RE: The Historical Reliability of the New Testament
May 25, 2015 at 10:04 am
(This post was last modified: May 25, 2015 at 10:05 am by IATIA.)
(May 25, 2015 at 9:10 am)Randy Carson Wrote: Are you saying that it is less than 50/50 that the authors of the NT got it right regarding the resurrection? Despite having been there? Despite having interviewed witnesses?
It is a known fact that perception is faulty and biased, memory is suspect at best and history is just as biased and faulty. Even the news at ten is faulty. I have seen news reports of events at which I was present and the report and my memory of the event never coincide.
Did jesus really die? Was there really even a jesus? The stories are from a bronze-age civilization and only a small sect at that. The stories were not even put into 'print' until decades after the event. Oral history is subject to the above comments on memory and will be biased through the beliefs and rationalizations of each teller of the story.
You make people miserable and there's nothing they can do about it, just like god.
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
-- Homer Simpson
God has no place within these walls, just as facts have no place within organized religion.
-- Superintendent Chalmers
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins a movie by telling you how it ends. There are some things we don't want to know. Important things.
-- Ned Flanders
Once something's been approved by the government, it's no longer immoral.
-- The Rev Lovejoy
