Fine detail in the gospels: made up or not?

[ippy]

I can't refute his statements but whenever I see indications of 'god doctor' it does incline me to switch them off and go elsewhere back  into the real world, also I couldn't help noticing his Narnia stuff, aimed at children.

Unless we one day see all over the media, as it would be, proof of god found! I have no trouble switching off all of these rather strange godly ideas, for that's all they are at the moment.

ippy

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Easily done.

Do people ever lie?

1) Yes;

Easily countered.
Do people tell the truth........Yes.

Sorry to piss on your bonfire Shakes.

[Nearly Sane]

Easily countered.
Do people tell the truth........Yes.

Sorry to piss on your bonfire Shakes.

Again that isn't a counter.

[Shaker]

Easily countered.
Do people tell the truth........Yes.

Sorry to piss on your bonfire Shakes.

The bonfire is still ablaze.

So people lie and people tell the truth. How do you tell the difference between the two?

[Sebastian Toe]

Easily countered.
Do people tell the truth........Yes.

So, this Mohammad chap.
Telling the truth or the perpetrator of the (2nd?) Biggest con in history?

Carrful now...

[Stranger]

Easily countered.
Do people tell the truth........Yes.

Do you really not get how utterly ridiculous you are being? Yes, people tell the truth, they also lie, and make mistakes (for lots of reasons).

There is always a risk of lies and mistakes in any document (to some degree or another) - so why are you (apparently) trying to assert that the gospels are free of that risk?

[Spud]

Police statements regarding the Hillsborough disaster, Profumo's assurances in the HoC, President 'have a cigar' Clinton's assurances about his sexual conduct etc etc etc.

Making mistakes and telling lies are known human behaviours, so they are clear risks when it comes to anecdotal accounts of uncertain provenance: tell me, Vlad, do you believe everything you read or are told?

In those cases the people lied to get themselves out of trouble. The gospels contain teaching that was certain to get the authors into trouble from the religious leaders, such as the claim that Jesus had declared all food to be 'clean', or the seven woes against the pharisees in Matthew 23.

[Spud]

Oh come on, claims are made about a lot things, which aren't credible. The Benny Hinn guy has claimed his healing scam has made amputated limbs grow back!

Do you have a link for that Floo? I watched some disturbing videos of his antics on youtube last night. Apparently the people who go up to the front are vetted as they queue, and not allowed up if its thought they won't be healed. So I think the 'healing' that does occur is psychosomatic. But I don't think we can say that about the resurrection and all the other miracles in the gospels.

[Nearly Sane]

Do you have a link for that Floo? I watched some disturbing videos of his healing services on youtube last night. Apparently the people who go up for healing are vetted as they queue, and not allowed up if its thought they won't be healed. So I think the 'healing' that does occur is psychosomatic. But I don't think we can say that about the resurrection and all the other miracles in the gospels.

His are televised, unlike any claim in the gospels.

[Gordon]

In those cases the people lied to get themselves out of trouble. The gospels contain teaching that was certain to get the authors into trouble from the religious leaders, such as the claim that Jesus had declared all food to be 'clean', or the seven woes against the pharisees in Matthew 23.

In what way does this address the risks of mistakes or lies in the content of the NT, such as in the details you note here. That supporters of a cause might suffer as a consequence does not imply that their cause is justified.

[Gordon]

Do you have a link for that Floo? I watched some disturbing videos of his antics on youtube last night. Apparently the people who go up to the front are vetted as they queue, and not allowed up if its thought they won't be healed. So I think the 'healing' that does occur is psychosomatic. But I don't think we can say that about the resurrection and all the other miracles in the gospels.

So you reject Hinn on the basis that he might not be a miracle worker but you don't extend this same scepticism to the resurrection and miracle claims in the NT - why don't you?

[Shaker]

Do you have a link for that Floo? I watched some disturbing videos of his antics on youtube last night. Apparently the people who go up to the front are vetted as they queue, and not allowed up if its thought they won't be healed. So I think the 'healing' that does occur is psychosomatic. But I don't think we can say that about the resurrection and all the other miracles in the gospels.

Why are they a special case?

[floo]

Do you have a link for that Floo? I watched some disturbing videos of his antics on youtube last night. Apparently the people who go up to the front are vetted as they queue, and not allowed up if its thought they won't be healed. So I think the 'healing' that does occur is psychosomatic. But I don't think we can say that about the resurrection and all the other miracles in the gospels.

So if Hinn can fool the gullible into believing he has performed miracles, why couldn't Jesus have done the same?

[Shaker]

That's three examples of essentially the same question in a row. I wonder if we'll be graced with an answer?

[jeremyp]

WRONGGG!!!!!!!!!!
Of course these days vox populi trumps expertise.
I think Professor Lewis would have recognised the differences in the fine detail between the New Testament and the Iliad.

It's absurd to suggest that that the gospels were in any way revolutionary as works of fiction. There are plenty of other works from the period or before with fine detail in them. Lewis presumably ignored them to serve his confirmation bias.

[jeremyp]

Was the Iliad the only book you were thinking of?

No. It was merely one I assumed you might have heard of.

What makes the gospels different is the claim that God became a man

Really.

I wrote a book about how God came down and incarnated in the form of Gerald, my pet hamster. I'm pretty sure no other story has ever made that claim before. Therefore, by your logic, my story is true.

That seems to be what CS Lewis is getting at.

There seems to be some doubt in your mind. Do you want to take some time to get things straight. While you are doing that, look up Aristophanes and Virgil.

[jeremyp]

The other thing is that the Iliad is thought to have been written centuries after the events it was based on,

The Iliad is fiction.

so that at the time of writing the supernatural events that embellish it obviously couldn't be confirmed by living eyewitnesses.

Neither could the supernatural events described in the Gospels.

The gospels however contain numerous references to living eyewitnesses

Which eye witnesses were still alive when each of the gospels were written. The time period in question is ~70CE to ~90CE. Give evidence for your claims.

who could be questioned by the first readers. Eg Jairus, Alphaeus, Simon of Cyrene

Where is your evidence that any of these people were still alive when the gospels were written.

Paul sums it up in 1 Corinthians 15:6: "Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep."

5,000 people witnessed the death and resurrection of Gerald my pet hamster. You need to start worshipping him now.

[jeremyp]

So people lie and people tell the truth. How do you tell the difference between the two?

People who lie often embellish their invented stories with many small details because they believe it gives them the hallmark of authenticity...

... oh, wait...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Erm,erm,erm,erm,erm,erm,erm, .......Iliad!
Ha Ha Ha.

[jeremyp]

Erm,erm,erm,erm,erm,erm,erm, .......Iliad!
Ha Ha Ha.

Your point?

[Nearly Sane]

Erm,erm,erm,erm,erm,erm,erm, .......Iliad!
Ha Ha Ha.

Nope, even for 3-2-1 that would be thrown out as gibberish

[ProfessorDavey]

The bonfire is still ablaze.

So people lie and people tell the truth. How do you tell the difference between the two?

More relevant is that people misinterpret or misrepresent what was actually said or reported when recording it decades later.

Send three and fourpence we're going to a dance.

[Stranger]

Send three and fourpence we're going to a dance.

Blessed are the cheese makers?

He says some Greek's going to inherit the Earth!   

[From Life of Brian]

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Sorry atheist guys, you either universally apply the principles you are here outlining or else it's special pleading, genetic fallacyville.

[Nearly Sane]

Sorry atheist guys, you either universally apply the principles you are here outlining or else it's special pleading, genetic fallacyville.

Which principles do you think which people are applying consistently?