Debating specific details of Bible stories

[Zzyzx]

.
Often in these threads there is debate about details of New Testament stories, sometimes hinging on the exact meaning of words used by Jesus and/or upon the intent of various writers.

HOW can anyone know exactly what Jesus may have said 2000 years ago? He did not leave writings that we can examine. There do not appear to have been records of his words made at the time. The earliest surviving records were compiled hundreds of years later. How can anyone know the intent of ancient writers?

The Gospels are said to have been written decades or generations after the supposed speeches – by people who cannot be identified with any agreement or certainty by Christian scholars and theologians. There is no way to verify the truth and accuracy of the ‘quotations’. There are no outside / disconnected sources to support the claims (particularly those of supernatural or ‘miracle’ nature).

The writings were selected by churchmen (under auspices of Roman officials) to reflect certain points of view – and were subject to various translations, editing, revisions, and hand copying by scribes over the centuries; resulting in fifty versions of the Bible in English alone.

Yet, people claim to know exactly what was said and what was meant by statements and individual words.

HOW can they know such things?

[JJ50]

.
Often in these threads there is debate about details of New Testament stories, sometimes hinging on the exact meaning of words used by Jesus and/or upon the intent of various writers.

HOW can anyone know exactly what Jesus may have said 2000 years ago? He did not leave writings that we can examine. There do not appear to have been records of his words made at the time. The earliest surviving records were compiled hundreds of years later. How can anyone know the intent of ancient writers?

The Gospels are said to have been written decades or generations after the supposed speeches – by people who cannot be identified with any agreement or certainty by Christian scholars and theologians. There is no way to verify the truth and accuracy of the ‘quotations’. There are no outside / disconnected sources to support the claims (particularly those of supernatural or ‘miracle’ nature).

The writings were selected by churchmen (under auspices of Roman officials) to reflect certain points of view – and were subject to various translations, editing, revisions, and hand copying by scribes over the centuries; resulting in fifty versions of the Bible in English alone.

Yet, people claim to know exactly what was said and what was meant by statements and individual words.

HOW can they know such things?

I agree. No one can quote accurately what a long dead person is supposed to have said years later.

[Jagella]

Traditionally, orthodox Christians have said that the accuracy of the scriptures is a matter of faith. It is the Holy Spirit, not the human writers, that orthodox Christians put their faith in.

That's exactly right, but many Bible scholars today are taking the faith-based documents of the New Testament and telling us that much of it is history. Christianity is being privileged as the only religion whose stories have been historicized. So we have a "historical" Jesus but no such historical Thor, Zeus, or Osiris.

[Zzyzx]

.

I agree. No one can quote accurately what a long dead person is supposed to have said years later.

Yes. Can any of us claim to accurately recall, word for word, extended speeches we heard thirty or fifty years ago?

[Tcg]

.

I agree. No one can quote accurately what a long dead person is supposed to have said years later.

Yes. Can any of us claim to accurately recall, word for word, extended speeches we heard thirty or fifty years ago?

We can see on this forum, and others like it, where posters can't accurately report what other posters stated a few days or even hours before. Of course in some cases it may be an intentional misrepresentation, but at times it clearly is an honest mistake related to faulty memory.


Not too long ago, a poster here thanked me for agreeing with them though in reality, they quoted themselves thinking I had made the statement. Granted, nested quotes can lead to confusion, but when a poster can't even recognize their own words hours after they wrote them, how can we expect others to accurately quote words spoken decades previously. It's simply not a reasonable conclusion.


Oh, and by the way, some making these mistakes on forums claim to have the Holy Spirit guiding them. If that is the case, it seems to suffer from the same memory issues humans do.




Tcg