Feeding 5000 With 2 Fish And 5 Loaves...

[Guest]

I agree Ld...Well said brother...Modern biblical scholarishp is going to be so important in the nxt 20 to 30 years...With the internent a person of faith can turn into an atheist/agnostic overnight...Not that there is anything wrong with atheist/agnostics...The ones I met are good people and a ton smarter then me...Although faith in the Creator is such a real and great thing and something people shouldn't miss out on...

[Socrates]

Socrates Josephus words were altered...That's if he wrote about Jesus at all...That's a known fact...Josephus and Philo wrote about what was going on at the time...If a mircale like this happened it would of got around...Why wouldn't it be included in their writings? That's a big deal. Just like its a big deal when Jesus comes back to life and brings saints with Him and thousands of people are said to see them. Why wouldn't that be recorded in these mens writing ? I'm at a point where I'm confused. A lot of the stuff in the old testement turns out not to be true right ? Such as Jonas in a whale etc etc. So is it a far stretch to think some of these stories about Christ might not be what really happened ? There has to be a logical reason Jesus seems not to be recorded in history outside of the gospel. If all these miracles occured it almost seems He would have to be wrote about outside of the gospels. I still identify as a catholic christian and I believe Christ was raised from the dead. Although I also wonder if things were done on a much smaller scale then how the Gospels present them to have happened.

 

The part about Josephus's words being altered is a theory, rather than known fact, but is largely beside the point. . . .

 

 

You have to keep in mind that the events recorded in the Gospels took place in the first century - long before there was any internet, television, radio, telegraphs, newspapers, or printing press - and largely took place in comparatively out-of-the-way parts of the world.  There was no press corps following around Jesus with microphones and cameras to immediately broadcast news of His deeds to Rome and the rest of the world.  

 

In ancient times, news spread mostly by word-of-mouth, and had to be painstakingly written down on papyrus, and copied word-for-word by hand for copies to be spread to others. By standards of ancient history the four Gospels were practically newsflashes - most historical writings at the time were written down long after the events took place.  The Gospel was spread by orally before the four Gospels were written down, and Matthew and John were eyewitness, while Mark and Luke got their information from eyewitnesses whom they were close to.

 

The only people to witness the miraculous feeding of the five thousand were those present at the event - and it likely was a big event for those witnesses, many of whom no doubt became Christians, and spread their faith with others.  The Christian Faith did not grow so quickly in its early years for no reason.  Those following Jesus who witnessed the miracle were probably largely already His followers to some extent, and already regarded Him at least as a great and holy prophet, and this miracle no doubt confirmed their belief in Jesus's holiness.  

The news of this and other of  Christ's miracles were spread enthusiastically by His followers before being put down in writing in the four Gospels.

 

 

If, as you say, you believe in Christ's glorious Resurrection from the dead, and believe in His divinity, there is absolutely no reason not to believe in the reality of His lesser miracles.  These miracles were written down in History - in the Gospels.  Josephus and Pliny were not witnesses to these events.

 

The Church does in fact teach that the events of Christ's life recorded in the Gospel are historically factual, and not mere parables or fables.

Whether you choose to believe is another matter - it's easy enough to claim that the Gospels are fictional fabrications - as most unbelievers regard them, but if that was the truth, we must conclude that an awful people were eager to to lose everything - even their own lives - in order to perpetuate a fraud.

Edited March 10, 2013 by Socrates

[Socrates]

The Church does in fact teach that the events of Christ's life recorded in the Gospel are historically factual, and not mere parables or fables.

Whether you choose to believe is another matter - it's easy enough to claim that the Gospels are fictional fabrications - as most unbelievers regard them, but if that was the truth, we must conclude that an awful people were eager to to lose everything - even their own lives - in order to perpetuate a fraud.

 

Last line should read, "but if that was the truth, we must conclude that an awful lot of people were eager to to lose everything - even their own lives - in order to perpetuate a fraud."

[Guest]

Socrates I need to have a beer with you...Or a few...

[reyb]

The part about Josephus's words being altered is a theory, rather than known fact, but is largely beside the point. . . .

 

 

You have to keep in mind that the events recorded in the Gospels took place in the first century - long before there was any internet, television, radio, telegraphs, newspapers, or printing press - and largely took place in comparatively out-of-the-way parts of the world.  There was no press corps following around Jesus with microphones and cameras to immediately broadcast news of His deeds to Rome and the rest of the world.  

 

In ancient times, news spread mostly by word-of-mouth, and had to be painstakingly written down on papyrus, and copied word-for-word by hand for copies to be spread to others. By standards of ancient history the four Gospels were practically newsflashes - most historical writings at the time were written down long after the events took place.  The Gospel was spread by orally before the four Gospels were written down, and Matthew and John were eyewitness, while Mark and Luke got their information from eyewitnesses whom they were close to.

 

The only people to witness the miraculous feeding of the five thousand were those present at the event - and it likely was a big event for those witnesses, many of whom no doubt became Christians, and spread their faith with others.  The Christian Faith did not grow so quickly in its early years for no reason.  Those following Jesus who witnessed the miracle were probably largely already His followers to some extent, and already regarded Him at least as a great and holy prophet, and this miracle no doubt confirmed their belief in Jesus's holiness.  

The news of this and other of  Christ's miracles were spread enthusiastically by His followers before being put down in writing in the four Gospels.

 

 

If, as you say, you believe in Christ's glorious Resurrection from the dead, and believe in His divinity, there is absolutely no reason not to believe in the reality of His lesser miracles.  These miracles were written down in History - in the Gospels.  Josephus and Pliny were not witnesses to these events.

 

The Church does in fact teach that the events of Christ's life recorded in the Gospel are historically factual, and not mere parables or fables.

Whether you choose to believe is another matter - it's easy enough to claim that the Gospels are fictional fabrications - as most unbelievers regard them, but if that was the truth, we must conclude that an awful people were eager to to lose everything - even their own lives - in order to perpetuate a fraud.

 

It is written in Matt 27:51-53

 

51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; 52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

 

If Catholic claim is true about ‘historicity’ of these events, do you really think Josephus -  if it is true that he wrote about Jesus-  will ever, ever, ever missed this ‘resurrection of saints’ scandal? Cannot you imagine the ‘scandal’ it will bring to them?  Dead people (not one but many people) risen from cemetery!  What kind of ‘present’ historian or non-historian will ever miss this event? Are you saying all of them never wrote about this event?

 

And another thing, why all your early fathers never mention about this ‘resurrection of saints’ during their discussion with these heretics (since this heretics do not accept their ‘human’ Jesus). If I were in Ignatius shoes they will surely be ashamed of me even without too much discussion. I will simply hold their hands and then, we will go to Jerusalem and then, I will let them discuss and debate with these ‘resurrected saints’ themselves. Let us see who will win.

 

Anyway, you are correct. If anyone can accept this ‘resurrection of saints’ as historical event even without any recorded physical evidences then, you can really accept anything even lies.

Edited March 11, 2013 by reyb

[Laudate_Dominum]

I want to have some beers with Socrates too.

[reyb]

I want to have some beers with Socrates too.

I am willing to come. If Socrates will invite me.

[krissylou]

So you believe Jonas was in a whale ? You believe God ordered women and children to be killed and raped ? I'm sorry but I don't. Although I guess I can see how those stories tied in with the new testement can come together in some crazy way to form a more postive then negative effect in the end....I think.

 

Father Barron has some interesting htings to say on this score.  He'll interpret quite a bit metaphorically.

 

So I think you're still within the family.

[krissylou]

Google one of Father Barron's discussions on "The Youtube Heresies" and look for his section on fundamentalistic Biblical interpretation.

[Guest]

Hey Krissy...Big fan of Father...I will check it out...Thank you...Godbless :)