Jump to content

Why Don't We See Quotes Of Jesus Predicting The Nt?


SOIL
 Share

Recommended Posts

Preface (Hello again and what is different these days?)

 

.............................................................................

 

Hi Folks,

 

Well, it has been over 6 months since I have read much of anything new which has been written here in these parts.

 

I'm curious about what changes have happened since my most recent post - (in that Genocide thread I think).

 

I'd appreciate it if someone could give me a summary of how things have changed (especially as relates to pesky "outsiders" such as myself.

 

....................................

 

 

What this thread can be "about"

.............................................

 

 

As far as this thread is concerned - like usual - my work responsibilities will probably have me just popping in and then being away for awhile and then popping back in quickly.

 

But here is the jest of what I wanted to bounce off of your craniums:

 

If people "made up" the NT:

 

Wouldn't they have been very tempted to put words in Jesus' mouth so as to have him either predict that the New Testament would be written (shortly) or wouldn't they even have said that Jesus wrote it himself (as a way to give more verification to "their holy book"). .... So, I am wondering if the fact that we don't see quotes of Jesus overtly predicting the coming of the NT - might actually be something that lends credence to the claim of how the NT is not likely the type of book that someone may have just "dreamed up" (as a way to tailor a religion to the likings of some group of folks who could personally benefit from it).

 

-Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi there!! I was hoping you'd come back. :)

 

My answer to your question is that the quotes that were manipulated were just that.. manipulated, and from texts that already existed (regarding OT stuff). Does that make sense? It would have been too obvious to insert something about the New Testament... In addition, the NT wasn't a coherent document until the Council of... ok, mind blank... I'll have to go look it up... but it wasn't until the church was established and gained political power, and there was some sense of integrity in creating the canon. Things wouldn't have just been pulled out of their arses to boost their claim. I believe they misinterpreted a lot, but were still somewhat honest in trying to weed out "heresy" and in finding things that were established works before the councils convened.

 

............

 

How have things changed? Not much... same stuff over and over again. It's not a bad thing, but we get the typical inerrantist on here every so often and the same arguments are rehashed.

 

However, a lot of the ex-christians on here have had some major life changes and issues to deal with... and we keep getting new members all the time. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Preface (Hello again and what is different these days?)

 

.............................................................................

 

Hi Folks,

 

Well, it has been over 6 months since I have read much of anything new which has been written here in these parts.

 

I'm curious about what changes have happened since my most recent post - (in that Genocide thread I think).

 

I'd appreciate it if someone could give me a summary of how things have changed (especially as relates to pesky "outsiders" such as myself.

 

....................................

 

 

What this thread can be "about"

.............................................

 

 

As far as this thread is concerned - like usual - my work responsibilities will probably have me just popping in and then being away for awhile and then popping back in quickly.

 

But here is the jest of what I wanted to bounce off of your craniums:

 

If people "made up" the NT:

 

Wouldn't they have been very tempted to put words in Jesus' mouth so as to have him either predict that the New Testament would be written (shortly) or wouldn't they even have said that Jesus wrote it himself (as a way to give more verification to "their holy book"). .... So, I am wondering if the fact that we don't see quotes of Jesus overtly predicting the coming of the NT - might actually be something that lends credence to the claim of how the NT is not likely the type of book that someone may have just "dreamed up" (as a way to tailor a religion to the likings of some group of folks who could personally benefit from it).

 

-Dennis

Hi Dennis! :grin:

 

How have you been? I was gone for about 8 months myself and I going to say some things to you to make you think that I am someone else using NBBTB sign-on!

 

I really don't think it matters if the NT was made up or not because many of things that Jesus said (or was attributed to him saying) is very profound and truthful on a philosophical base. I think that some of the writters of the NT understood what Jesus said more so than others, hence the descrepancies. Even if Jesus was based off of Myrtha or other Pagan dieties, whoever took these sayings understood the essence of what a myth was supposed to do...some more than others.

 

I now think the commonalities between all religions are an asset, not a hinderance. They all try to point to something greater than the words themselves. An overall theme is a good thing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have also been a few non-traditional Christians come and join the board, and also a few non-Christians with some very strange ideas have a short stint as well.

 

LOL Someone want to explain Ssel to SOIL? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have also been a few non-traditional Christians come and join the board, and also a few non-Christians with some very strange ideas have a short stint as well.

 

LOL Someone want to explain Ssel to SOIL? ;)

HA!

 

If Ssel would have left the ego out of his posts, what he had to say would have been more understood, IMO. But, trying to teach about the evils of the ego while using the ego is useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome back Dennis, :wave:

 

Well, what have changed? We do have a few more resident Christians here, like Sofia, Amanda and Open_Minded, all very nice and interesting people to discuss with.

 

And we also have a couple of hard core, extremist, fundamentalists too, like Sub_Zer0, Chris DeVidal (seems to have left though...), TxViper, and some other that come and go.

 

Regarding your question, that's a good point, and I will think a bit about it and let you know if I have any answer.

 

 

The Ssel story was kind of fascinating, and the Rameus affair too.

 

Both of them non-Christian, and one of them, Rameus, was banned and the other ... well... what can I say, I scared poor Ssel away. :(

 

He didn't like my critique. :scratch:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome back Dennis, :wave:

 

Well, what have changed? We do have a few more resident Christians here, like Sofia, Amanda and Open_Minded, all very nice and interesting people to discuss with.

 

And we also have a couple of hard core, extremist, fundamentalists too, like Sub_Zer0, Chris DeVidal (seems to have left though...), TxViper, and some other that come and go.

 

Regarding your question, that's a good point, and I will think a bit about it and let you know if I have any answer.

 

 

The Ssel story was kind of fascinating, and the Rameus affair too.

 

Both of them non-Christian, and one of them, Rameus, was banned and the other ... well... what can I say, I scared poor Ssel away. :(

 

He didn't like my critique. :scratch:

Rameus was banned? I would love to know what he discovered. I know he used another sign-on to trick posters, but why? What was his message? What sign-on did he use so I can read his posts?

 

Sorry SOIL for the interrupt, but I would love to know what happened with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rameus was posing as an apologist and stirred up quite a storm, and when he revealed who he was, some members got mighty upset, and when he was warned that we don't like spoofing and posing he said he didn't care and that he would do it again, and then he got banned. Clergicide left a little while later.

 

I have to look up what Rameus was posing as.

 

...

 

Actuall the thread where he was posing was deleted on Rameus own request, but here's the thread that he started the same week and the responses from what he did.

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&s...ndpost&p=100037

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rameus was posing as an apologist and stirred up quite a storm, and when he revealed who he was, some members got mighty upset, and when he was warned that we don't like spoofing and posing he said he didn't care and that he would do it again, and then he got banned. Clergicide left a little while later.

 

I have to look up what Rameus was posing as.

 

...

 

Actuall the thread where he was posing was deleted on Rameus own request, but here's the thread that he started the same week and the responses from what he did.

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&s...ndpost&p=100037

Wow...

 

I understand his point, like everyone else, but trickery is usually not smiled upon. What a waste...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the responses everyone!

 

I have come across a couple of things I don't quite understand (I think my brain has often operated on some different wavelength - maybe due to differing foundational preconceived assumptions or something to that effect? - or maybe we simply dance to the beat of different drummers?).

 

For instance, NotBlind,

 

I don't understand what you are referring to in this sentence:

...

... I think that some of the writters of the NT understood what Jesus said more so than others, hence the descrepancies. ...

 

I am not sure why - but I think your sentences (below) may be what prompted me to think about posting the other thread about Tolkien.

 

...

Even if Jesus was based off of Myrtha or other Pagan dieties, whoever took these sayings understood the essence of what a myth was supposed to do...some more than others.

 

I now think the commonalities between all religions are an asset, not a hinderance. They all try to point to something greater than the words themselves. An overall theme is a good thing!

 

-Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If people "made up" the NT:

 

Wouldn't they have been very tempted to put words in Jesus' mouth so as to have him either predict that the New Testament would be written (shortly) or wouldn't they even have said that Jesus wrote it himself (as a way to give more verification to "their holy book"). .... So, I am wondering if the fact that we don't see quotes of Jesus overtly predicting the coming of the NT - might actually be something that lends credence to the claim of how the NT is not likely the type of book that someone may have just "dreamed up" (as a way to tailor a religion to the likings of some group of folks who could personally benefit from it).

Why would there be any mention of the NT? Jesus left and was coming right back. There was no time for a book to be written and distributed. In fact, jesus clearly indicates that he would be back before the disciples managed to tell everyone in Israel about him. Ignoring that the real story would be more that the books, gospels in this case, were written about the time of the Roman sacking of the temple. With the temple gone a new way to worship god was needed. A story was written and back dated. So when jesus claims he'll be back before everyone who is standing before him dies that places the return time conveniently during the time of those post-temple Jews. They needed a way to get people on board, and fast, and the story was written to meet those requirements.

 

Skip ahead to the formation of the Catholic church. The NT was formed during this time. Books that supported their particular theological and governmental views were included and the rest destroyed. This is why Paul is so dominate in the NT (he supports a clear hierarchy and adherance to the church/government and he split xianity from Judaism among other "useful" things). Did jesus mention this Paul person as a foundation of the church? Nope. So why bother including so much of his work over the "chosen" ones? He served their purpose and the "others," meaning those that jesus did mention specifically, are barely more than footnotes in the cannon by comparison. If one were to go to any "fan fiction" type site and scrape the stories for a certain theme (to support a personal agenda) I can imagine that you could create a (somewhat) coherant novel from those stories with a little "creative" editing (and a whole lot of good spin doctors, or apologists, once the cracks in the facade started to show). Why would those authors include a reference to the larger work if they never envisioned their short story ever being used in such a manner? They wouldn't and this is the same reason jesus never mentioned the NT.

 

Oddly, you seem the type to have already known this so I imagine there's more to this question then what is written...but I could be wrong.

 

mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome back Dennis, :wave:

 

Well, what have changed? We do have a few more resident Christians here, like Sofia, Amanda and Open_Minded, all very nice and interesting people to discuss with.

 

And we also have a couple of hard core, extremist, fundamentalists too, like Sub_Zer0, Chris DeVidal (seems to have left though...), TxViper, and some other that come and go.

 

Hello Dennis:

 

Just popping in to say "Hi", I'm Open_Minded. Nice to meet you. :wave:

 

I look forward to watching this thread unfold...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the responses everyone!

 

I have come across a couple of things I don't quite understand (I think my brain has often operated on some different wavelength - maybe due to differing foundational preconceived assumptions or something to that effect? - or maybe we simply dance to the beat of different drummers?).

 

For instance, NotBlind,

 

I don't understand what you are referring to in this sentence:

...

... I think that some of the writters of the NT understood what Jesus said more so than others, hence the descrepancies. ...

 

I am not sure why - but I think your sentences (below) may be what prompted me to think about posting the other thread about Tolkien.

 

...

Even if Jesus was based off of Myrtha or other Pagan dieties, whoever took these sayings understood the essence of what a myth was supposed to do...some more than others.

 

I now think the commonalities between all religions are an asset, not a hinderance. They all try to point to something greater than the words themselves. An overall theme is a good thing!

 

-Dennis

First, the Lord of the Rings bored me to tears! But, I only watched the first one, so I can't really judge it. But, if it speaks of wisdom through myth, then I may have to watch alllllllllllll of them! :HaHa:

 

I think some writers were more enlightened than others. Some knew the esoteric value of his words while others could only grasp a lighter, more literal meaning so it got all jumbled up. But, if the meaning can be grasped then the essence can carry over even to parts that are translated badly, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NotBlind,

 

OK, now I understand what you were saying.

 

First, the Lord of the Rings bored me to tears! But, I only watched the first one, so I can't really judge it. But, if it speaks of wisdom through myth, then I may have to watch alllllllllllll of them! :HaHa:

Actually, I think you will probably find what you are looking for more powerfully if you read the Tolkien books (also that will likely keep you from being bored). Because if you only see the movies - I suspect it is more likely - you (unfortunately like many folks who may be concentrating too much on the special effects) might miss some of the more powerful points. Actually I think the problems with putting the best parts of Tolkien's books into film is the basic issue that prompted the guy to write the article at the link I posted in the other thread).

 

-Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, the Lord of the Rings bored me to tears!

The first is kind of slow and I wasn't much impressed by it, but second and third ones are really great. Do check them out if you haven't seen it.

Okay...thanks Priti...oops...skeptic! :grin:

 

Welcome back Dennis, :wave:

 

Well, what have changed? We do have a few more resident Christians here, like Sofia, Amanda and Open_Minded, all very nice and interesting people to discuss with.

 

And we also have a couple of hard core, extremist, fundamentalists too, like Sub_Zer0, Chris DeVidal (seems to have left though...), TxViper, and some other that come and go.

 

Hello Dennis:

 

Just popping in to say "Hi", I'm Open_Minded. Nice to meet you. :wave:

 

I look forward to watching this thread unfold...

Dennis, you'll like this guy right here. I really like the way he thinks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

How have you been? I was gone for about 8 months myself ...

Thanks for asking NotBlind.

 

Well actually I have been doing OK overall I suppose.

 

To tell you the truth one of the reasons I left was because I didn't like the way it appeared as if some folks seemed to be dreaming up ideas about how I was doing (back then).

 

For instance this (from the last page of the Genocide thread) really irked me :

...Perhaps the next time you start running out of tear-jerking articles to bolster your untenable position, you'll divert the topic and clue us in on your child custody battle instead. ...

Actually, though I mentioned at some point that I was sleeping at my office/house for a few days due to the friction between my family (caused I think in part by my reconsiderations of some of the Christian fundamentals - prompted by discussions on this site), I had never said anything about any consideration of the 'D' word (and to tell you the truth, I never did consider that). I have been living with the family as normal for pretty much the entire last 6 months, (I don't think there was ever a day that I didn't eat at least one meal with my wife and at least one of our daughters - even though several are grown and living outside of our home now).

 

The type of personal comments (like above) did really bug me - but then - I was in some deep spiritual agony at that time, and I may have been guilty of inflicting the same kind of pain on others, (actually, I probably need to go back and read through that whole thread - now that some time has passed under the bridge, so to speak).

 

I am still doing a lot of thinking about really tough issues - like the different ways people view the inherent value of females verses males (in various cultures and religious and philosophical frameworks/worldviews). But I hope I am a bit more "balanced" now - though that is probably something worthy of a good deal of debate! --- Also I have continued to be interested in the whole concept of genocide and also the Old Testament depiction of God as a Warrior.

 

...

 

NotBlind, how have you been?

 

(I hope you have been - and are continuing to be - "doing good").

 

-Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

How have you been? I was gone for about 8 months myself ...

Thanks for asking NotBlind.

 

Well actually I have been doing OK overall I suppose.

 

To tell you the truth one of the reasons I left was because I didn't like the way it appeared as if some folks seemed to be dreaming up ideas about how I was doing (back then).

 

For instance this (from the last page of the Genocide thread) really irked me :

...Perhaps the next time you start running out of tear-jerking articles to bolster your untenable position, you'll divert the topic and clue us in on your child custody battle instead. ...

Actually, though I mentioned at some point that I was sleeping at my office/house for a few days due to the friction between my family (caused I think in part by my reconsiderations of some of the Christian fundamentals - prompted by discussions on this site), I had never said anything about any consideration of the 'D' word (and to tell you the truth, I never did consider that). I have been living with the family as normal for pretty much the entire last 6 months, (I don't think there was ever a day that I didn't eat at least one meal with my wife and at least one of our daughters - even though several are grown and living outside of our home now).

 

The type of personal comments (like above) did really bug me - but then - I was in some deep spiritual agony at that time, and I may have been guilty of inflicting the same kind of pain on others, (actually, I probably need to go back and read through that whole thread - now that some time has passed under the bridge, so to speak).

 

I am still doing a lot of thinking about really tough issues - like the different ways people view the inherent value of females verses males (in various cultures and religious and philosophical frameworks/worldviews). But I hope I am a bit more "balanced" now - though that is probably something worthy of a good deal of debate! --- Also I have continued to be interested in the whole concept of genocide and also the Old Testament depiction of God as a Warrior.

 

...

 

NotBlind, how have you been?

 

(I hope you have been - and are continuing to be - "doing good").

 

-Dennis

Wow...All I can say Dennis is that usually when people vent at someone else like that it is a reflection of what they believe. It's their story and their creation, don't take it personally.

 

I have been doing okay...my mom passed away and I embarked on a spiritual journey. Everything just clicked for me and I am lovin' it!

 

I hope you stick around. Your good people!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dennis! Nice to see you back! :woohoo:

 

As for your question about the NT and Jesus predicting it.

 

I don't beleive the writers of the NT had any concept that they were creating something that would later be joined with other writings and then voted upon to decide on what we today call the NT. So even if there were some kind of conspiracy amongst the writers of the NT (which I've never believed anyways) I don't think they would have because the idea of a "new" testament didn't exist at the time of their writing.

 

Does that make sense?

 

:thanks:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason that the writers of the gospels didn't put words into Jesus' mouth predicting a New Testament, is because they didn't envision it themselves. How could they have had any clue that their writings would be compiled several hundred years later, and formed into a canon that became declared scripture?

 

How would the writers of Mark or Luke have known that the Gospel of Thomas or the Didache or the Gospel according to Peter would be thrown out like dirty laundry, while their writings would become dissected and studied and practically worshipped as though they were spoken right from the mouth of God?

 

In looking through the eyes of redaction criticism, it's not hard to see the writers putting words into Jesus' mouth that fit their ideologies or the direction that they thought the religion needed to go. They spun the story to fit with their individual theological tendencies, or to counteract something that someone else had written.

 

Even when early christians (for the first several hundred years) refer to "Scripture" they aren't talking about anything in the NT. They are speaking strictly about the OT.

 

If a person were to build a religion based solely on the book of Matthew, it would bear no resemblance to a religion based on John.

 

 

p.s. welcome back, Dennis. You always seemed like a pretty good egg to me. (as far as christians go)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't they have been very tempted to put words in Jesus' mouth so as to have him either predict that the New Testament would be written (shortly) or wouldn't they even have said that Jesus wrote it himself (as a way to give more verification to "their holy book"). .... So, I am wondering if the fact that we don't see quotes of Jesus overtly predicting the coming of the NT - might actually be something that lends credence to the claim of how the NT is not likely the type of book that someone may have just "dreamed up" (as a way to tailor a religion to the likings of some group of folks who could personally benefit from it).

 

-Dennis

Hello Dennis :grin:

 

I don't think I got much of a chance to get to talk with you before, but I look forward to having discussions with you.

 

To address your question you raised: Interesting thought. I see where you're going with it, but I don't think those who wrote the Jesus stories in the gospel's were imagining their texts being compiled and canonized along with various letter from Paul into a book called the NT. We do see quotes of Jesus however "predicting" known past events to the writers of the Gospels, such as the destruction of the temple. In these cases, their temptation to put words in his mouth is obvious.

 

Personally, I don't see the Gospels as something that was "dreamed up" as such. I see them as an evolution of an original theme beginning with "Mark" using the vehicle of a hero's tale to convey the message of their faith. The Gospel is imaginative and creative, yes, but it’s simply as a literary vehicle. It's the later folks who turned it into a supposed historical reality and insisted such an understanding be accepted universally. Kind of detracts from the message by making the story "fact", what with credible science and all to challenge such thin claims, IMHO.

 

Wouldn't it be better just to accept it as a vehicle to share a message through an imaginative legendary hero story created through well intentions? The message would still be there, wouldn't it? :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would there be any mention of the NT? Jesus left and was coming right back. There was no time for a book to be written and distributed. In fact, jesus clearly indicates that he would be back before the disciples managed to tell everyone in Israel about him. ...

Hi mwc,

 

Are you referring to the places in Matthew, Mark, and Luke similar to below?

 

Mark 9:1-13

 

and

 

Matthew 16:28-17:9

 

 

Sorry, but my memory of Biblical passages is not as keen tonight as I wish.

 

I remember while reading the New Testament getting the impression that Paul, Peter, and John etc... seemed to think Jesus was coming back sooner then Jesus' words indicated (at least to my way of thinking anyway). For instance, I remember reading where Jesus said something to the effect that even he didn't know (specifically) when the Father would send him back (physically) here to get things wrapped up (so to speak).

 

Matthew 24:23-50

 

-Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... My answer to your question is that the quotes that were manipulated were just that.. manipulated, and from texts that already existed (regarding OT stuff). Does that make sense? It would have been too obvious to insert something about the New Testament... In addition, the NT wasn't a coherent document until the Council of... ok, mind blank... I'll have to go look it up... but it wasn't until the church was established and gained political power, and there was some sense of integrity in creating the canon. ...

Hi Pandora,

 

For a while I would have basically agreed with the way it seems to me you may be heading - but in researching some of the early dates for many of the writings of the The Early Church Fathers I think I can see that most of what (was later) cannonized, was already in circulation and at least they thought it was in some "sense of integrity".

 

-Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark 9:1 He also said to them, "Amen, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come in power."

 

Matt 10:23 When they persecute you in one town, flee to another. Amen, I say to you, you will not finish the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes."

 

Mark 14:62 (To Caiphas) Then Jesus answered, "I am; and 'you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.'"

 

 

I don't know, Dennis. Sounds to me like Jesus thought he was coming back soon, too.

 

And, the shifting of the text in Mark, to make it seem like Jesus was referring to the transfiguration is only proof that those passages were arranged after all of the disciples were dead. (By that time, they knew that those "standing here" did not see Jesus' return - so they had to cover the base somehow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.