The Jesus Itinerary

[Drich]

1. Sorry, I thought these were reliable eye-witness accounts.

The writers could only write what they were privy to.
Again no one person was privy to everything.

2. The Gospels tell plenty of tales that the supposed authors weren't privy to. Jesus' ordeals in the trials were related in great detail despite the fact that Peter was elsewhere, with the servants, at that time.

Where was Mary/Mother Mary Magdline? Those who could write were rare. It was not possiable to have an actual writer pen down everything himself.

3. The problem is not just that events are inconsistent but that the order of events is different for each account.

Jews did not prize Chronology in their accounts as we do, unless it was mandated/at a trial for example. So why would those writers write in a style not consistant with how they typically wrote?

Where/when does a little cross cultural accountability in to your argument? when do you take the time to study the people, the culture and the time frame what you are trying to tear down? Or were you truly under the assumption that everyone who has ever written anything down would record it the same way this generation, in this culture that speaks English would record their message in the same way?

[DeistPaladin]

Seems to me you desperately want to find a problem where none exists in the actual text.

Why would I do that? I don't follow a religion that says the Gospels are not true. I'm simply skeptical about the claims of your religion just as I am about any other religion.

You Christians need to understand that skepticism is not an agenda.

See - a few sentences, which aren't even necessary as you invented the problem in the first place.

Your few sentences are an outline of a fan fic plot, which would be an elaborate story if fleshed out.

[DeistPaladin]

Where/when does a little cross cultural accountability in to your argument?

I hold "The Word of God" to a higher standard than you do, it would seem.

[John V]

Why would I do that? I don't follow a religion that says the Gospels are not true. I'm simply skeptical about the claims of your religion just as I am about any other religion.

You Christians need to understand that skepticism is not an agenda.

If that were true there'd be no problem. However, in this case you invented a claim to protest. That goes beyond skepticism, and does indeed indicate an agenda.

Your few sentences are an outline of a fan fic plot, which would be an elaborate story if fleshed out.

Key words bolded.

[Drich]

Where/when does a little cross cultural accountability in to your argument?

I hold "The Word of God" to a higher standard than you do, it would seem.

Actually you hold the Word of God to your own personal standard. Which in of itself is based on faulty reasoning. You assume God would record His word in such a way that you would not have to think about it to get its complete meaning, which means you assume that you and God think alike, or at least on the same wave length. Never mind the generation of people recording his word in this way would alienate.

[DeistPaladin]

If that were true there'd be no problem. However, in this case you invented a claim to protest. That goes beyond skepticism, and does indeed indicate an agenda.

No, I haven't invented. I've read what's there.

Key words bolded.

Your point?

EDIT TO ADD: If it helps you understand, consider that my comments on the Kessel Run were also only a few sentences. This too was fan fic-ing to resolve a script blunder.

[DeistPaladin]

Actually you hold the Word of God to your own personal standard. Which in of itself is based on faulty reasoning. You assume God would record His word in such a way that you would not have to think about it to get its complete meaning, which means you assume that you and God think alike, or at least on the same wave length. Never mind the generation of people recording his word in this way would alienate.

I assume the same God that gave me the very ability to communicate would understand some of the basic elements of good communication, one of which is clarity. And since this Word of God is written for the entire world, such a universal objective should be reflected in the communication. Both qualities are not consistent with the requirement to get a doctorate in ancient Hebrew culture to understand this communication. You apparently have a lower standard of what the Word of God should be like.

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly Christians transition from "Word of God" to "ah, whaddaya want?" as soon as you begin discussing flaws in this supposed divine communication.

[Captain Colostomy]

I hold "The Word of God" to a higher standard than you do, it would seem.

Actually you hold the Word of God to your own personal standard. Which in of itself is based on faulty reasoning. You assume God would record His word in such a way that you would not have to think about it to get its complete meaning, which means you assume that you and God think alike, or at least on the same wave length. Never mind the generation of people recording his word in this way would alienate.

When does it become clear that it isn't faulty reasoning? Consensus, which can be faulty reasoning en masse? If god wants clarity, he should be unambiguous to a 'T'. Hell, even the most straightforward lines in the bible can be confusing. Thou shalt not kill, for one. On the surface it is clear...we are to be as Jains, wearing surgical masks and not eating plant killing roots and stalks. But no!...faulty reasoning! Dig deeper and we sde pigeons getting whacked as sin offerings for menstruation, so animals are ok. But no!...faulty reasoning! Plenty of gleeful homicides are evidenced in the bible. So here we are...a clear statement of prohibition that with proper reasoning becomes meaningless. In the end, saying 'god only knows' is the only recourse, but if only he knows, why would he bother authorizing a book to speak for him?

And the troubles compound on the more muddy passages liberally sprinkled throughout the bible. I think the faulty reasoning really rests on those who wrote it. It was a mistake. Of course, then god would have been only a folk tale with few followers, if any. So thank god for the unchanging truths of the written word! Amen.

[John V]

No, I haven't invented. I've read what's there.

No, you've gone beyond what's there. It doesn't say it's Joseph's house. You added that.

Your point?

That IF it COULD be a fan fic, then NOW it ISN'T a fan fic.

EDIT TO ADD: If it helps you understand, consider that my comments on the Kessel Run were also only a few sentences. This too was fan fic-ing to resolve a script blunder.

You said: "You answer involves writing an entire fan fic." Neither my answer, nor your comments on the Kessel Run, constitute an entire fan fic. You're now trying to backpedal from the original claim.

---

I assume the same God that gave me the very ability to communicate would understand some of the basic elements of good communication, one of which is clarity. And since this Word of God is written for the entire world, such a universal objective should be reflected in the communication. Both qualities are not consistent with the requirement to get a doctorate in ancient Hebrew culture to understand this communication. You apparently have a lower standard of what the Word of God should be like.

You're not considering Proverbs 25:2 -

It is the glory of God to conceal a matter,
But the glory of kings is to search out a matter.

God's intention is that we need to study scripture to properly understand it. It's like a teacher who knows the answer to a question, but assigns it as a research project instead of just spoon-feeding it to the students. Many people see value in the process as well as the result.

[Minimalist]

They are getting desperate, D-P.

The thought that their bullshit is wrong terrifies them.

But its amusing watching them invent excuses.