Gospel of John

[polonius]

There are disputes about who really authored the Gospels. One of the most interesting is the Gospel of John.

Is there evidence against his authorship? If so, what evidence?

[JehovahsWitness]

Well first you will need to prove.....................................
- that Jesus assaulted anyone

G-John:{2:15} And when he had made a scourge of
small cords, he drove them all out of the temple,.............

Okay he had a cord whip in his possession. He drove the merchants out. Now, like I said, all you have to do is prove he assaulted anyone.

[JehovahsWitness]

Every Jewish male had to pay a half-shekel to the Temple each year. There was only one type of coin allowed, the Tyrian half-shekel (or the full shekel could pay for two men together). The money-changers were the lawfully appointed providers of these coins.

Now all that is lacking is your providing a reference to the actual law that authorises money-changers. There are only 613, find and quote the one that mentions money changers.

All the above persons were lawfully appointed.

May I ask if you ever intend to actually provide evidence of the Law in question, because just saying there were laws authorising these things hardly proves that there were.

...Now if you need help on this, I can quote the laws that apply to the above for you..... if you need me to show you....

Yes I do need you to quote the laws that apply to the above for me.

Thanks for asking,


JW

[oldbadger]

Since Jesus was “about thirty years old� at the time of his baptism in 29 C.E. (Lu 3:23), his birth took place 30 years earlier, or about the fall of the year 2 B.C.E.

I see plenty of problems but just one for now........
Herod the Great died in 4BC, after Jesus was born. which would make Jesus much older.
or...

The Syrian Legate Cyrenius (Quirinius) held a Census on Augustus's Instructions in 6CE, after which Jesus was born, which would make him much younger.

Or would you like to refute those dates?

[JehovahsWitness]

- that he caused any damage.....

G-John: ...............and poured out the changers’ money,
and overthrew the tables;

Metal coins are rarely damaged because they are fall to the ground, and he overturned the tables he didn't take an axe to them. Do you have anything that isn't assumption?

[JehovahsWitness]

The Syrian Legate Cyrenius (Quirinius) held a Census on Augustus's Instructions in 6CE, after which Jesus was born, which would make him much younger.

Or would you like to refute those dates?

I already did. Perhaps you missed my post on the subject.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 863#831863

[JehovahsWitness]

That's your interpretation. All Jewish people were the children of Jehovah. The Temple was their house, all together, and they were expected to respect it ...Now if you need help on this, I can quote the laws that apply to the above for you..... if you need me to show you....

I agree that all Jews were to absolutely respect, the temple, I have no problem with that,I would however be interested in the support for the temple being their house as opposed to God's... nothing like that comes to mind but I am ready to stand corrected on that one,


Thanks,


JW

[Tetragrammaton]

Responses to topics with "but first you have to prove that the Bible is true" is not allowed here.

Thanks for the memo, I did miss it.

However I never said those words, but you did try to put them in my mouth.

Nice try, but all I said was:

If you are searching for the truth in the claims of the bible, you cannot use the bible as evidence to confirm things in the bible.

which is not the same as:
"but first you have to prove that the Bible is true"


All it was being debated was, if the gospels were eyewitnesses accounts and not that they are not true or authoritative as text in this sub-forum.

Their meaning is not authoritative, the books are considered authoritative to support some claims about Jesus life, not authoritative to discuss if they were eyewitnesses accounts or not.

If you think that is not allowed, you are being unreasonable and dodging the argument.

Thus far you have provided nothing to show they were eyewitnesses accounts.

The authoritative gospels themselves never claim this, NONE, and its one of the few things they agree about.

[JehovahsWitness]

all I said was:

If you are searching for the truth in the claims of the bible, you cannot use the bible as evidence to confirm things in the bible.

I already agreed with that. I however have completed my search and have concluded the bible is true and am now presenting it's contents as evidence of truth. The writer of John confirms he was an eyewitness of events. That statement is in the bible, therefore it is evidence supporting the conclusion

And your response is...?

[Tetragrammaton]

all I said was:

If you are searching for the truth in the claims of the bible, you cannot use the bible as evidence to confirm things in the bible.

I already agreed with that. I however have completed my search and have concluded the bible is true and am now presenting it's contents as evidence of truth.

And your response is...?

The contents of the bible are being assumed as authoritative, not as evidence of truth.

Your research has to find evidence outside the assumption to be considered evidence.

What you can say is that in matters of doctrine you can find evidence to support your claims.
YOU NEED TO SPECIFY

Claiming that all it's content is true is well known not to be true even among christian historians.

In this subforum the canon of the Bible is considered authoritative with respect to the historical consensus of the canon's content.

[JehovahsWitness]

Claiming that all it's content is true is well known not to be true even among christian historians.

So what are you saying about my evidence, ie the writers claim to be an eyewitness... he swears his account is true ... do you perhaps have a question... or a challenge ...

Maybe specifically on the question of the truth ...

... of the assurances of ... the Bible?


Lol ... in your own words of course lol..