Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Eliot Rosewater

(31,096 posts)
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:01 PM Mar 2018

Historically speaking, what is the ONE reason we know about John or Jesus

or the bible, etc?

What historical proof (not questioning the proof, want to know the timeline, etc) is there that John existed and the he wrote the bible or whoever did.

How does that story get from 2000 years ago to now, I guess is how I am asking, what ONE person is responsible for the fact that we even talk about a "bible" or Jesus, John, etc?

30 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Historically speaking, what is the ONE reason we know about John or Jesus (Original Post) Eliot Rosewater Mar 2018 OP
Probably no single person, but Paul might have been the most influential The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2018 #1
So he writes the bible and somehow it gets handed down for 2000 years? Eliot Rosewater Mar 2018 #2
There were various stories that were collected marylandblue Mar 2018 #3
So the entire bible is in fact dependent on word of mouth stories? Eliot Rosewater Mar 2018 #6
For the gospels and Book of Acts, yes marylandblue Mar 2018 #9
there is speculation of. Q documents edhopper Mar 2018 #19
Yes, Oral Tradition accounts. sprinkleeninow Mar 2018 #21
Paul didn't write the Bible. He might have written between 8 and 13 The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2018 #5
Which is interesting in itself since Paul never even met Jesus Major Nikon Mar 2018 #11
That's true. He wrote his letters based on what one could call hearsay. The Velveteen Ocelot Mar 2018 #12
There was a significant gap Major Nikon Mar 2018 #13
That is what I am looking for. One wonders about all that. Eliot Rosewater Mar 2018 #14
Without Paul, there would be no Christianity today Major Nikon Mar 2018 #10
Today, you mean? MineralMan Mar 2018 #4
Roman CATHOLIC church? Eliot Rosewater Mar 2018 #7
Yes, but it started as just the church in Rome. MineralMan Mar 2018 #8
Thanks, I am having a situation where I wish I could believe. I wish there was Eliot Rosewater Mar 2018 #30
I would keep in mine that the word "Catholic" merely means "Universal" ExciteBike66 Mar 2018 #28
The New Testament is a collection of different books. Voltaire2 Mar 2018 #15
The Torah is just the first 5 books (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) nt IphengeniaBlumgarten Mar 2018 #16
Yes. The op was asking about the NT. Voltaire2 Mar 2018 #17
That one's a mess. Pope George Ringo II Mar 2018 #18
There still exist many New Testament canons from the ancient Roman empire The Genealogist Mar 2018 #24
Constantine, converting edhopper Mar 2018 #20
Maybe. Or maybe Constantine's "conversion" was a political move on his part, struggle4progress Mar 2018 #22
That is my position on why Constantine "converted" The Genealogist Mar 2018 #23
could be edhopper Mar 2018 #27
The triumph of Christianity - an interview with Bart Ehrman Jim__ Mar 2018 #25
Proof of Jesus Ohioboy Mar 2018 #26
Thanks, sounds more like what makes sense to me Eliot Rosewater Mar 2018 #29

Eliot Rosewater

(31,096 posts)
2. So he writes the bible and somehow it gets handed down for 2000 years?
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:03 PM
Mar 2018

I just wonder if there is any point where there is a gap and stuff could have been invented, so to speak.

marylandblue

(12,344 posts)
3. There were various stories that were collected
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:09 PM
Mar 2018

and written down 20 to 50 years after Jesus' death, with additional changes to the text for centuries after that. Because the original stories were oral, there is no one person who is responsible for them. The main exceptions are some of Paul's letters. Many scholars believe at least some of them were actually written by Paul. But Paul never met Jesus, so he too was relying on stories.

marylandblue

(12,344 posts)
9. For the gospels and Book of Acts, yes
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:21 PM
Mar 2018

The New Testament letters were probably written down from the beginning, but not necessarily by the person they are ascribed to. In the days before printing and copyright, it was very common to write in someone else's name.

Old Testament is also mix of things, some originally oral, some written and again with uncertain authors.

edhopper

(33,164 posts)
19. there is speculation of. Q documents
Mon Mar 26, 2018, 12:54 AM
Mar 2018

written soon after the time of Jesus, that the Gospels are based on.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,267 posts)
5. Paul didn't write the Bible. He might have written between 8 and 13
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:11 PM
Mar 2018

of the 27 books of the New Testament. The Old Testament already existed as a compilation of the sacred texts in the Jewish tradition. There is still no consensus among Christian denominations regarding which writings comprise the Bible, or who wrote most of them.

Major Nikon

(36,814 posts)
11. Which is interesting in itself since Paul never even met Jesus
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:40 PM
Mar 2018

Unless you count the time the Holy Poltergeist whispered into his ear after a 3 day bender.

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,267 posts)
12. That's true. He wrote his letters based on what one could call hearsay.
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:43 PM
Mar 2018

Most of the Bible is derived from oral tradition and assorted legends and is full of internal contradictions, which makes it tricky for literalists to explain.

Major Nikon

(36,814 posts)
13. There was a significant gap
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:53 PM
Mar 2018

The Christian biblical canons were written decades if not more than a century after the death of Christ, and not by those in which they are attributed to.

Major Nikon

(36,814 posts)
10. Without Paul, there would be no Christianity today
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:38 PM
Mar 2018

The problem early Christians had was it was most decidedly a Jewish sect and male membership required the absence of a foreskin per Mosaic law. During a time of no antibiotics or anesthesia, this made the price of membership quite high as there was a good chance the highly painful procedure would result in death or pieces falling off.

Paul brought the gentiles to the party, foreskin intact, along with the resulting Greek and Roman wealth which bankrolled the early church.

MineralMan

(146,189 posts)
4. Today, you mean?
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:10 PM
Mar 2018

Thank the Roman church for that. They're the ones that created the biblical canon by assembling, editing and compiling a story from all those different accounts.

They're the ones that kept it alive and began spreading it everywhere.

MineralMan

(146,189 posts)
8. Yes, but it started as just the church in Rome.
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 01:14 PM
Mar 2018

It's a very complicated story, actually. There's lots of material on the growth of Christianity from the very early churches to the behemoth it is today. You can get started at this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Christianity

Other links from that article will take you to many other aspects of the story. It's a long, long story, so there's lots to learn.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,096 posts)
30. Thanks, I am having a situation where I wish I could believe. I wish there was
Tue Mar 27, 2018, 11:47 AM
Mar 2018

life after death and something to look forward to.

I cant get "The Invention Of Lying" movie out of my head, Ricky Gervais, if you haven't seen it, you must. I would love to believe.

ExciteBike66

(2,280 posts)
28. I would keep in mine that the word "Catholic" merely means "Universal"
Tue Mar 27, 2018, 06:07 AM
Mar 2018

At one point (I think) it was the only game in town for Christianity.

Voltaire2

(12,610 posts)
15. The New Testament is a collection of different books.
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 02:21 PM
Mar 2018

With many different authors, most written long after the alleged events.

The Roman state and religious authorities decided which of the many existing books or gospels were acceptable, those became what is now known as the New Testament or the canonical gospels. This was in the 4th century CE. The rest is history. The Old Testament is essentially the Torah and it has its own history.

Voltaire2

(12,610 posts)
17. Yes. The op was asking about the NT.
Sun Mar 25, 2018, 05:35 PM
Mar 2018

I really didn’t want to get into the details of what the Christian OT is derived from.

The Genealogist

(4,723 posts)
24. There still exist many New Testament canons from the ancient Roman empire
Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:27 PM
Mar 2018

It took centuries for the New Testament as it is today to emerge. Different local congregations had their own ideas of what the New Testeament was. There were many MANY gospels, stories of apostolic acts, epistles and apocalypses in circulation. Some of the preserved canons even contain literature that no longer exists.

edhopper

(33,164 posts)
20. Constantine, converting
Mon Mar 26, 2018, 12:56 AM
Mar 2018

and making Christianity the religion of the Empire is a major reason it survived and flourished.

struggle4progress

(118,032 posts)
22. Maybe. Or maybe Constantine's "conversion" was a political move on his part,
Mon Mar 26, 2018, 08:28 PM
Mar 2018

to try to gather more public support for himself. There were a many converts to Christianity in the Roman world before the time of Constantine

The Genealogist

(4,723 posts)
23. That is my position on why Constantine "converted"
Mon Mar 26, 2018, 09:21 PM
Mar 2018

I have no idea what he really believed. Christianity was a minor religion when he came to power. But I think he saw in Christianity a potential source of unity for his empire, and began laying a framework for Christianity to become the dominant religion. Most of the following emperors were Christians, with varying degrees of interest in enforcing Christianity as THE religion of the empire.

Ohioboy

(3,222 posts)
26. Proof of Jesus
Mon Mar 26, 2018, 10:24 PM
Mar 2018

( This is Ohioboy's wife speaking)
There really isn't any proof that Jesus existed, historically or archaeologically. Josephus the historian does mention a Jesus, but we don't know if it's the same one. The gospel of Mark is the oldest gospel, nobody knows who really wrote it. The gospels of Matthew and Luke are thought to have used Mark as a source; they're called the synoptic gospels for that reason. John's gospel was written later. Nobody knows who wrote those either.
The Bible as a collection of books was written by a whole bunch of different people, and there are books and gospels and letters (epistles, like those written by Paul to the different Christian congregations of the first century) that are not considered "canonical" that is, they didn't make the cut when, in 325ce, the Council of Nicea decided what books should go in and which not. If the Bible seems to agree with itself in any way, it's because these guys made that happen. There are also the Early Church Fathers, who came along a generation after the disciples, like Clement of Rome, Ignatius, and Polycarp. They all had an influence on what Christians believe today.
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Historically speaking, wh...