"veritas"
yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:74624383-d31e-4885-9801-2c81ff74edc1@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 7, 6:28 pm, "Ralph" yahoo.com> wrote:>
>>> On Jul 4, 8:04 am, "Bill M"
bellsouth.net> wrote:>
>>>> Can anyone supply OBJECTIVE VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE that Jesus Christ
>>>> was
>>>> a real
>>>> god and not just an ancient fable???
>
>>> What, you want me to pull Him out of a hat for you? ELP style.
>
>>> John wrote at the end of his gospel
>
>> Modern scholarship has determined that the Christian "Gospel of John"
>> was not written by the Apostle John (provided, of course, such a
>> figure ever existed in the first place).
>
> "modern scholarship" You mean, liberal scepticism. Anglical Bishop
> Butler wrote as far back as 1736, "It is come to be taken for granteed
> by many persons, that Christianity is not even a subject of inquiry,
> but that it is now at length discovered to be fictitious. And
> accordingly
> they treat it as if, in the present age, this was an agreed point
> among all people of discernment, and nothing remained but to set it
> up as a principal subject of mirth and ridicule, as it were by way of
> reprisals for its having so long interrrupted the pleasures of the
> world."
>
> Here is the true basis for the "modern" dismissal of super-
> natural religion and plenary inspiration.
>
>>> I guess one of the biggest evidences I find is that all His disciples
>>> disregarded their own lives after His ascension.
>
>> But you have provided no evidence that any of this *really* happened.
>> "John" is not the only Christian writing that was fabricated from
>> fragments and hearsay a generation or more after these events
>> allegedly happened..
>
>
> I suggest you read about Simon Greenleaf (1783-1853) , one of the
> principle
> founders of Harvard Law School and often noted as probably one of the
> best
> legal scholars in US history. I have a dead link to an article he
> wrote titled, "Testimony of the Evangelists." which I remember
> telling of
> his agnostic testimony in a class room which when challenged, sent him
> off to research the subject for himself. Like another legal scholar
> in
> Great Britain before him, (who's name escapes me), after careful
> research came to the conclusion that the evidence was inescapable.
> This wasn't any internet posting nerd's conclusion. And I only refer
> to him because of the recognized authority level of the man.
>
>>> Men don't act like this.
>
>> Perhaps you've spent too much time in the company of the wrong men.
>
>> -Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
>
> use to live on 14th st between the Peachtrees. By the time I left
> that area, there were all kinds of "wrong men" carousing the streets.
>
> Reply: None of the gospels were written by the authors claimed by the
> Christian church. Do a little research before you run off at the mouth.
> There is not the first main line scholar who thinks the gospels were
> written
> by those to which they were attributed.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I've studied the gospels very closely, as an agnostic, I would have to
take issue on the gospel of John. I believe that if any of the
gospels have any truth in them, it would be John's. He simply told
what he saw, not what he thought happened, or had heard happened. He
tells a simple story as if he was there, (He never mentions his own
name) and just told it like he saw it. I would accept his over any of
the others, if I were to accept any at all. (Which I find very hard to
do as an agnostic.) That might well have happened, but that doesn't
mean he had anything more to do directly with God, than Oral Roberts
does. Lord, that comparison is a bad one. Ken Hogan
Reply: The gospel of John is a book of theology. It was never meant to
describe Jesus except in the light of the early church theology. I have read
one book where the author claims John was the first written gospel but there
is nothing in evidence to support this.
