Paul wrote his letters before the 70 CE destruction of the Temple&Jerusalem. The 4 Gospels were written after and in response to the destruction. The implications are STAGGERING!~
2007-05-08
06:09:32
·
15 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
The implications is that while Jesus did exist as a historical persons, he did none of the supernatural things ascribed to him in the 4 Gospels. Paul did not believe in the virgin birth or in the literal resurrection of Jesus. The Gospels put words into Jesus' mouths. Paul had it basically right theoogically speaking : Jesus was a normal born flesh and blood man who became the Son of God by virtue of a figurative spiritual resurrection.
2007-05-08
08:07:44 ·
update #1
Yeah... well I'd have to be STAGGERING before I put any credence in what Paul had to say anyway.
2007-05-08 06:12:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by ZombieTrix 2012 6
·
1⤊
5⤋
I'm glad that you were able to pinpoint the writing of the gospels when historians have studied it for millenia and still are unable to come to a final conclusion.
They may or may NOT have written the gospels before the destruction of the temple (except for John, which is likely after its destruction).
As for the implications of Paul's letters being written before...they are not necessarily staggering. Remember, Paul learned about the LORD from the disciples...including Peter (the source behind Mark) and John.
2007-05-08 06:24:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by TWWK 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
yes they were indeed written before the gospels
for they were supposed to be letter of instructions to the respective house-churches he help planted.
the only staggering implication is that the gospel writers first thought the end will come in their lifetimes and so there wasn't any real need to put the "entire" gospel down in writing.
Paul most probably figured that all these will take some time and so he labored and he wrote stuff down... (assuming correctly that this is a world-wide thing and not only a localized thing)
and when the future gospel writers realized what was happening (and seeing that this is far bigger than anything they have ever imagined) they had to put ink into paper to preserve the eye-witness accounts and the teachings that we still have today... (like any other ancient manuscript)
2007-05-08 06:27:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by 4x4 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
"The 4 Gospels were written after and in response to the destruction."
If they were, it is very unlikely that they would not have mentioned it. It's ironic how many people take the silence of historians contemporary to Jesus as evidence that he never existed, but refuse to believe that the total silence of the Gospels concerning the destruction of the Temple (something that occurred in their "own backyard" and had far more impact on Jewish life than Jesus would have had on most historians of the time) in no way indicates that they were written prior.
"The implications are STAGGERING!"
Mind sharing them with us, then?
2007-05-08 06:29:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by Deof Movestofca 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I do know that the actual scholars and acedemics aren't for sure when they were written, so I'd love to know how you came by this information. Are you gonna publish, or did you just read something some other moron wrote which isn't based on any legitimate findings?
2007-05-08 06:32:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yeah, this should be common knowledge, hopefully even for the christians.
Paul was the only connection between when Jesus lived and the several decades (40 or more - probably much more) years later when the gospels were written... and Paul believed his "christ jesus" lived and died in a mythical realm and never existed on Earth... oops.
2007-05-08 06:17:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mike K 5
·
1⤊
3⤋
Really?
Then explain John's use of the present tense when he wrote: "Near the Sheep Gate in Jerusalem is a pool called Bethesda in Hebrew. It has five colonnades..." (John 5:2)
Next?
2007-05-08 06:18:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
So stagger us already. Paul was all over the map. What's that got to do with the gospels?
2007-05-08 06:15:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Yeah, the DaVinci Code replaced into unquestionably meant to be a artwork of fiction, yet dissimilar human beings, such as you, take it as actuality. in basic terms because of the fact they reference yet another e book would not make it non-fiction. basically some random area notice- did you already know that L. Ron Hubbard (the "writer" of Scientology) replaced right into a technological information Fiction author? some human beings study his books and marked it as organic genius and that all of them created a faith out of it. stupid, good?
2016-10-04 13:57:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by lieser 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
And only half of the letters of Paul were actually written by him, many like Hebrews and Timothy were written in the first decade of the second century and just attributed to Paul to convince people of the authenticity of the teaching they contained.
2007-05-08 06:17:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
It is obvious from reading Paul's letters that he had only heard of this Jesus fellow and had no idea of the contents of these "gospels".
2007-05-08 06:15:50
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋