Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Maybe Matt Ward wrote that half?

Brushfire wrote:Right off, I have to disagree with Ehrman's contention that since John and Peter supposition they were"unlettered", hence, illiterate. It's very likely they raised in the tradition to ready and study the Torah as children, so while they may not be formerly schooled like the Pharisees were, they most likely could read and write. Plus many of the apostles, even Paul, used scribes.

I forget the word, but it's a certain kind of Rabii (Jesus was one) but supposedly all the disciples were also of the same rank and one of the requirements for it was to be able to read and write. They may not have known Greek though and likely knew Aramaic instead. Paul of course wasn't one of Jesus' disciples.

Gitkikka wrote:Maybe Matt Ward wrote that half?

That would explain the whole drink my blood thing.

The guy does bring up a good point in that Acts 4:13 says that Peter and John are unschooled.

As in, they didn't know how to read or write.
Which is a problem since, well, they supposedly wrote 2 of the books in the New Testament.

Heres to hoping this is all over in... what, which doomsayer are we believing these days?

Frazzled wrote:

Gitkikka wrote:Maybe Matt Ward wrote that half?

That would explain the whole drink my blood thing.

I wonderd how long it would take a Matt Ward comment to pop up, thought i should throw it in myself, a bit too late though....

Doomthumbs wrote:The guy does bring up a good point in that Acts 4:13 says that Peter and John are unschooled.

As in, they didn't know how to read or write.
Which is a problem since, well, they supposedly wrote 2 of the books in the New Testament.

Heres to hoping this is all over in... what, which doomsayer are we believing these days?

What they didn't have secretaries in 8 BC? No ghost writers? No gag writers?

Doomthumbs wrote:The guy does bring up a good point in that Acts 4:13 says that Peter and John are unschooled.

As in, they didn't know how to read or write.
Which is a problem since, well, they supposedly wrote 2 of the books in the New Testament.

Heres to hoping this is all over in... what, which doomsayer are we believing these days?

I could be wrong, but maybe they just dictated it to someone else to write down, which obviously means its not going to be 100% what they wanted to say.
I also vaguely remember hearing that they didn't write it at all, it was written later on after stories were passed on...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

Doomthumbs wrote:The guy does bring up a good point in that Acts 4:13 says that Peter and John are unschooled.

As in, they didn't know how to read or write.
Which is a problem since, well, they supposedly wrote 2 of the books in the New Testament.

Heres to hoping this is all over in... what, which doomsayer are we believing these days?

What they didn't have secretaries in 8 BC?

Where would we be without you Frazzled?

Frazzled wrote:
What they didn't have secretaries in 8 BC?

Sure they did! They were all over the place, in all different sections of the Mediterranean.
Unfortunately, none of them write about Jesus until about 600 years AD.
Also, "The Bible" (king james version) is 400 years old, this year.
Just saying that theres a lot of room for whaaaaaat in there.

Cyporiean wrote:

I was thinking of posting the quote from this

Personally as an atheist I would suggest that all holy books/slates/rock carvings/etc are entirely man made with no divine inspiration or intervention.

What I would really love to see is the Vatican archives opened up to the world so we can see how religious works have been changed, dropped, adopted, emphasised, re-translated and so on through history. I choose the Vatican as they have existed for a good portion of the time Christianity has been around and they must have all sorts of documents stored.

Given the length of time, the number of translations, the amount of "politics" and the amount of material that is lifted pretty much word for word from other cultures and religions I think it is safe to say that the "bible" is almost nothing like the "original" collected works of the disciples, assuming that such a thing existed as a complete series of works.

SilverMK2 wrote:

Cyporiean wrote:

I was thinking of posting the quote from this

Personally as an atheist I would suggest that all holy books/slates/rock carvings/etc are entirely man made with no divine inspiration or intervention.

You would be wrong.

What I would really love to see is the Vatican archives opened up to the world so we can see how religious works have been changed, dropped, adopted, emphasised, re-translated and so on through history. I choose the Vatican as they have existed for a good portion of the time Christianity has been around and they must have all sorts of documents stored.

Wussy, the Eastern Orthodox church is older. They've got all the cool alien artifacts and such. They just want you to think the Vatican has it.

Additionally, but speaking of dropping, I don't know about you but dropping a Bible on your foot can really hurt.

Doomthumbs wrote:The guy does bring up a good point in that Acts 4:13 says that Peter and John are unschooled.

As in, they didn't know how to read or write.
Which is a problem since, well, they supposedly wrote 2 of the books in the New Testament.

It's unlikely any of the NT books were written by the Apostles. John has traditionally been associated with the Gospel of John, the Epistles of John, and Revelation. Peter is associated with no NT book and it's highly unlikely John the Apostle wrote any of the books ascribed to him. John was a very common name (like it still is). John of Patmos wrote Revelation and John the Evangelist wrote the Epistles, and the Gospel of John has no known author. The book just has his name on it and lots of people assume he wrote it even though no evidence of his authorship exists.

Lots of Christians have hung onto traditional views of authorship that theological scholars have long known to be false, but the typical Christian doesn't even read the Bible, let alone know its origins. Ehrman is just being inflammatory.

What I would really love to see is the Vatican archives opened up to the world so we can see how religious works have been changed, dropped, adopted, emphasised, re-translated and so on through history. I choose the Vatican as they have existed for a good portion of the time Christianity has been around and they must have all sorts of documents stored.

You don't need to go to the Vatican to find that. There are Bibles still in existence from throughout history. Someone with enough time could probably track the evolution of entire books if they wanted. I'm unsure if anyone has ever tried.

I am confused by this, I thought it was somewhat common knowledge among scholars that:

1. As there was no print press the the common means of mass producing works of literature was to hand write copies (in this case usually by devout monks) but as such any variations could still have occured even with individuals with the best intentions.

2. The earliest 'copy' of new testement scripture was somewhere around 90 AD, the original scirptures where thought to be penned around 50 AD so a good 40 years worth of copying had elapsed.

3. As the various scriptures were canonized many versions of each book had to be 'weeded' out to find the one that was thought to be most in line with other known works of the authors and in addition many other books supposedly written by some of the same authors or people who claimed to know Jesus where left out because at the time those responsible for canonization didnt think the message fit with the rest of the scriptures.

Therefore, wasnt it already pretty much known that what we know today as 'the bible' was more or less a series of copies of copies that seemed to 'go well' together and there was no way to know whether they were really the original teachings but believers are okay with this because the collection was at least divinly inspired?

So this author says kind of the same things but it a bit more inflamatory way and CNN publishes it as news ..do i have the right or am i wrong?

Wait so now you're telling me Paul's Second Letter to the Laundromat is a fake? Blasphemer!

Frazzled wrote:You would be wrong.

And you would be stating your opinion.

Wussy, the Eastern Orthodox church is older. They've got all the cool alien artifacts and such. They just want you to think the Vatican has it.

But do they have such extensive archives?

Additionally, but speaking of dropping, I don't know about you but dropping a Bible on your foot can really hurt.

Depends if it is on microfilm or on a USB stick or printed in large font

Is this thread supposed to be funny?

2. The earliest 'copy' of new testement scripture was somewhere around 90 AD, the original scirptures where thought to be penned around 50 AD so a good 40 years worth of copying had elapsed.

The Crucifixion happened between 30-35 AD.

SilverMK2 wrote:

Frazzled wrote:You would be wrong.

And you would be stating your opinion.

Just as you did turkey jerky.

Wussy, the Eastern Orthodox church is older. They've got all the cool alien artifacts and such. They just want you to think the Vatican has it.

But do they have such extensive archives?

Of course they do. They are hidden away and can only be accessed using the double secret decoder ring. Look real close the next time you see Putin shirtless. See that left nipple ring? There you go.

Additionally, but speaking of dropping, I don't know about you but dropping a Bible on your foot can really hurt.

Depends if it is on microfilm or on a USB stick or printed in large font

High falutin youngin. Back in my day we used thin lead sheets and were glad we had 'em.

I just can't wait for the church to open up the period of Jesus' life between the ages of 8 and 35 to writers, the way Lucas let writers have the timespace after the 3rd original movie.

Theres some possibilities for truly great works of literature there, and in 600 years, no one will know that we snuck in our own political bias.

Frazzled wrote:Just as you did turkey jerky.

Which is why I said "Personally as an atheist..." not "Religion is a lie and you are all idiots for thinking the way you do".

High falutin youngin. Back in my day we used thin lead sheets and were glad we had 'em.

Was that to protect you from the fall out from the Dino/Mammal nuclear war?

Frazzled wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:

Frazzled wrote:You would be wrong.

And you would be stating your opinion.

Just as you did turkey jerky.

Except he said it was his opinion. You just flat out said he was wrong.

LordofHats wrote:

2. The earliest 'copy' of new testement scripture was somewhere around 90 AD, the original scirptures where thought to be penned around 50 AD so a good 40 years worth of copying had elapsed.

The Crucifixion happened between 30-35 AD.

So if Matt Ward wrote it, that means Zombie Jebus and RoboPope Paul (who fell through a bubble in the warp) came back and broke the back of a bloodthirster and ripped its wings off, shouting Blood for the blood go...er ME! abouts AD 37 then?

Frazzled wrote:

LordofHats wrote:

2. The earliest 'copy' of new testement scripture was somewhere around 90 AD, the original scirptures where thought to be penned around 50 AD so a good 40 years worth of copying had elapsed.

The Crucifixion happened between 30-35 AD.

So if Matt Ward wrote it, that means Zombie Jebus and RoboPope Paul (who fell through a bubble in the warp) came back and broke the back of a bloodthirster and ripped its wings off, shouting Blood for the blood go...er ME! abouts AD 37 then?

Sounds about right. Horus then took his rightful place as the Anti-Christ somewhere around 54 and the Rapture happened, so the world's already ended and we're all just the figments of some random dude's imagination.

SilverMK2 wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Just as you did turkey jerky.

Which is why I said "Personally as an atheist..." not "Religion is a lie and you are all idiots for thinking the way you do".

High falutin youngin. Back in my day we used thin lead sheets and were glad we had 'em.

Was that to protect you from the fall out from the Dino/Mammal nuclear war?

No, that was later. You needed the lead sheets to protect you when the tyrannosaurs walked by. Sometime they would drop the coconuts they were eating (you know the whole I have girly arms thing) and you needed to protect youself, else you might get a concussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

purplefood wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:

Frazzled wrote:You would be wrong.

And you would be stating your opinion.

Just as you did turkey jerky.

Except he said it was his opinion. You just flat out said he was wrong.

Which is fact. See how simple that was. Now lets get back to Paul's note to his gardner.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordofHats wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

LordofHats wrote:

2. The earliest 'copy' of new testement scripture was somewhere around 90 AD, the original scirptures where thought to be penned around 50 AD so a good 40 years worth of copying had elapsed.

The Crucifixion happened between 30-35 AD.

So if Matt Ward wrote it, that means Zombie Jebus and RoboPope Paul (who fell through a bubble in the warp) came back and broke the back of a bloodthirster and ripped its wings off, shouting Blood for the blood go...er ME! abouts AD 37 then?

Sounds about right. Horus then took his rightful place as the Anti-Christ somewhere around 54 and the Rapture happened, so the world's already ended and we're all just the figments of some random dude's imagination.

Pete Haines probably.

LordofHats wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

LordofHats wrote:

2. The earliest 'copy' of new testement scripture was somewhere around 90 AD, the original scirptures where thought to be penned around 50 AD so a good 40 years worth of copying had elapsed.

The Crucifixion happened between 30-35 AD.

So if Matt Ward wrote it, that means Zombie Jebus and RoboPope Paul (who fell through a bubble in the warp) came back and broke the back of a bloodthirster and ripped its wings off, shouting Blood for the blood go...er ME! abouts AD 37 then?

Sounds about right. Horus then took his rightful place as the Anti-Christ somewhere around 54 and the Rapture happened, so the world's already ended and we're all just the figments of some random dude's imagination.

You know were not real, someone is just playing the Sims.... And were all part of it

2 pages before the insults started to fly, I'm impressed...
Does it matter if a fairy tale has become some some miss guided folks faith? Matters not a jot to me as all, ALL organised religions are evil and self serving. God is nothing more than a figment of the metaly ill.
Besides, Lors of the Rings is more beliveable than that badly writen collection of old myths.

Ribon Fox wrote:2 pages before the insults started to fly, I'm impressed...
Does it matter if a fairy tale has become some some miss guided folks faith? Matters not a jot to me as all, ALL organised religions are evil and self serving. God is nothing more than a figment of the metaly ill.
Besides, Lors of the Rings is more beliveable than that badly writen collection of old myths.

Tell me of this Lors of the Rings you speak of. It wasn't written by Matt Ward was it? Please tell me they kept CS Goto away from it to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rodgers37 wrote:

LordofHats wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

LordofHats wrote:

2. The earliest 'copy' of new testement scripture was somewhere around 90 AD, the original scirptures where thought to be penned around 50 AD so a good 40 years worth of copying had elapsed.

The Crucifixion happened between 30-35 AD.

So if Matt Ward wrote it, that means Zombie Jebus and RoboPope Paul (who fell through a bubble in the warp) came back and broke the back of a bloodthirster and ripped its wings off, shouting Blood for the blood go...er ME! abouts AD 37 then?

Sounds about right. Horus then took his rightful place as the Anti-Christ somewhere around 54 and the Rapture happened, so the world's already ended and we're all just the figments of some random dude's imagination.

You know were not real, someone is just playing the Sims.... And were all part of it

The guy playing me really got screwed didn't he...

Ribon Fox wrote:2 pages before the insults started to fly, I'm impressed...
Does it matter if a fairy tale has become some some miss guided folks faith? Matters not a jot to me as all, ALL organised religions are evil and self serving. God is nothing more than a figment of the metaly ill.
Besides, Lors of the Rings is more beliveable than that badly writen collection of old myths.

Has anyone even posted anything serious in this thread?
As far as i can tell, thats the only insult so far..... Thanks for calling me mentally ill, i suppose i should get my self to a hospital and get my self checked out...

Ribon Fox wrote:Besides, Lors of the Rings is more beliveable than that badly writen collection of old myths.

Ironic you should say that since Lord of the Rings is filled with Christian metaphor

EDIT: I tried being serious, cause Theology actually interests me, but no one else wanted to talk about it so I resorted to making bad jokes (I have no shame saying I have no idea who Pete Haines is )

rodgers37 wrote:

Ribon Fox wrote:2 pages before the insults started to fly, I'm impressed...
Does it matter if a fairy tale has become some some miss guided folks faith? Matters not a jot to me as all, ALL organised religions are evil and self serving. God is nothing more than a figment of the metaly ill.
Besides, Lors of the Rings is more beliveable than that badly writen collection of old myths.

Has anyone even posted anything serious in this thread?
As far as i can tell, thats the only insult so far..... Thanks for calling me mentally ill, i suppose i should get my self to a hospital and get my self checked out...

Well, as a plaguebearer of nurgle you might steer clear of hospitals. You never know what you might catch, and that whole plaguebearer things means you'll never get rid of it, like a bad rash, or maybe the US legal system.

Frazzled wrote:No, that was later. You needed the lead sheets to protect you when the tyrannosaurs walked by. Sometime they would drop the coconuts they were eating (you know the whole I have girly arms thing) and you needed to protect youself, else you might get a concussion.

I would not imagine lead has very good protective properties against t-rex guided coconut strikes

Also, thank you for reminding me about that fantastic creationist thread

Which is factually questionable given the empirical lack of evidence for the existance of anything that could be considered "divine intervention" in the formation of the "holy books" of Christianity or any other religion. See how simple that was. Now lets get back to Paul's note to his gardner.

Fixed that for you

Edit: Fixy quotey catchy monkey