Socrates

Originally posted by FMF
How many Gospels were written by witnesses but were rejected? Why were the Gospels that were selected written decades after Jesus' death by people who were not eye witnesses?

Poetic license.

Originally posted by josephw
But why do you ask? You've already stated many times the whole business is a myth. You're just being pretentious now.

whodey said something about how his belief is supported by what he sees as testimony from witnesses so I asked him about that testimony. I don't see how it's "pretentious" to ask him the question in the circumstances, unless you are using the word in some non-conventional way.

Originally posted by FMF
whodey said something about how his belief is supported by what he sees as testimony from witnesses so I asked him about that testimony. I don't see how it's "pretentious" to ask him the question in the circumstances, unless you are using the word in some non-conventional way.

No. You're being pretentious because you already know it's all a myth. Your question is vacuous, without merit and a pretext for further denunciation of that which you deny exists.

Simply put. You're just being a phony, not forthright or honest. 😉

Originally posted by josephw
No. You're being pretentious because you already know it's all a myth. Your question is vacuous, without merit and a pretext for further denunciation of that which you deny exists.

Simply put. You're just being a phony, not forthright or honest. 😉

It's a debate and discussion forum, josephw, and people disagreeing about what they believe and asking each other questions [about what they say about their beliefs] is not "pretentious" or "phony". It's what a debate and discussion forum is all about.

Originally posted by josephw
That's for God to know and you to find out.

whodey, having referenced the fact that Jesus didn't write anything, said:

"After all, anyone can sit down and write about themselves, but what is believed the most? Is it someone writing about themselves or others writing about them?"

Do you think if Jesus had delivered some of his teaching in writing it would have been somehow less believable.

Originally posted by FMF
whodey, having referenced the fact that Jesus didn't write anything, said:

[b]"After all, anyone can sit down and write about themselves, but what is believed the most? Is it someone writing about themselves or others writing about them?"

Do you think if Jesus had delivered some of his teaching in writing it would have been somehow less believable.[/b]

I think that a book written over centuries of time by observers who list the good, the bad, and the ugly of the people they are writing about is much more believable than someone simply sitting down and writing about themselves.

So sit down and write a book of Mormon or the Quran all by yourself if you like. More than likely, you will either be rejected or seen as perfect in the eyes of God.

However, have someone else write about you and you are not as likely to fair as well.

Originally posted by whodey
I think that a book written over centuries of time by observers who list the good, the bad, and the ugly of the people they are writing about is much more believable than someone simply sitting down and writing about themselves.

So sit down and write a book of Mormon or the Quran all by yourself if you like. More than likely, you will either be rejected o ...[text shortened]... of God.

However, have someone else write about you and you are not as likely to fair as well.

The question was: do you think if Jesus had delivered some of his teaching in writing it would have been somehow less believable?

Originally posted by FMF
The question was: do you think if Jesus had delivered some of his teaching in writing it would have been somehow less believable?

In a court of law, your own testimony counts for something, however, the words of a witness seem to carry more weight.

Originally posted by whodey
In a court of law, your own testimony counts for something, however, the words of a witness seem to carry more weight.

It's interesting the way you are dancing around this. I'll try one last time. Do you think if Jesus had delivered some of his teaching in writing it would have been somehow less believable?

Originally posted by whodey
...the words of a witness seem to carry more weight.

How many Gospels were written by witnesses but were rejected?

Why were the Gospels [that were selected] written decades after Jesus' death by people who were not eye witnesses?

Originally posted by FMF
How many Gospels were written by witnesses but were rejected?

Why were the Gospels [that were selected] written decades after Jesus' death by people who were not eye witnesses?

Like I said before. That's for God to know and you to find out.

The books of the Bible were codified by the first century Apostles and prophets. All that's left is for you to believe it or not. Your questions are meaningless obfuscations of the facts.

Originally posted by whodey
Apparently Jesus had a similar thought process. He let other people write about him.

And I think this perhaps the most wise approach of all. After all, anyone can sit down and write about themselves, but what is believed the most? Is it someone writing about themselves or others writing about them? For me, a witness testimony holds more water.

I think the point is getting lost somewhere. While you may be right (who can say?) that Jesus thought it unwise to commit his thoughts to writing, the problem is that Paul and co chose to do the exact opposite, did not follow the example of Jesus, and committed a great deal to writing. In consequence, we have today the madness of debates about the status of "scripture." The same could be said of those, notably Plato, who write down what Socrates [possibly] said.

The point is that a teacher can debate with a student and assist the student in overcoming errors and appreciating the nature of the lesson. A book is helpless and the author cannot argue back when its contents are misquoted, misrepresented, selectively taken out of context, applied to new and inappropriate situations and so forth.

“Plato was suspicious of writing which seems to remove knowledge from the present moment of the individual and lodge it elsewhere, in books, which are inert and cannot defend themselves against fools.”
Iris Murdoch

Or as JK Rowling said, "Books are like mirrors. When a fool looks in do not expect a genius to look out."

If we know anything that Jesus said, it is only through the medium of books written by other people who had not even met him, and it is only in translations from translations, each one generating shifts in meaning and significance. How often do we encounter someone building an argument upon the strict meaning of a word in the English language, which is, itself, only the product of a translator's whim?

What is education if not, for most of us, a process of reading and failing to understand, being corrected by our teacher, quietly mocked by our fellow students, and never fully achieving the impossible task of incorporating the book's wisdom into our own lives?

Originally posted by josephw
No. You're being pretentious because you already know it's all a myth. Your question is vacuous, without merit and a pretext for further denunciation of that which you deny exists.

Simply put. You're just being a phony, not forthright or honest. 😉

Maybe FMF finds it funny.

Originally posted by whodey
Maybe FMF finds it funny.

That appears to be why he's here. To have fun at the expense of the truth. Not his truth, oh no! Then he is serious. But if it's God's truth, according to the scriptures, then it's a myth and a fable. Funny myths and fables too, and folks like you and I are fodder for the flames of his laughter.

😉

Originally posted by josephw
That appears to be why he's here. To have fun at the expense of the truth. Not his truth, oh no! Then he is serious. But if it's God's truth, according to the scriptures, then it's a myth and a fable. Funny myths and fables too, and folks like you and I are fodder for the flames of his laughter.

😉

What you believe to be truth is pure fiction to someone else. Wouldn't Jesus want you to respect that other person's right to an opinion?