Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
"Statistically how?" "I would disagree with that assertion." "Of course, this is just your opinion."
When I said statistically, I actually meant it
The stats I use here are from a paper I got about a year ago, so the numbers may have changed by 1 or 2 since then, but unless there have been some major findings this year, they should be good enough.
"Historians evaluate the textual reliability of ancient literature according to two standards: (1) what the time interval is between the original and the earliest copy; and (2) how many manuscripts are available"
For anyone who doesn't understand the reasoning behind this, the time interval is important because the longer the interval between the original writing and the first copy we have, the more time there was for mistakes and for details to be changed. The number of manuscripts is also a good indicator of reliability because if someone wrote a history book that everyone
knew was fake, nobody would have made copies.
I can post the whole chart if I have to, but for the sake of saving time, I will just list a few key stats. According to the chart, one of the best (historically reliable) works of ancient literature is Homer's Iliad. We have 643 manuscipts, the earliest of which was written a mere 400 years after the Iliad.
Jesus isn't a Confucian -- that is, He didn't just sit under a tree and think up stuff to say.
Just like the book of Proverbs, where the [mundane] authors (Solomon, King Lemuel, et al.) actually experienced the advice they gave, Jesus did the same.
Yes, Jesus could create His own parable -- (like when He cursed the fig tree) -- but He used events that He, Himself actually witnessed.
Was he hiding behind a rock when the man travelling to Jericho was robbed and left for dead, and waited for the Samaritan just so he could tell a story about it later?
Jesus isn't a Confucian -- that is, He didn't just sit under a tree and think up stuff to say.
Just like the book of Proverbs, where the [mundane] authors (Solomon, King Lemuel, et al.) actually experienced the advice they gave, Jesus did the same.
Yes, Jesus could create His own parable -- (like when He cursed the fig tree) -- but He used events that He, Himself actually witnessed.
The Samaritan event was probably witnessed by Jesus as a young Boy.He's the Son of God- I don't think it'd take Him much more than a milisecond to come up with a morally viable parable. Plus, how could He have 'witnessed' events like the Prodigal Son? Or in the case of the Good Samaritan, why wouldn't Jesus have done something to help the man instead of waiting for a passer by? Or did He fear that'd 'ruin' His parable?
Your logic makes no sense.
The Samaritan event was probably witnessed by Jesus as a young Boy.
They say that Jesus' life as a youngster is not recorded in the Scriptures, but I somewhat disagree.
Like I said, He wasn't a Confucian.Or maybe being God he created them ex nihilo specificly so he could have a story to tell.
Like I said, He wasn't a Confucian.
The Samaritan event was probably witnessed by Jesus as a young Boy.
They say that Jesus' life as a youngster is not recorded in the Scriptures, but I somewhat disagree.
The Samaritan event was probably witnessed by Jesus as a young Boy.
They say that Jesus' life as a youngster is not recorded in the Scriptures, but I somewhat disagree.
I am, huh?Now you're just making stuff up, AV --
SOURCEBefore we go any farther, it’s interesting to note that this parable mirrors actual events familiar to those living in and around Jericho. Archelaus (Matthew 2:22), the son of Herod the Great (Matthew 2:1-19), went to Rome to ask that his father’s kingdom be restored to him, as it had been divided between Archelaus and his brother Herod Antipas. The kingdom was not restored to its original size until several years later, during the reign of Herod Agrippa II (Acts 25 and 26). Though there are obvious double meanings here (the spiritual ones, I’ll explain in a minute), Jesus describes in the parable what actually took place. While Archelaus went to Rome, the citizens sent an embassy to Augustus Caesar promising open rebellion against Rome if Archelaus got what he wanted (verse 14). Rome, stretched to the limit of its ability to govern the lands it had previously conquered, began the process of replacing Archelaus, who did everything he could to exact revenge on the people who rejected him before he was eventually deposed (verse 27).
I am not denying Jesus spoke in parables -- I am saying the parables are real, not fictitious.Nonsense. Pure nonsense. Nothing more, nothing less. Why is it so hard for you to accept that Jesus could communicate morality in parables?
Read my last post, please.You're the first person I've ever encountered with this twisted and fundamentally erroneous view of Jesus' parables...
I am not denying Jesus spoke in parables -- I am saying the parables are real, not fictitious.
Parable: A simple story illustrating a moral or religious lesson.
Read my last post, please.
Then maybe you need to get out more?
But until you do, don't lay your ignorance at my feet and expect me to agree -- okay?
He can't do both?You're suggesting that Jesus wasn't teaching the words of God, but rather recounting His previous life experiences.
No, I don't realize that -- especially in view of such verses as:Don't you realise that Jesus wasn't interested in giving others His own autobiography?
Believe me -- Jesus encountered more kings in the Old Testament than you'll ever know.Of course, that's inane- why Jesus would have encountered a king sending his unforgiving servant away or how Jesus ever owned a farm and hired workers for a single day is beyond anyone with a basic understanding of Jesus' life and teachings.
Either that, or you do.You also seem to undermine Jesus' status in Christianity-
Ya -- I read that in His Autobiography.He's the Son of an omniscient God.
Who said He did?He doesn't need to draw on His experiences for inspiration.
That was His style?Why would He?
You're suggesting that Jesus wasn't teaching the words of God, but rather recounting His previous life experiences. Don't you realise that Jesus wasn't interested in giving others His own autobiography? Of course, that's inane- why Jesus would have encountered a king sending his unforgiving servant away or how Jesus ever owned a farm and hired workers for a single day is beyond anyone with a basic understanding of Jesus' life and teachings.
So Jesus went to Rome and witnessed all this himself, eh, AV?
Link please?Or did you forget that that's what you were claiming?
The entire Bible is His Autobiography.
Believe me -- Jesus encountered more kings in the Old Testament than you'll ever know.
And setting kings aside, Who do you think Abraham tithed to, or Who do you think Jacob physically wrestled?
Surprising to whom?Surprising, considering his Earthly birth was long after those Kings went to dust.
-- What?
Link please?
Yes, Jesus could create His own parable -- (like when He cursed the fig tree) -- but He used events that He, Himself actually witnessed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?