=]
You can't.
That's why people who interperate the bible literally are foolish in a sense.
2006-12-04 09:09:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
that is a crucial question, especially if one were to put faith in the accuracy of the Gospels.
Most scholars agree that the last book of the Bible (Revelation) was written by at least 90AD, while some tend to believe it was finished by 70 AD (because the destruction of the Temple by Titus is not mentioned anywhere in Scripture) Even if you take the later date, that is only 60 years after Christ's resurrection.
That is just not enough time for legend to corrupt actual eyewitness accounts of what happened.
And to top it off, the manuscripts were copied rather fast and passed around from church to church. There are literally thousands of early mansucripts still around.
I have some great research on this at home, but unfortunately, I'm at work taking a lunch break and don't have access to it.
2006-12-04 17:21:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by nildesperandum777 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sometimes it takes time to figure out just what happened. Just look at the JFK assassination. Forty years later, and there are still questions about that event. Is it really surprising that it took a while to figure out something as weird as a Resurrection? Have we forgotten the specifics of the Kennedy Administration in 40 years? Remember, Paul INVITED ppl to check things out with the survivors of the 500+ witnesses to Jesus' resurrection. Without access to video footage, what better proof can you ask for?
2006-12-04 17:16:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because the Old testament flows right into it , each gospel is written for the people of that time
Mathew for the Jews
Mark for the Romans
Luke for the Greek
and John was written to the New Believers (the church)
2006-12-04 17:10:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by Terry S 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
There's no canonical Gospel that was written after the 1st century.Matthew and John were Apostles, and eyewitnesses of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. Mark probably drew his account from the Apostle Peter, and Luke wrote his Gospel after consulting many sources, including Mary herself.
2006-12-04 17:13:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Paulie D 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I've heard of no credible suggestion that any of the Gospel writings could be any younger than 40 years after the death of Jesus. On top of that, the names attributed to the gospels are, at best, iffy.
2006-12-04 17:11:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by JAT 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Jesus was "invented in 325"???? Uuuuhhhh okay.
The earliest known Biblical manuscript I believe dates from 90AD, the previous one was from about 140 AD.
You can tell Jesus wasn't effected by legend because eyewitnesses wrote accounts of him. Mithras and Hercules do not share that feat. Unlike pagan myths, the New Testament is authored from a historical perspective in that the documents are written as fact, not poetic story-telling. And reading them in English does not do justice to them, you should try to read it in their original Greek because contextually and linguistically everything becomes extremely clear.
2006-12-04 17:22:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
who said they were written 5-135 years after Jesus ascended to heaven. That infomation is incorrect. They were written between 1-40AD.
2006-12-04 17:09:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by A follower of Christ 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
We are not sure... and yes they are twisted to fit the legend. Read Misquoting Jesus.
2006-12-04 17:14:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by Max D 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I always wonder about Jewish law. Jesus was a Jew and be read the torah and observed the laws .
Vatican is going over eliminating revelations.
2006-12-04 17:17:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by Labatt113 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think you've hit on a VERY important part of the mythology.
After all, jesus was invented at the council of nicea in 325 "ad". Prior to that there was NO credible mention of this person.
That's because he never existed.
2006-12-04 17:08:16
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋