Pope's magic kiss heals baby

[facebook164]

A little more subtle.  There are surviving more or less complete texts from the 200 - 500 CE period for NT books for instance.  Let us say we have a complete text of John's Gospel from 250 CE.  That is a fact.  The question remains, what to make of that fact.  The idea that any of these are eye-witness accounts, rather than literature of some type ... was necessary for Roman policy after Constantine.  Even though people then would have known, as we do now, that the original ascriptions of authorship ... are spurious, because we have the texts from that period, that don't say ... Gospel according to Matthew ... and we know that in the time of Papias, early 1st century CE ... this question of authorship was a subject of research ... and that even in the time of Constantine (see Eusebius) the authorship of some books were still disputed, or even considered un-Christian (the Book of Revelation) for instance.  Ancient literature is mostly by unknown authors.  So given that ... what makes it a forgery or not?  In a world where authorship is not important, and where the footnotes of scribes are added in-line with the text, not at the bottom of the page ... the text is in fact fluid, as multiple copies of old manuscripts of the same books demonstrate.

So a text is just a text.  But we can put, because of commentary in ancient times on the text, what people back then thought about it, and give a rough date to the manuscript.  Of course that doesn't make it a fact that Matthew wrote the gospel attributed to him, or that a person like Matthew even existed.  The idea of accurate eye-witness reports .. isn't even an idea in the ancient world ... the purpose of history and biography was entertainment and politics.  Was it a good story?  Did it support our political faction.  So in that context, what isn't a forgery.  Even today ... the standards of History Channel are way less than I had hoped for ;-)

What the ****** does this add to what I said in this context?

[Youssuf Ramadan]

What the ****** does this add to what I said in this context?

It adds the idea that the text has come about for a reason, and we can learn (if we are so inclined) something by digging around the possible motivations for creating this text, and the contexts in which it was created, regardless of whether the text is a forgery, a bunch of lies or whatever.

At least, that was my understanding of it.... *shrug*

[facebook164]

It adds the idea that the text has come about for a reason, and we can learn (if we are so inclined) something by digging around the possible motivations for creating this text, and the contexts in which it was created, regardless of whether the text is a forgery, a bunch of lies or whatever.

At least, that was my understanding of it.... *shrug*

Yes. But in the context of this thread? Then the fact that it doesnt have to be true enough.

[Baruch]

Yes. But in the context of this thread? Then the fact that it doesnt have to be true enough.

OK, forgery = falsehood.  Not how I use those words.  It would be false, to say that Romney won the 2012 election ... but if I had written an essay making that false claim, but admitted I wrote it, it isn't a forgery.  But if someone else wrote that essay and claimed I wrote it, then it would be both a falsehood and a forgery.

So are any of the gospel texts true?  Of course not, no more than the Odyssey is true.  To ascribe an authorship to a gospel, that isn't true, is false ascription .... and that is true.

[widdershins]

You may not agree with certain aspects of the New Testament, but it IS a historically reliable record of the earliest days of the Church.

If this is something you dispute, please explain why.

Thanks.

Because Jesus supposedly went all Harry Potter casting magic spells all over the place, healing people, making wine, etc.  If you tell me that you just came from the store, I'm likely to believe you.  If you tell me you just came from the store via magical teleport it brings suspicion on the entirety of your story.

[Baruch]

Because Jesus supposedly went all Harry Potter casting magic spells all over the place, healing people, making wine, etc.  If you tell me that you just came from the store, I'm likely to believe you.  If you tell me you just came from the store via magical teleport it brings suspicion on the entirety of your story.

If he came from the store after going there to get wine, you might suspect he had been tippling on the side ;-)

[widdershins]

If he came from the store after going there to get wine, you might suspect he had been tippling on the side ;-)

Tippling?  I have never heard that word before.  I assume you must be English or something because you can't speak English properly ;)  'Cause we invented English in Amurica!