Resurrection

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>> BAKKE

>> Granted, although the possibility that it did not raises an interesting

>> question. To wit, if the city did not exist in the early first century,

>> how could the Gospel writers have referenced it for something as

>> important as the home of Jesus and get contemporary readers to take

>> their stories seriously?

> 

>ELF

>Well, IF the writers wrote their stories in and about Jerusalem shortly

>after the life of Jesus (assuming him to be real for the moment), then yes no

>contemporary readers would have taken them very seriously.

> 

>Since the stories WERE at some point obviously taken seriously, then if

>there was no Nazareth nor any Arimathea, then that argue that the stories were

>neither local nor close in time to the events.


BAKKE
That is quite true.  However, I don't know that the 3-7 decade time lag
between the events recorded in the Gospels and the writing of those same
Gospels would have been sufficient to allow the creation of bogus cities
that readers would have accepted at face value.  Only a relatively few
people supposedly saw Jesus, but it's reasonable to assume that a great
many more would have known of the cities that were (or were not)
contemporary with his life.

-- 
Visit "NIGHT OWL MK. II" at: http://home.earthlink.net/~mlbakke1
Featuring:
  BOULDER GAMES -- The Best in Wargames! (A Starting Point Hot Site!)
  Philosophy of Life -- Speak Your Mind! | Register your site with the
  "Grognard: The Collectable Card Game"  | Wargamers' Homepage Listing!

• Previous message: Resurrection
• Next message: Resurrection
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]