Is the New Testament just hazy third party recollections of the deeds and words of a long dead anarchist?

Answer 1

I think that sums it up quite well.

Answer 2

You could not say that the NT is "third party recollections" because two of the four Gospel writers knew Christ personally during his ministry, James, the author of the letter James, was the Lord's half brother, Peter, the author of 1 and 2 Peter, was one of Christ's disciples, and the Apostle Paul had an encounter with the resurrected Christ.
The NT was completed during the first century, when many other eyewitnesses of Christ were still alive.

Answer 3

If you read the New Testament you will find similarities in the various books. So, I think, parts of it are truth. I also believe that what is written has been modified by the Church to suit their purposes; and if you ever watch Discovery channel or History channel you will see that there is evidence to support biblical events, yet at the same time that there is more to the stories than what we've been spoon-fed as absolute truth.

Answer 4

Hardly. Consider the accout written by Luke the physician. He went around like a reporter interviewing people and writing down their eyewitness testimonies.

Luke 1:1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Acts 1:1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 3 To them he presented himself alive after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.

Answer 5

The New Testament is antiPagan propaganda. The old testament is the mythology. Evert single religious pantheon, regardless of whether it's Muslim, Heathen, Hindu, Jewish, Christian has its mythology, or the story of how we came to be, and within these categories, so do the individual cultures practising under these banners have their mythologies. Old Testament is just the mythology of the Christian pantheon..

Answer 6

Actually, the vast majority is first hand accounts. John, Matthew, and Mark all knew Jesus personally, as did Peter. Paul met the resurrected Christ. Even Luke was only a secondhand witness, having interviewed the others, and quite possibly having at least met Jesus in life.

The most convincing thing to me today is that His words rang true enough for generations of believers to lay their lives on the line for their faith. All but one of His disciples died under Nero or others for refusing to deny their faith in the One they had known. That one died in exile for his testimony. In the 20th century more Christians died for their faith than in all of Christendom before it. So those words in red still speak firsthand to the hearts of those who want to know the truth at all cost.

Answer 7

the New Testament recorded by eye witness to Jesus-as required to be included in the cannonization of the bible. It is a Jesus love letter to those that believe, and condemnation to those that chose to be decieved.

As a Jew I was taught against the New testament and Jesus too, now he is my savior since I did as he asked and repented from my sins=even one lie, and let Jesus in to help me and be my friend. as he promised in Revelation 3:19&20

and praying for you to see the light too and the exact account of the New Testament which as it says to those without the Spirit of God is not able to understand the Spirit of God in the book -except to come to Jesus and then it opens up wide-worked for me. Have a nice eve, David

Answer 8

I think so..I'm an athiest but I've read the bible for fun and I thought the old testament was horrible but more interesting than the new testament

Answer 9

I think it is a combination of eyewitnesses AND third party accounts. Y'know, those who were there, and those who liked to pretend they were there. Pretty cool anarchist; too bad his words have been twisted to suit the purposes of organizations he would have despised.

Answer 10

Start with the book of Mark.

Mark was a child when he had seen these things.

It is short.

It is powerful.

Answer 11

Some accounts are eyewitness, but still, that doesn't make them reliable. So yeah, this pretty much sums it up.