How do we know what Jesus said when no one was there, anyway?

[Rhea]

For someone who thinks the bble is actually true, how do they think the gospel writers learned the private cnversaions of Jesus?

The prayers in Gethsemene. Who recorrded that and how?
The words Jesus spoke to the adulteress - everyone else had left. Who recorded that and how?
There are other points, I’m sure.

How do believrs think this was recorded and by whom?

 

[Lion IRC]

Spirit Paraclete
See also, Canonical exegesis.

 

[southernhybrid]

A young woman who I worked with, just prior to my recent retirement had a degree in Bible Studies and she admitted to me that the Bible if full of contradictions, but then she went on to say that when you put it all together, the message is the same. I really liked her so I didn't say anything. At least she admitted that the Bible contradicted itself and was written over a long period of time. I guess people who want to believe that something is true, regardless of the evidence, will do whatever they need to do mentally, to make it all sound reasonable to them.

 

[Lion IRC]

Well, I don't 'admit' that there's any contradictions in the bible.
So does my opposite view cancel out hers? A nil-all-draw?

I would go even further and assert that there are no contradictions in the bible. And that the exact same method bible skeptics use to interpret something as a so-called contradiction, can equally be employed to resolve the supposed contradiction.

 

[bilby]

Well, I don't 'admit' that there's any contradictions in the bible.
So does my opposite view cancel out hers? A nil-all-draw?

I would go even further and assert that there are no contradictions in the bible. And that the exact same method bible skeptics use to interpret something as a so-called contradiction, can equally be employed to resolve the supposed contradiction.

Which would be fine, if reality was fungible, and everyone was equally entitled to their opinion. But it's not, and they aren't, so you are simply wrong.

https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html

You can assert that the Moon is made of cheese if you like; That won't actually change the composition of the Earth's largest satellite.

 

[Juma]

For someone who thinks the bble is actually true, how do they think the gospel writers learned the private cnversaions of Jesus?

The prayers in Gethsemene. Who recorrded that and how?
The words Jesus spoke to the adulteress - everyone else had left. Who recorded that and how?
There are other points, I’m sure.

How do believrs think this was recorded and by whom?

Because it was written by Jesus? Or rather his father, his holy ghost writer.
(That the real trinity...)

 

[whollygoats]

Spirit Paraclete
See also, Canonical exegesis.

I counter with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narration#Third-person,_omniscient

It works perfectly well as fiction, which is the nature of the gospels. They are fictional narratives. Midrash of other scripture, actually.

 

[Lion IRC]

Well, I don't 'admit' that there's any contradictions in the bible.
So does my opposite view cancel out hers? A nil-all-draw?

I would go even further and assert that there are no contradictions in the bible. And that the exact same method bible skeptics use to interpret something as a so-called contradiction, can equally be employed to resolve the supposed contradiction.

Which would be fine, if reality was fungible, and everyone was equally entitled to their opinion. But it's not, and they aren't, so you are simply wrong.

https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html

You can assert that the Moon is made of cheese if you like; That won't actually change the composition of the Earth's largest satellite.

Skeptics annotated bible and iron chariots and infidels.org etc etc etc.
Yep. They are entitled to their opinion. They can 'assert' stuff about the bible.
But what happens when their opinions don't sway me from mine?

 

[bilby]

Well, I don't 'admit' that there's any contradictions in the bible.
So does my opposite view cancel out hers? A nil-all-draw?

I would go even further and assert that there are no contradictions in the bible. And that the exact same method bible skeptics use to interpret something as a so-called contradiction, can equally be employed to resolve the supposed contradiction.

Which would be fine, if reality was fungible, and everyone was equally entitled to their opinion. But it's not, and they aren't, so you are simply wrong.

https://infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/contradictions.html

You can assert that the Moon is made of cheese if you like; That won't actually change the composition of the Earth's largest satellite.

Skeptics annotated bible and iron chariots and infidels.org etc etc etc.
Yep. They are entitled to their opinion. They can 'assert' stuff about the bible.
But what happens when their opinions don't sway me from mine?

You remain demonstrably and objectively wrong.

Reality exists; and reality trumps all opinions.

 

[Lion IRC]

You remain demonstrably and objectively wrong.

No you are.

Reality exists; and reality trumps all opinions.

Yes it does.
And the reality is that your opinions remain just that.

 

[bilby]

You remain demonstrably and objectively wrong.

No you are.

Reality exists; and reality trumps all opinions.

Yes it does.
And the reality is that your opinions remain just that.

Meh. If that makes you happy.

It's not fooling anyone else.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Christians often say that the NT is based on "eye witness accounts." That's true for the events that Paul records about his travels and doings, but it isn't true for the gospels -- nor, or as far as I can see, do the gospels claim to be written by participants. As for the OP's stated question, and it's a good one, how would the gospel writers have known what transpired between Jesus and the Sanhedrin? And even if you concede that street scuttle would've provided that, how would the gospel writers have gotten the dialogue between Pilate and Jesus?

 

[DBT]

It's not an opinion that there are contradictions in the bible if the contradictions are there for anyone to see, and they are indeed logically incompatible.

 

[Lion IRC]

Yep. That's what I think too.
It's not an opinion that there are contradictions in the bible if the contradictions are there for anyone to see, and if they are logically incompatible.

...meanwhile, talk is cheap.

 

[bilby]

Yep. That's what I think too.
It's not an opinion that there are contradictions in the bible if the contradictions are there for anyone to see, and if they are logically incompatible.

...meanwhile, talk is cheap.

As, apparently, are long and explicit lists of hard evidence with links to the specific chapters and verses.

"You can take a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead" - Stan Laurel.

"There's none so blind as those what cannot see nuthin'" - Del Trotter.

 

[Lion IRC]

Hey, apologists use the exact same long and explicit lists of chapters, verses (and translations) as the bible-errancy crowd. Nobody is ducking for cover.

As I said before, the same method which bible skeptics use to interpret something as a so-called contradiction, can equally be employed to resolve the supposed contradiction.

 

[Lion IRC]

Christians often say that the NT is based on "eye witness accounts." That's true for the events that Paul records about his travels and doings, but it isn't true for the gospels -- nor, or as far as I can see, do the gospels claim to be written by participants.

Well, the entire genealogy of Jesus can't have been 'witnessed' by any one single Gospel writer.
It's multiple-source oral history and/or revelation.

As for the OP's stated question, and it's a good one, how would the gospel writers have known what transpired between Jesus and the Sanhedrin?

What precludes one or more of the Gospel writers from having been there?
Because...you don't actually know who those anonymous Gospel writers were do you?

And even if you concede that street scuttle would've provided that, how would the gospel writers have gotten the dialogue between Pilate and Jesus?

The Gospels state explicitly that the Sanhedrin/Council took Jesus to Pilate. (Luke 23:1-10)
It wasn't a 1-on-1 private interrogation.

 

[Elixir]

Well, the entire genealogy of Jesus can't have been 'witnessed' by any one single Gospel writer.

It's tough developing genealogy for someone whose father doesn't exist... there's a revelation for you.

 

[Lion IRC]

You mean Adam didn't have a father?

 

[Jobar]

You remain demonstrably and objectively wrong.

No you are.

Reality exists; and reality trumps all opinions.

Yes it does.
And the reality is that your opinions remain just that.

The problem for you is that Christians have their Great Commission to preach their religion to all the world- and that's hard to do when you can't agree among yourselves just what that religion means.

Also, consider Augustine's words:

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn.

I'd say that also applies when Christians deny contradictions in their holy book that are plain for anyone to see.