his teaching will know the truth, not those who figure out who wrote what piece.

 

[Bibleinvestigations]

Consider this , not everyone knows how to write even now and back then very few could write , but unless they are blind they can be an eyewitness . Matthew could have copied the scribes notes that were present with Jesus and the Pharisees .

Did John write his own Gospel? is so than it is very reasonless to find that James wrote the Gospel of Mark. Could Nicodemus write? Certainly becausebh3 was a religious leader. Could Peter write? The evidence seems to indicate he could not Because he used the scribe Silas who, incidentally Paul also co-authored letters with. Silas was with Peter and Paul and was a scribe? What do you know about Matthew, Mark, and Luke? Hardly anything except what some people told you later on years after they were dead.