Word of God?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Im sure this question must have been asked before so if anyone can direct me to a previous thread it would be much appreciated.

I had always taken it for granted that the gospel was written Matthew Mark Luke John during or shortly after Jesus's life.But I discover at via some cynical mates it was written 4 or 5 hundered years later, based on oral history. Surely not! Someone must be pulling my leg! The New Testament was written half a century after the event?!? What kind of joke is that?!

Feeling a very foolish after being laughed at by atheist friends who assure me this is true.

Please please tell me this is not so.

-- Kiwi Golem (csisherwood@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002

Answers

excuse the appalling grammar/spelling

-- kiwi golem (csisherwood@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

Wait a minute: four or five hundred years don't make half a century. Bible research has been pointing out for almost 150 years, however, that it is extremely likely that the gospel texts that we have were written after 60 A.D. We can infer from references in Paul's letters that most, if not all, of them were written before that date, and why doesn't he refer to them?

OTOH does is mattter? Oral history can be extremely reliable--ask an expert on how it works.

Then, why write things down if you can ask an eyewitness? As long as the apostles were around, there was no need to write things down.

Also, you're unlikely to bother with putting things in writing if the Messiah has just shown up: many people in those days believed that he'd be back very soon. There was, from a certain POV, no need to write things down for posterity because there wouldn't be any.

It also doesn't matter when exactly the books of the Bible were written if they're inspired by the Lord. We can be sure He made sure the contents are correct, despite the books weren't written right after the fact.

-- -- (unknown@a.nonymous), June 06, 2002.


Courtenay,

1/2 a century is 50 years. So your atheist friends are correct in that the Gospels(at least one was that late) were written nearly a half century after Jesus' death.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the estimated dates that the Gospels were written:

Matthew 40-45 A.D. Mark 50-67 A.D. Luke I couldn't find a date, but only that it was written before Mark. John ~96 A.D.

-- Glenn (glenn@excite.com), June 06, 2002.


Courtney

"But I discover at via some cynical mates it was written 4 or 5 hundered years later, based on oral history."

The Biblical stories of the Apostles and the Gospels were complete within the first century after the death of Christ and his Apostles.

I think the people who are confusing you are really confused about the Bible and Church traditions which were ongoing for some time after the death of Christ. St. Ignatius, St Jerome, St augustine and manny others were hard at work establishing the Traditions of the Church and also the final makeup of the Bible we have to this day.

You need to read on all of the beginning historical things of the early Church and the Councils which helped to establish how the Church Peter was intrusted with by Christ was to be like. Much of this is denied to the protestants this day and denied to ther faithful and we as Catholics have this to help us to better understand our Church traditions, faith and the Triune GOD today.

Thanks be to GOD.

-- Fred Bishop (FCB@heartland.com), June 06, 2002.


Hi Kiwi:

The New Testament books as well as the deuterocanical books and O.T. were ratified as canonical at the councils of Hippo and Trent in the late 300's and early 400's. Perhaps that was what your atheist friends were talking about. And Fred is correct, most Protestants will tell you that the Catholic church added the deuterocanicals at the council of Trent, but that is not true. Reformers threw the deuterocanicals OUT in the reformation. The deuterocanicals had been part of the Greek Septuagint and Jerome's Latin translation all along.

Gail

-- Gail (Rothfarms@socket.net), June 06, 2002.



Consider what would happen if the finest, most informed, well intentioned people in America got together to write out the definitive story of some historic event 300 years in the past. I've had to wonder what kind of arrogance exists that enabled someone to say, "This passage is the Word of God, but this other stuff isn't."

-- Bob Hennessy (bobhen@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

Bob

You need not to look very far indeed. The world is full of them who have actually done what you mentioned in your question.

They are the Mormons, Moonies, Jehovahs Witnesses, Christian Scientists, New Age Activists and many, many more since the reformation period.

Blessings.

-- Fred Bishop (FCB@heartland.com), June 06, 2002.


Bob

And the greatest enemy of the Catholic Church, the Masonic Lodge which has tried to disguise itself under many umbrellas over the years. How about the Church of england and the Calvinists and the Lutherans. They have diavowed the leadership of Christs Apostales and Peter's role as the head of the Church. The list goes on and on. They have in some form deemed the word of GOD has changed to suit them and the Catholics and others even those within their ranks to be wrong and not to have the true word of GOD. We even have Heretics floating around this very forum trying to tell us that the Word is being taught wrong by us in this forum. Including Yourself.

-- Fred Bishop (FCB@heartland.com), June 06, 2002.


doh,half a millennium of course, 60 years that sounds much better. Huh Ill show them now! Ill have all the boys converting at this rate(maybe thats a bit hopeful)...thanks Fred Gail and Glenn and unknown

"unknown" poster re "Oral history can be extremely reliable--ask an expert on how it works." Oral history leads to myths and legends from what I can make from history of societies that never had a written language such as NZ's native people the Maori.

I certainly would not throw the house on the local tribes version of just about anything... Have you never played 'chinese whispers' , nor told a fishing story around a camp fire over a few drinks? Id be very interested if you could point me in the direction of such an "expert" on oral history on the net please.

-- kiwi golem (csisherwood@hotmail.com), June 07, 2002.


Oral history doesn't work like the way from, "We are going to advance, send reenforcements", to "We are going to a dance, send three- and fourpence". [It's said to have actually happened to British communications in WW I but it may be an urban legend :-) ] It has been studied in a few cultures in Europe: elders, shamans, or others to whom maintaining the traditions of the group has been assigend, learn the important texts by heart and can quote them precisely, word by word. Believe it or not, it actually happened--we so often underestimate our memory's capabilities. (Exception: university professors regularly overestimate their students' memories' capacity.)

I dimly remember one episode or Roots in which the author went back to his home village in Africa, meeting an elder who could actually tell the entire group's history for centuries. Correct me if I'm wrong; I hope I'm somehow comprehensible...

Btw there was some source around even before Mark was written down. It usually goes under the abbreviation Q, which I've been told comes from German quell, 'source'. (Once upon a time German scholars were leading Catholic theologians, but that was decades before Hans Küng etc.) We can be pretty sure that Matthew, Mark, and Luke used that Q collection of sayings and deeds of Jesus. There are also surprising similarities between Luke and John that may suggest a common source.

And the latest, from a German (!) exegesis professor named Klaus Berger, is the thesis that the Gospels were written within 15 years after Christ's death and resurrection, and before Paul wrote any of his letters.

-- -- (unknown@a.nonymous), June 07, 2002.



Well Ive learnt something new today, Thanks unknown. Guess I keep thinking in terms of my own memory!

Highly recommended reading to those interested in oral history in the early church.

http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_03_01_01.html#recall

Bible and Society Oral Arguments

On the Reliability of Oral Tradition

J. P. Holding

-- kiwi golem (csisherwood@hotmail.com), June 07, 2002.


KG, --Keep in mind, that even if --IF the written scripture had never been recorded as we know it, the Word of God was protected by the Holy Spirit from the days of the Holy Apostles onward. No error could enter into their oral history, as Christ clearly provided a safeguard in the Advocate, or Holy Spirit.

In John, 16 :12 --:16, Christ calls Him the Spirit of Truth, and makes a startling prophesy: ''For He will speak not on His own authority, but whatever He will hear (FROM ME) He will speak, and the things that are to come He will declare to you.''

Is it too much to understand the ''things that are to come''-- would even be the revelations later on to His Church-- Of exactly which holy books were the true Word of God? The Holy Spirit is who declared the Holy Bible inspired; NOT MEN. Men only sat in council and heard Him speak the truth; as Christ prophesied.

That is our guarantee of the genuine books of the Bible. Not a printing press, or a manuscript dating to 60 A.D. --

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), June 07, 2002.


''Consider what would happen if the finest, most informed, well intentioned people in America got together to write out the definitive story of some historic event 300 years in the past. I've had to wonder what kind of arrogance exists that enabled someone to say, 'This passage is the Word of God, but this other stuff isn't.' '' -- Bob Hennessy (bobhen@hotmail.com), June 06, 2002.

Look at my post right here. Do you mean the Holy Spirit is ''arrogant'', or that He wouldn't reveal the truth?

Did you know that to God one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as one day? What are 300 years or so; to God? Do you even believe< in God, Bob?

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), June 07, 2002.


Hello, "unknown/anonymous."

You wrote: "And the latest, from a German (!) exegesis professor named Klaus Berger, is the thesis that the Gospels were written within 15 years after Christ's death and resurrection, and before Paul wrote any of his letters."

Yes, I have read this thesis too. And, if you keep reading, you will find that some scriptural scholars, in recent years, have been abandoning the idea that you mentioned about a "Q" (quelle). There is no known "Q" document. This "Q" is only another thesis (from 19th-century German Protesants), which may or may not be correct. A few years ago, I read a plausible non-Q explanation for the structure of the synoptic gospels. And, just now, in seeking a reference for you to consult, came across this one almost immediately. Upon arriving there, I suggest that you try the links under the heading, "Supplementary Materials (Introductory)."

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 08, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ