.
When considering events from the past, it is wise to acknowledge that there is an element of doubt concerning truth and accuracy of accounts.
Reputable historians do not claim to know about past events down to details and exact words spoken. We do not even know the exact words Lincoln spoke in the Gettysburg Address. There are six different versions attributed to Lincoln himself.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/rea ... g-address/
That was less than 160 years ago with information directly from the source – and there is still uncertainty. That was the President of the US speaking at at time when newspapers were common and chroniclers / historians were active.
How much detail do we know about events and conversations 1000 years ago? It would be very foolish to claim knowledge about things from that period. Right?
Yet, people claim to know about details and conversations from 1990 years ago – down to exact words. Their information does NOT come directly from the source, but from writers years, decades, or generations later in literature promoting a splinter group religion.
It cannot be said that the actions and words of Jesus are preserved because he was an important person. He wasn't. He was only a wandering Jewish preacher who only lasted a few years and wasn't widely reported on during his era – quite the opposite of Lincoln who was important, widely known, and widely reported upon during his era.
How can anyone rationally claim to KNOW in detail what Jesus said and did?
Uncertainty
Moderator: Moderators
-
Zzyzx
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 25089
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
- Location: Bible Belt USA
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 73 times
Uncertainty
Post #1.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
-
Purple Knight
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3514
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
- Has thanked: 1139 times
- Been thanked: 733 times
Post #2
I wouldn't doubt that accounts passed down that way are generally based in fact.
But as you point out, there are six versions of the Gettysburg Address. It's like a game of telephone.
Two thousand years ago, there are certainly more "telephone holes" for correct information to fall through, or for incorrect information to seep in, such that a story may no longer even resemble itself.
The story of Jesus, despite being an incredibly well-kept one, has plenty of telephone holes. That's even assuming everyone on the phone is being honest.
It's not very clear how just a few loaves and fish were used to feed hundreds of people, for example. Were they giant? Was there a pot-luck? Did everyone have only a tiny morsel? This could have originally been a parable for restraint - not being greedy. It could have been about pitching in. Yet in modern day, people assume duplication magic.
The first thing to seep in through a telephone hole is magic, because it's extraordinary and people want the extraordinary to be true, so they hear it even when the last person didn't say it.
But as you point out, there are six versions of the Gettysburg Address. It's like a game of telephone.
Two thousand years ago, there are certainly more "telephone holes" for correct information to fall through, or for incorrect information to seep in, such that a story may no longer even resemble itself.
The story of Jesus, despite being an incredibly well-kept one, has plenty of telephone holes. That's even assuming everyone on the phone is being honest.
It's not very clear how just a few loaves and fish were used to feed hundreds of people, for example. Were they giant? Was there a pot-luck? Did everyone have only a tiny morsel? This could have originally been a parable for restraint - not being greedy. It could have been about pitching in. Yet in modern day, people assume duplication magic.
The first thing to seep in through a telephone hole is magic, because it's extraordinary and people want the extraordinary to be true, so they hear it even when the last person didn't say it.
-
Overcomer
- Guru
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:44 am
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 32 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
Post #3
First of all, we have a lot more than six copies of the books of the Bible. We have over 200 Old Testament manuscripts (with the Dead Sea Scrolls testifying as to how well they were transmitted down through the centuries), and 5800 New Testament manuscripts in Greek have been catalogued. And there are tens of thousands of early New Testament manuscripts in a variety of other languages such as Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, and Slavic just to name a few.
Here's the world's leading textual critic talking about it:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blog ... nuscripts/
Why is having so many copies significant? It means that we can compare and compare and compare. And they're finding more documents all the time. This group is devoted to ferreting out manuscripts and digitlizing every copy we have:
http://www.csntm.org/
You can find a series of talks on their work here:
https://danielbwallace.com/tag/biblical-manuscripts/
Here's the thing:
Did the six different Lincoln addresses differ in meaning, tone, etc,? No. So the fact that it was not recorded verbatim is immaterial.
I have stated this elsewhere and will state it again. Ancient biography differs from modern biography. Those who recorded the lives of great men used a variety of devices which allow for accuracy if not precision. Here is a link to my most recent explanation of it:
viewtopic.php?p=1000377#1000377
As to it being like the telephone game, that is a poor and inapt comparison. Here's why, as explained by Amy Hall at Stand To Reason:
First, the goal of the telephone game is to see how badly the story can get misrepresented, while the goal of New Testament copying was by and large to produce very careful, accurate copies of the original.
Second, in the telephone game there is only one line of transmission, while with the New Testament there are multiple lines of transmission.
Third, one is oral, recited once in another’s ear, while the other is written, copied by a faithful scribe who then would check his or her work or have someone else do it.
Fourth, in the telephone game only the wording of the last person in the line can be checked, while for the New Testament textual critics have access to many of the earlier texts, some going back very close to the time of the autographs.
Fifth, even the ancient scribes had access to earlier texts, and would often check their work against a manuscript that was many generations older than their immediate ancestor. The average papyrus manuscript would last for a century or more. Thus, even a late second-century scribe could have potentially examined the original document he or she was copying.
https://www.str.org/blog/the-bible-is-n ... lg_oCE3kdU
Here's the world's leading textual critic talking about it:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blog ... nuscripts/
Why is having so many copies significant? It means that we can compare and compare and compare. And they're finding more documents all the time. This group is devoted to ferreting out manuscripts and digitlizing every copy we have:
http://www.csntm.org/
You can find a series of talks on their work here:
https://danielbwallace.com/tag/biblical-manuscripts/
Here's the thing:
Did the six different Lincoln addresses differ in meaning, tone, etc,? No. So the fact that it was not recorded verbatim is immaterial.
I have stated this elsewhere and will state it again. Ancient biography differs from modern biography. Those who recorded the lives of great men used a variety of devices which allow for accuracy if not precision. Here is a link to my most recent explanation of it:
viewtopic.php?p=1000377#1000377
As to it being like the telephone game, that is a poor and inapt comparison. Here's why, as explained by Amy Hall at Stand To Reason:
First, the goal of the telephone game is to see how badly the story can get misrepresented, while the goal of New Testament copying was by and large to produce very careful, accurate copies of the original.
Second, in the telephone game there is only one line of transmission, while with the New Testament there are multiple lines of transmission.
Third, one is oral, recited once in another’s ear, while the other is written, copied by a faithful scribe who then would check his or her work or have someone else do it.
Fourth, in the telephone game only the wording of the last person in the line can be checked, while for the New Testament textual critics have access to many of the earlier texts, some going back very close to the time of the autographs.
Fifth, even the ancient scribes had access to earlier texts, and would often check their work against a manuscript that was many generations older than their immediate ancestor. The average papyrus manuscript would last for a century or more. Thus, even a late second-century scribe could have potentially examined the original document he or she was copying.
https://www.str.org/blog/the-bible-is-n ... lg_oCE3kdU
Post #4
If something lacks credibility, as does much of the Bible, it should be questioned and not accepted as factual. Biblical literalists accept everything in the Bible to be true, because they believe god put the words into the minds of the authors.
Re: Uncertainty
Post #5[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]
Neither of these groups are alive today so anyone that's breathing today can't legitimately know what he said, much less meant. It's all biased speculation from second, third...sixtieth hand... accounts.
People claiming otherwise are, at best, misinformed, at worst: liars.
The only one that can claim to know what he meant legitimately is Jesus himself. The only ones to know what he said was him and those immediately around him.How can anyone rationally claim to KNOW in detail what Jesus said and did?
Neither of these groups are alive today so anyone that's breathing today can't legitimately know what he said, much less meant. It's all biased speculation from second, third...sixtieth hand... accounts.
People claiming otherwise are, at best, misinformed, at worst: liars.
