Section 2 - Writing A Church Constitution - Association Of Baptist: Fill & Download for Free

On the eve of the Revolution, France was still the most populous country in Europe (26 million inhabitants) and one of the richest. But revolt was brewing. Peasants made up 80% of the population and paid the lion's share of royal taxes—plus tithes to the Church and seigniorial dues—while earning the lowest income. The middle class held almost all economic power, but was excluded from political power. Meanwhile, the nobility lived in idleness, and the Church owned 10% of the most profitable lands in the country.It is hardly surprising then that popular revolts erupted, particularly seeing how long the middle classes had been preparing them. The people were the ones who seized the Bastille on July 14, 1789, executed Louis XVI, and for all intents and purposes made the Revolution, but it was the middle classes who seized power and imposed their form of language.The revolutionary period stirred national sentiment, including with regard to language. For the first time, language was associated with nation. Language was a matter of state, for the state had to equip the "united and indivisible Republic" with a national language and raise the people up through education and knowledge of French. The very idea of a "united and indivisible Republic" whose motto was "Fraternité, Liberté, Egalité" (Fraternity, Freedom, Equality) was irreconcilable with linguistic fragmentation and differences between the former provinces of the monarchy. The revolutionary middle classes saw such fragmentation as an obstacle to the spread of their ideas, and declared war on the dialects. Bertrand Barère (1755–1841), a member of the Committee of Public Safety, led the fight for a national language. In a report "on the idioms" (regional dialects) he presented before the Convention on January 27, 1794, Barère stated his position thus:The monarchy had reasons for clinging to the Tower of Babel. In a democracy, keeping citizens ignorant of the national language, unable to control power, is a betrayal of the motherland… In a free country, the language must be the same for one and all. […] What money we spent translating the laws of the first two national assemblies into France's various idioms! As though it were up to us to maintain these barbaric dialects and coarse idioms, which now serve only fanatics and counter-revolutionaries!He was by no means alone in his thinking. One of the most famous members of the ruling class—Abbot Henri-Baptiste Grégoire (1750–1831)—published his famous Rapport sur la nécessité et les moyens d'anéantir les patois et d'universaliser l'usage de la langue française in 1794. He denounced the linguistic situation in the French republic, which, "with thirty different dialects," was still "a Tower of Babel" whereas "for liberty" it was "a leader among nations." At the Convention, he stated, "We no longer have provinces but rather thirty dialects that remind us of their names." With a certain dread, Abbot Grégoire revealed in his report that French was spoken "exclusively" in "about 15 departments" (out of 83). It seemed a paradox to him—and intolerable, to say the least—that fewer than 3 million out of 25 million French people spoke the national language, while this language was used and unified "even in Canada and along the Mississippi." On September 20, 1793, Abbot Grégoire stated the following to the Public Education Committee:The local dialects, the patois of six million French people who do not speak the national language, will gradually disappear, because—and I can't say it often enough—it is more important politically to eradicate this diversity of coarse idioms, which prolong the infancy of reason and the age of prejudice.The term language began to be used exclusively in reference to French, "our language." Everything that was not French was called a patois or feudal idiom, which for Grégoire was Breton, Norman, Picard, Provençal, Gascon, Basque, etc. He even spoke of "Corsican Italian" (Corsican) and German of the Upper and Lower Rhine (Alsatian), which he qualified as "much degenerated idioms." He further stated that "the Negroes in our colonies" spoke "a poor type of idiom" akin to "the Frankish tongue." No modern linguist could get away with statements like that today!Linguistic TerrorConsequently, a need was felt to impose French via stringent decrees throughout France, something the English language never experienced. Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand (1754–1838), one of the great French politicians of the time, proposed that there be an elementary school for teaching French in each municipality:The language of the Constitution and laws will be taught to everyone, and this host of tainted dialects—the last remains of the feudality—will be forced to disappear. Circumstances dictate it.Then, the decree of 2 Thermidor (July 20, 1794) sanctioned linguistic terror. From this point on, local dialects were literally hunted down. This linguistic law, though it was repealed almost immediately because of Robespierre's execution (July 28, 1794), gives us a good idea of the revolutionary leaders' intentions:Section 1From the day this law is published, no public document may be written in any language other than French in any part of the Republic.Section 2One month following the publication of this law, no document may be registered if it is not written in French, even under private signet.Section 3Any civil servant, public official, or government agent who, following the publication of this law, records, writes, or draws up minutes, judgments, contracts, or any other documents in idioms or languages other than French shall be brought before the correctional police court in his place of residence, condemned to six months of imprisonment, and dismissed.Section 4The same sentence shall be imposed on all registration fee collectors who, from the month after publication of this law, register documents in idioms and languages other than French, even under private signet.But "linguistic terror" did not succeed in destroying the "dialectal Tower of Babel." Not only did the population resist, but the secularization of ecclesiastical institutions led to the disappearance of most schools, which the state did not have the means to replace. Small village schools found it impossible to teach French given the lack of funds and teachers.Even in Paris, public schools were not up to the task, or scarcely so, given the lack of teachers (on account of low salaries, appalling recruitment practices, lack of training, etc.). In schools that did manage to operate, local officials preferred translating French into patois or dialects. A sense of realism and a desire for efficiency led to the continuation of this system of translation throughout the Revolution, even under the Terror. In short, contrary to most perceptions, the language policy of the Revolution was neither consistent nor uniform, and was not always repressive of regional languages.Source: https://slmc.uottawa.ca/?q=french_history#s4b

Jesus died A.D. 33 april 3 fri. or A.D. 30 fri. 7 april. either date the are fairly close. The gospels where written from 50-69 A.D. 1st of all I have never heard of Jesus and his friends speaking in Aramaic from all that I have researched I have not seen any facts that Jesus and His friends spoke Aramaic. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John where all eyewitnesses and friends of Jesus not to mention that all they wrote in the gospels where inspired by the Holy Spirit which is written in these areas of the Bible 2 Peter 1:20-21 and 2 Timothy 3:16 are some of my favorite verses on this subject because they are very clear that the Word of God (The Bible) is inspired by the Holy Spirit also known as the Holy Ghost so, there is a couple of reasons why the gospels are reliable heres some more stuff about that question A searchable online Bible in over 150 versions and 50 languages. Historical reliability of the GospelsFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThis article is part of the Jesus and history series of articles.Further information: Gospel and Biblical criticismPart of a series onJesus in Christianity[show]Jesus in Islam[show]Background[show]Jesus in history[show]Perspectives on Jesus[show]Jesus in culture[show]Christianity portalIslam portalBook:JesusvteThe historical reliability of the Gospels refers to the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. Some believe that all four canonical gospels meet the five criteria for historical reliability; some say that little in the gospels is considered to be historically reliable.[1][2][3][4][5][6]Almost all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed,[7][8][9][10]but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus,[11]and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman PrefectPontius Pilate.[12][13][14]Elements whose historical authenticity is disputed include the two accounts of the Nativity of Jesus, the miraculous events including the resurrection, and certain details about the crucifixion.[15][16][17][18][19][20]According to the majority viewpoint the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, collectively referred to as the Synoptic Gospels, are the primary sources of historical information about Jesus and of the religious movement he founded.[1][21][22]The fourth gospel, the Gospel of John, differs greatly from the first three gospels. Historians often study the historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostleswhen studying the reliability of the gospels, as Acts was seemingly written by the same author as the Gospel of Luke.Historians subject the gospels to critical analysis, attempting to differentiate, rather than authenticate, reliable information from possible inventions, exaggerations, and alterations.[1]Since there are more textual variants in the New Testament (200-400 thousand) than it has letters (c. 140 thousand),[23]scholars use textual criticism to determine which gospel variants could theoretically be taken as 'original'. To answer this question, scholars have to ask who wrote the gospels, when they wrote them, what was their objective in writing them,[24]what sources the authors used, how reliable these sources were, and how far removed in time the sources were from the stories they narrate, or if they were altered later. Scholars can also look into the internal evidence of the documents, to see if, for example, the document is misquoting texts from the Hebrew Tanakh, is making claims about geography that were incorrect, if the author appears to be hiding information, or if the author has made up a certain prophecy.[25]Finally, scholars turn to external sources, including the testimony of early church leaders, writers outside the church (mainly Jewish and Greco-Roman historians) who would have been more likely to have criticized the early churches, and to archaeological evidence.Contents[hide]1Methodology2Earliest extant manuscripts3Authorship and date3.1Synoptic Gospels3.1.1Mark3.1.2Matthew3.1.3Luke3.2John4Textual criticism and interpolations5Internal consistency5.1Nativity accounts5.2Dating the birth of Jesus5.3Death of Judas6External sources6.1Preserved by the church6.2Outside of the church7Archeology and geography8See also9References10Bibliography11External linksMethodology[edit]When judging the historical reliability of the gospels, scholars ask if the accounts in the gospels are, when judged using normal standards that historians use on other ancient writings, reliable or not.[26]The main issues are what are the 'original' gospels, whether the original gospel works were accurate eyewitness accounts, and whether those original versions have been transmitted accurately through the ages to us. In evaluating the historical reliability of the Gospels, scholars consider a number of factors. These include authorship and date of composition,[27]intention and genre,[24]gospel sources and oral tradition,[28][29]textual criticism,[30]and historical authenticity of specific sayings and narrative events.[27]The genre of the gospels is essential in understanding the intentions of the authors regarding the historical value of the texts. New Testament scholar Graham Stanton states that "the gospels are now widely considered to be a sub-set of the broad ancient literary genre of biographies."[31]Charles H. Talbert agrees that the gospels should be grouped with the Graeco-Roman biographies, but adds that such biographies included an element of mythology, and that the synoptic gospels also included elements of mythology.[4]E.P. Sanders states that “these Gospels were written with the intention of glorifying Jesus and are not strictly biographical in nature.”[1]Ingrid Maisch and Anton Vögtle writing for Karl Rahner in his encyclopedia of theological terms indicate that the gospels were written primarily as theological, not historical items.[32]Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis notes that "we must conclude, then, that the genre of the Gospel is not that of pure 'history'; but neither is it that of myth, fairy tale, or legend. In fact, 'gospel' constitutes a genre all its own, a surprising novelty in the literature of the ancient world."[5]Some critics have maintained that Christianity is not founded on a historical figure, but rather on a mythical creation.[33]This view proposes that the idea of Jesus was the Jewish manifestation of a pan-Hellenic cult, known as Osiris-Dionysus,[34]which acknowledged the non-historic nature of the figure, using it instead as a teaching device.Scholars tend to consider Luke's works (Luke-Acts) to be closer in genre to "pure" history,[6][6][35]although they also note that “This is not to say that he [Luke] was always reliably informed, or that - any more than modern historians - he always presented a severely factual account of events.”[6]New Testament scholar, James D.G. Dunn believes that "the earliest tradents within the Christian churches [were] preservers more than innovators...seeking to transmit, retell, explain, interpret, elaborate, but not create de novo...Through the main body of the Synoptic tradition, I believe, we have in most cases direct access to the teaching and ministry of Jesus as it was remembered from the beginning of the transmission process (which often predates Easter) and so fairly direct access to the ministry and teaching of Jesus through the eyes and ears of those who went about with him."[36]Nevertheless, David Jenkins, a former Anglican Bishop of Durham and university professor, has stated that “Certainly not! There is absolutely no certainty in the New Testament about anything of importance.”[37]Critical scholars have developed a number of criteria to evaluate the probability, or historical authenticity, of an attested event or saying represented in the gospels. These criteria are applied to the gospels in order to help scholars in reconstructions of the Historical Jesus. The criterion of dissimilarity argues that if a saying or action is dissimilar to, or contrary to, the views of Judaism in the context of Jesus or the views of the early church, then it can more confidently be regarded as an authentic saying or action of Jesus.[38][39]One commonly cited example of this is Jesus' controversial reinterpretation of the Mosaic law in his Sermon on the Mount, or Peter's decision to allow uncircumcised gentiles into what was, at the time, a sect of Judaism. The criterion of embarrassment holds that the authors of the gospels had no reason to invent embarrassing incidents such as the denial of Jesus by Peter, or the fleeing of Jesus' followers after his arrest, and therefore such details would likely not have been included unless they were true.[40]Bart Ehrman, using the criterion of dissimilarity to judge the historical reliability of the claim Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, notes that "it is hard to imagine a Christian inventing the story of Jesus' baptism since this could be taken to mean that he was John's subordinate."[41]The criterion of multiple attestation says that when two or more independent sources present similar or consistent accounts, it is more likely that the accounts are accurate reports of events or that they are reporting a tradition which pre-dates the sources themselves.[42]This is often used to note that the four gospels attest to most of the same events, but that Paul's epistles often attest to these events as well, as do the writings of the early church, and to a limited degree non-Christian ancient writings. The criterion of cultural and historical congruency says that a source is less credible if the account contradicts known historical facts, or if it conflicts with cultural practices common in the period in question.[43]It is, therefore, more credible if it agrees with those known facts. For example, this is often used when assessing the reliability of claims in Luke-Acts, such as the official title of Pontius Pilate. Through linguistic criteria a number of conclusions can be drawn. The criterion of "Aramaisms" as it is often referred[44]holds that if a saying of Jesus has Aramaic roots, reflecting Jesus' Palestinian context, the saying is more likely to be authentic.[45]Earliest extant manuscripts[edit]Main article: Biblical manuscriptThe earliest manuscript is a business card sized fragment from the Gospel of John, Rylands Library Papyrus P52, which dates to the first half of the 2nd century. The first complete copies of single New Testament books appear around 200, and the earliest complete copy of the New Testament, the Codex Sinaiticus dates to the 4th century.[46]In the case of the Gospels, the gap of time between authorship and the earliest extant or existing manuscript text is less than other accepted ancient manuscripts, such as the manuscripts attributed to Plato.[47]The earlier existing copy of Plato's dialogues dates about 1,000 years after Plato wrote the text.[48]The conditions of the earliest manuscripts is important, but this does not necessarily impact the reliability, or lack of reliability, of a source.[49]The following table lists the earliest extant Gospel manuscripts.BookEarliest ExtantManuscriptsDateConditionMatthew[math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]1, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]19, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]21, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]25, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]37, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]45, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]53, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]64/67, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]70, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]77, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]101, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]103, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]104[50]c. 150–250 (2nd–3rd century)Large fragmentsMark[math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]45c. 250 (3rd century)Large fragmentsLuke[math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]4, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]69, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]75, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]45c. 175–250 (2nd–3rd century)Large fragmentsJohn[math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]5, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]6, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]22, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]28, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]39, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]45, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]52, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]66, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]75, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]80, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]90, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]95, [math]{\displaystyle {\mathfrak {P}}}[/math]106c. 125–250 (2nd–3rd century)Large fragmentsAuthorship and date[edit]Main articles: Authorship of the Bible and Dating the BibleMost scholars hold to the two-source hypothesis which claims that the Gospel of Mark was written first. According to the hypothesis, the authors of the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke then used the Gospel of Mark and the hypothetical Q document, in addition to some other sources, to write their individual gospels.[51][52][53][54][55]Scholars agree that the Gospel of John was written last, by using a different tradition and body of testimony. In addition, most scholars agree that the author of Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles. Scholars hold that these books constituted two halves of a single work, Luke-Acts.Evangelist Mattheüs en de engel by RembrandtStrictly speaking, each Gospel is anonymous.[56]The Gospel of John is somewhat of an exception, although the author simply refers to himself as "the disciple Jesus loved" and claims to be a member of Jesus' inner circle.[57]During the following centuries, each canonical gospel was attributed to an apostle or to the close associate of an apostle.[58]Most scholars have rejected the traditional attributions.[59]Synoptic Gospels[edit]Main articles: Synoptic Gospels and Source criticism (biblical studies)The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the Synoptic Gospels because of a similar sequence and wording. They are also composed in Koine Greek and the majority of Mark and roughly half of Matthew and Luke coincide in content, in much the same sequence, often nearly verbatim.The Synoptic Gospels are the primary sources of historical information about Jesus and of the religious movement he founded.[21][22]They recount the life, ministry, crucifixion and resurrection of a Jew named Jesus, who spoke Aramaic. There are different hypotheses regarding the origin of the texts because the gospels of the New Testament were written in Greek for Greek-speaking communities,[60]that were later translated into Syriac, Latin and Coptic.[61]Mark[edit]Mark is the primary source for information about Jesus.[62]It was possibly composed in Rome[63]or Antiochine Southern Syria.[64]New Testament scholars generally credit its account of Jesus as a Galilean holy man, including his baptism by John the Baptist, his reputation as an exorcist and healer, his preaching about the coming Kingdom of God, his band of close disciples, the disruption he caused at the Temple, his betrayal, and his crucifixion under Pontius Pilate.[1][22]In 1901, William Wrede challenged the historical reliability of the gospel, concluding especially that Mark portrays Jesus as secretive about his messianic identity because the historical Jesus had never claimed to be the Messiah.[65][66]Form criticism later revealed that the narrative comprises fragments put in order by Mark, or by someone before him.[67][68]While the majority of scholars consider Jesus to have been an apocalyptic prophet, as he appears in Mark, a minority of prominent contemporary scholars argue that his coming kingdom was to be a social revolution rather than a supernatural apocalypse.[69]Tradition holds that the Gospel of Mark was written by Mark the Evangelist, as St. Peter's interpreter.[67]Numerous early sources say that Mark's material was dictated to him by St. Peter, who later compiled it into his gospel.[70][71][72][73][74]The gospel, however, appears to rely on several underlying sources, which vary in form and in theology, and which tell against the story that the gospel was based on Peter's preaching.[75]Most scholars believe that Mark was written by a second-generation Christian, around or shortly after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Second Temple in year 70.[76][77][78]Richard Bauckham has noted that the geography in Mark is accurate when looked at from the perspective of fisherman from Capernaum, which is consistent with Mark relaying the gospel from Peter, who indeed was a fisherman. Many scholars use modern maps to gauge Mark, which often results in errors in judging Mark's geography. A fisherman would not have had a modern map in mind, but instead a mental map based on his experiential world.[79]According to some, Mark's geography was not always accurate, for example Mark 7:31, describing Jesus going from Tyre to the Sea of Galilee by way of Sidon (20 miles farther north and on the Mediterranean coast). The author of Mark did not seem to know that one would not go through Sidon to go from Tyre to the Sea of Galilee, and there was no road from Sidon to the Sea of Galilee in the 1st century, only one from Tyre.[80][81]Catholic scholars have interpreted this passage as non-problematic since Jesus would have traveled in a wide circle, first north, then east and south.[82]Matthew[edit]Matthew was most likely written at Antioch, then part of Roman Syria[83]or in Northern Palestine.[84]Most scholars hold that Matthew drew heavily on Mark and added teaching from the Q document.[85]While Matthew arranged this material into compilations, such as the Sermon on the Mount, much of the material goes back to the historical Jesus.[86]According to E. P. Sanders, the infancy narrative is an invention.[87]Matthew presents Jesus' ministry as limited to the Jews, though the resurrected Jesus later commissions the disciples to preach to all the world. Geza Vermes judges that the ministry of Jesus was exclusively for Jews and that the order to proclaim the gospel to all nations was an early Christian development.[88]According to the majority viewpoint, this gospel is unlikely to have been written by an eyewitness.[85]While Papias reported that Matthew had written the "Logia," this can hardly be a reference to the Gospel of Matthew.[85]The author was probably a Jewish Christian writing for other Jewish Christians.[89]Biblical scholars generally hold that Matthew was composed between the years c. 70 and 100.[90][91][92][93]Based upon internal evidence Harrington claims parts of the Gospel of Matthew may have first been written in Aramaic.[94]The birth stories and the resurrection experiences on the other hand were composed in koine Greek. The Ebionim seem to have worked from a version of Matthew in Aramaic, that excluded birth and post resurrection stories.[95]Luke[edit]Luke was written in a large city west of Palestine,[96]although Burton Mack, on the basis of its colloquial Greek and clear Pauline connections, and its later acceptance by the heretical Marcionites, suggests an author from Greece or western Asia Minor.[97]Like Matthew, Luke drew on Mark and added material from Q.[98]Luke also includes a large amount of unique material, such as the parable of the good Samaritan, and many of these parables seem to be authentic.[99]Luke emphasizes the universal nature of Jesus' mission and message,[100]but Geza Vermes concludes that this theme is not authentic to the historical Jesus.[101]As is the case with Matthew, much controversy has surrounded the Lukan birth narrative.[87]Some scholars[102][103]uphold the traditional claim that Luke the Evangelist, an associate of St. Paul who was probably not an eyewitness to Jesus' ministry, wrote the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles. Others point out that Acts contradicts Paul's own letters and denies him the important title of apostle, suggesting that the author was not a companion of Paul's.[104]As is the case with all the Gospels, it is unknown exactly when the Gospel of Luke was written. Scholars have proposed a range of dates from as early as 60 AD to as late as 90 AD.[105][106][107]Donald Guthrie argues, however, that Acts was written in the early 60s AD (since the book ends before the death of Paul, which most probably occurred during the Persecution of the Christians under Nero between AD 64 and AD 68), and therefore the Gospel of Luke would have to have been written prior to that, around AD 60.[108]It is generally agreed that the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles were both written by the same author.[109]The most direct evidence comes from the prefaces of each book. Both prefaces were addressed to Theophilus, and Acts of the Apostles (1:1-2) says in reference to the Gospel of Luke, "In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and teach until the day He was taken up to heaven, after giving instructions through the Holy Spirit to the apostles He had chosen." (NIV) Furthermore, there are linguistic and theological similarities between the two works, suggesting that they have a common author.[110][111]Both books also contain common interests.[112]John[edit]John was likely composed at Ephesus, although other possibilities are Antioch, Northern Syria,[97]Palestine and Alexandria.[113]Some scholars believe that Jesus' teaching in this gospel cannot be reconciled with that found in the synoptics,[114]whilst others, including John A.T. Robinson hold the view that the synoptics are best reconciled within the framework of John.[115]In the majority viewpoint, it is unlikely that John the Apostle wrote the Gospel of John.[116][117]Rather than a plain account of Jesus' ministry, the gospel is a deeply mediated representation of Jesus' character and teachings, making direct apostolic authorship unlikely.[118]Opinion, however, is widely divided on this issue and there is no widespread consensus.[119][120]Many scholars believe that the "beloved disciple" is a person who heard and followed Jesus, and the gospel of John is based heavily on the witness of this "beloved disciple."[121]Most scholars date the Gospel of John to c. 80–95.[56][122]Textual criticism and interpolations[edit]An 11th-century Byzantine manuscript containing the opening of the Gospel of Luke.Main article: Textual variants in the New TestamentSee also: List of Bible verses not included in modern translationsTextual criticism deals with the identification and removal of transcription errors in the texts of manuscripts. Ancient scribes made errors or alterations (such as including non-authentic additions).[123]In attempting to determine the original text of the New Testament books, some modern textual critics have identified sections as additions of material, centuries after the gospel was written. These are called interpolations. In modern translations of the Bible, the results of textual criticism have led to certain verses, words and phrases being left out or marked as not original.For example, there are a number of Bible verses in the New Testament that are present in the King James Version (KJV) but are absent from most modern Bible translations. Most modern textual scholars consider these verses interpolations (exceptions include advocates of the Byzantine or Majority text). The verse numbers have been reserved, but without any text, so as to preserve the traditional numbering of the remaining verses. The Biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman notes that many current verses were not part of the original text of the New Testament. "These scribal additions are often found in late medieval manuscripts of the New Testament, but not in the manuscripts of the earlier centuries," he adds. "And because the King James Bible is based on later manuscripts, such verses "became part of the Bible tradition in English-speaking lands."[124]He notes, however, that modern English translations, such as the New International Version, were written by using a more appropriate textual method.[125]Most modern Bibles have footnotes to indicate passages that have disputed source documents. Bible Commentaries also discuss these, sometimes in great detail. While many variations have been discovered between early copies of biblical texts, most of these are variations in spelling, punctuation, or grammar. Also, many of these variants are so particular to the Greek language that they would not appear in translations into other languages.[126]Two of the most important interpolations are the last verses of the Gospel of Mark[127][128][129]and the story of the adulterous woman in the Gospel of John.[130][131][132]Some critics also believe the explicit reference to the Trinity in 1 John to have been a later addition.[133][134]The New Testament has been preserved in more than 5,800 fragmentary Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin manuscripts and 9,300 manuscripts in various other ancient languages including Syriac, Slavic, Ethiopic and Armenian. Not all biblical manuscripts come from orthodox Christian writers. For example, the Gnostic writings of Valentinus come from the 2nd century AD, and these Christians were regarded as heretics by the mainstream church.[135]The sheer number of witnesses presents unique difficulties, although it gives scholars a better idea of how close modern bibles are to the original versions.[135]Bruce Metzger says "The more often you have copies that agree with each other, especially if they emerge from different geographical areas, the more you can cross-check them to figure out what the original document was like. The only way they'd agree would be where they went back genealogically in a family tree that represents the descent of the manuscripts.[126]In "The Text Of The New Testament", Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland compare the total number of variant-free verses, and the number of variants per page (excluding orthographic errors), among the seven major editions of the Greek NT (Tischendorf, Westcott-Hort, von Soden, Vogels, Merk, Bover and Nestle-Aland), concluding that 62.9%, or 4999/7947, are in agreement.[136]They concluded, "Thus in nearly two-thirds of the New Testament text, the seven editions of the Greek New Testament which we have reviewed are in complete accord, with no differences other than in orthographical details (e.g., the spelling of names). Verses in which any one of the seven editions differs by a single word are not counted. ... In the Gospels, Acts, and Revelation the agreement is less, while in the letters it is much greater"[136]Per Aland and Aland, the total consistency achieved in the Gospel of Matthew was 60% (642 verses out of 1071), the total consistency achieved in the Gospel of Mark was 45% (306 verses out of 678), the total consistency achieved in the Gospel of Luke was 57% (658 verses out of 1151), and the total consistency achieved in the Gospel of John was 52% (450 verses out of 869).[136]Almost all of these variants are minor, and most of them are spelling or grammatical errors. Almost all can be explained by some type of unintentional scribal mistake, such as poor eyesight. Very few variants are contested among scholars, and few or none of the contested variants carry any theological significance. Modern biblical translations reflect this scholarly consensus where the variants exist, while the disputed variants are typically noted as such in the translations.[137]A quantitative study on the stability of the New Testament compared early manuscripts to later manuscripts, up to the Middle Ages, with the Byzantine manuscripts, and concluded that the text had more than 90% stability over this time period.[138]It has been estimated that only 0.1% to 0.2% of the New Testament variants impact the meaning of the texts in any significant fashion.[138]Internal consistency[edit]Main article: Internal consistency of the BibleAuthors such as Raymond Brown point out that the Gospels contradict each other in various important respects and on various important details.[139]W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders state that: "on many points, especially about Jesus’ early life, the evangelists were ignorant … they simply did not know and, guided by rumour, hope or supposition, did the best they could".[140]Nativity accounts[edit]Modern scholars such as E. P. Sanders, Geza Vermes and Marcus Borg consider both narratives non-historical, arguing that there are contradictions between them.[141][142][143]On the other hand, biblical scholar Mark D. Roberts aims to establish a harmonised account of the birth of Jesus, maintaining that any contradictions can be reconciled.[144]Many biblical scholars view the discussion of historicity as secondary, given that gospels were primarily written as theological documents rather than historical accounts.[145][146][147][148]The nativity narratives found in the Gospel of Matthew (Matthew 1:1-17) and the Gospel of Luke (Luke 3:23-38) give a genealogy of Jesus, but the names, and even the number of generations, differ between the two. Some authors have suggested that the differences are the result of two different lineages, Matthew's from King David's son, Solomon, to Jacob, father of Joseph, and Luke's from King David's other son, Nathan, to Heli, father of Mary and father-in-law of Joseph.[149]However, Geza Vermes argues that Luke makes no mention of Mary, and questions what purpose a maternal genealogy would serve in a Jewish setting.[150]Ferrar Fenton, who translated the whole of the Bible into one of the first versions in modern English, omitted the genealogy of Luke, placing it instead as a note at the end of his translation. The reasons that he gave were that Luke's genealogy was inconsistent with Old Testament genealogies and also that the gospel reads more smoothly with this genealogy removed. Fenton thought that it was a gloss that had been added to the original gospel.Dating the birth of Jesus[edit]See also: Date of birth of Jesus of NazarethBoth Luke and Matthew date Jesus' birth to within the rule of King Herod the Great, who died in 4BC.[151][152]:770However the Gospel of Luke also dates the birth ten years after Herod's death, during the census of Quirinius in 6 AD described by the historian Josephus.[151]Raymond E. Brown notes that "most critical scholars acknowledge a confusion and misdating on Luke's part."[153]Some conservative Christian biblical scholars and commentators still believe the two accounts can be harmonised,[154][155]arguing that the text in Luke can be read as "registration before Quirinius was governor of Syria", and Tertullian believed that a number of censuses were performed throughout the Roman world under Saturninus at the same time.[156][157][158]Geza Vermes has described such approaches as 'exegetical acrobatics'.[159]Death of Judas[edit]Raymond E. Brown states that there is an obvious contradiction regarding the death of Judas Iscariot: "Luke's account of the death of Judas in Acts 1:18 is scarcely reconcilable with Matt 27:3-10."[160]In Matthew 27:3-8, Judas returns the bribe he has been given for handing over Jesus, throwing the money into the temple before he hangs himself. The temple priests, unwilling to return the defiled money to the treasury,[161]use it instead to buy a field known as the Potter's Field, as a plot in which to bury strangers. In Acts 1:18, on the other hand, Judas uses the bribe money to buy the field himself, and his death is attributed to injuries from having fallen in this field. Other scholars state that the contradictory stories can be reconciled.[162][163]External sources[edit]Further information: Sources for the historicity of JesusIn addition to the internal and textual reliability of the gospels, external sources can also be used to assess historical reliability. There are passages relevant to Christianity in the works of four major non-Christian writers of the late 1st and early 2nd centuries – Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Pliny the Younger. Of the four, Josephus' writings, which document John the Baptist, James the Just, and Jesus, are of the most interest to scholars dealing with the historicity of Jesus. Tacitus, in his Annals writtenc.115, mentions Christus, without many historical details (see also: Tacitus on Jesus). There is an obscure reference to a Jewish leader called "Chrestus" in Suetonius. (According to Suetonius, chapter 25, there occurred in Rome, during the reign of emperor Claudius (c. AD 50), "persistent disturbances ... at the instigation of Chrestus".[citation needed]Mention in Acts of "After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome." Additionally, many New Testament passages misquote texts from the Hebrew Tanakh.[164]A basic prophecy appears to be completely made up by an author of the Gospel of Matthew without any source.[25]Preserved by the church[edit]Paul the Apostle, a 1st-century Pharisaic Jew who experienced a conversion to faith in Jesus, dictated letters to various churches and individuals from c. 48–68.[165]Though there are debates on Paul's authorship for some of these epistles, almost all scholars agree that Paul wrote the central corpus of these letters (such as the Epistle to the Romans and 1 Corinthians). Jerome Murphy-O'Connor believes that the historical Jesus is fundamental to the teachings of Paul, who rejected the separation of the Jesus of faith from the Jesus of history.[166]While not personally an eyewitness of Jesus' ministry, Paul states that he was acquainted with people who had known Jesus: the apostle Peter (also known as Cephas), the apostle John, and James, described as the brother of Jesus (Galatians 1:19). Likewise, Paul alludes to Jesus' humanity and divinity, the Last Supper, his crucifixion, and reports of his resurrection.[167]The authors whose works are contained in the New Testament sometimes quote from creeds, or confessions of faith, that obviously predate their writings. Scholars believe that some of these creeds date to within a few years of Jesus' death, and developed within the Christian community in Jerusalem.[168]Though embedded within the texts of the New Testament, these creeds are a distinct source for Early Christianity. 1 Corinthians 15:3-4[169]reads: "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." This contains a Christian creed of pre-Pauline origin.[170]The antiquity of the creed has been located by many Biblical scholars to less than a decade after Jesus' death, originating from the Jerusalem apostolic community.[171]Concerning this creed, Campenhausen wrote, "This account meets all the demands of historical reliability that could possibly be made of such a text,"[172]whilst A. M. Hunter said, "The passage therefore preserves uniquely early and verifiable testimony. It meets every reasonable demand of historical reliability."[173]Other relevant creeds which predate the texts wherein they are found[174]that have been identified are 1 John 4:2:[175]"This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God",[176][177]"Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, this is my Gospel",[178]Romans|1:3-4:[179]"regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, and who through the spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.",[180]and 1 Timothy 3:16:[181]"He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory," an early creedal hymn.[182]Julius Africanus, writing c. 221, while writing about the crucifixion of Jesus, refers to the historian Thallus. He wrote, "This darkness Thallus, in his third book of History, calls (as appears to me without reason) an eclipse of the sun."[183]It is not known when Thallus lived, or whether his History made any reference to the crucifixion. Lucian, a 2nd-century Roman satirist, wrote, "the Christians, you know, worship a man to this day — the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account… You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws."[184]Celsus wrote, about 180, a book against the Christians, which is now only known through Origen's refutation of it. Celsus apparently accused Jesus of being a magician and a sorcerer[185]and is quoted as saying that Jesus was a "mere man".[186]F. F. Bruce noted that Celsus, in seeking to discredit Jesus, sought to explain his miracles rather than claim they never occurred.[187]The church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (264 – 340) cited a statement of the 2nd-century pagan chronicler Phlegon of Tralles that during the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad (AD 32/33) "a great eclipse of the sun occurred at the sixth hour that excelled every other before it, turning the day into such darkness of night that the stars could be seen in heaven, and the earth moved in Bithynia, toppling many buildings in the city of Nicaea".[188]In the same passage, Eusebius cited another unnamed Greek source also recording earthquakes in the same locations and an eclipse. Eusebius argued the two records had documented events that were simultaneous with the crucifixion of Jesus. Tertullian, in his Apologetics, tells the story of the darkness that had commenced at noon during the crucifixion; those who were unaware of the prediction, he says, "no doubt thought it an eclipse".[189]Though he does not mention the claims of others, he suggests to the church's critics that the evidence is still available: "You yourselves have the account of the world-portent still in your archives."[190]The early historian and theologian, Rufinus of Aquileia wrote of the apologetic defense given by Lucian of Antioch, around 300 AD.[191]Lucian, like Tertullian, was also convinced that an account of the darkness that accompanied the crucifixion could be found among Roman records. Ussher recorded Lucian's words on the matter, presumably also to church critics, as “Search your writings and you shall find that, in Pilate’s time, when Christ suffered, the sun was suddenly withdrawn and a darkness followed.”[192]Outside of the church[edit]Flavius Josephus, a Jew and a Roman citizen who worked under a couple Roman emperors, wrote near the end of the 1st century. In the Testimonium Flavianum, Josephus says Jesus "was the Christ. When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified, those who had formerly loved him did not cease to follow him, for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold, along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him."[193]Concerns have been raised about the authenticity of the passage, and it is widely held by scholars that at least part of the passage has been altered by a later scribe. For example, where the version now says "he was the Christ", its original form may have been "he was thought to be the Christ." Judging from Alice Whealey's 2003 survey of the historiography, it seems that the majority of modern scholars consider that Josephus really did write something here about Jesus, but that the text that has reached us is corrupt.[194]There has been no consensus on which portions have been altered, or to what degree.[195]In the second, brief mention, Josephus calls James "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ."[196]The great majority of scholars consider this shorter reference to Jesus to be substantially authentic (although the parallel passage is missing from The Jewish War).[197]In about 112, the Roman governor of Bithynia et Pontus, Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus (better known as Pliny the Younger), wrote to Emperor Trajan, regarding Christianswho were refusing to worship the emperor. His letters show the Christians in his day to be very strongly devoted, and enough of a problem for him to request advice from the emperor.Tacitus, writingc.116, included in his Annals a mention of Christianity and "Christus", viewed by most scholars as a reference to Jesus. In describing Nero's persecution of this group following the Great Fire of Rome c. 64, he wrote, "Nero fastened the guilt of starting the blaze and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome."[198]There have been suggestions that this was a Christian interpolation but most scholars conclude that the passage was written by Tacitus.[199]R. E. Van Voorst noted the improbability that later Christians would have interpolated "such disparaging remarks about Christianity".[200][201]Suetonius (c.69–140) wrote in his Lives of the Twelve Caesars about riots which broke out in the Jewish community in Rome under the emperor Claudius. He said, "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [ Claudius ] expelled them [the Jews] from Rome".[202]The event was noted in Acts 18:2. The term Chrestus also appears in some later texts applied to Jesus, and Robert Graves,[203]among others,[204]consider it a variant spelling of Christ, or at least a reasonable spelling error.In the Christian-Jewish-dialogue, texts from the Jewish Bible are known for being misquoted and altered in Christian scripture. Along the translation process of original Hebrew script into Christian Greek script, alterations, mistranslations, interpretative variants, fabrications and misquotations occurred. A famous example may be the translation of the Hebrew term almah עַלְמָה in Isaiah 7:14, meaning “young woman”, as “virgin” in Matthew 1:22-23.[164][205]Further, the Gospel of Matthew inconsistently claims, the title Nazarenefor Jesus was derived from Old Testament prophecy "He will be called a Nazorean" (Matthew 2:22-23), but that prophecy does not exist in the Hebrew Tanach.[25]The Talmud, a series of religious documents redacted by Jewish scholars between 200 and 500 CE, refer to persons named "Jesus" using the term "Yeshu." These references of Jesus in the Talmud probably date back to the 2nd century.[206]One important reference relates the trial and execution of person named Yeshu and his disciples,[206]saying "On the eve of Passover they hung Yeshu and the crier went forth for forty days beforehand declaring that "[Yeshu] is going to be stoned for practicing witchcraft, for enticing and leading Israel astray....But no one had anything exonerating for him and they hung him on the eve of Passover".[207]These early possible references to Jesus have little historical information independent from the gospels, but they can be interpreted to reflect a historical picture of Jesus as a man who had disciples and was brought to death as a criminal during Passover.[206]F. F. Bruce noted that, in attempting to discredit Jesus, the passage sought to explain his miracles rather than claim they never occurred.[187]Around the time these passages were being written, Mara (a Syrian Stoic)[206]was imprisoned by the Romans and wrote a letter to his son. In it he said, "For what benefit did...the Jews by the murder of their Wise King, seeing that from that very time their kingdom was driven away from them? For with justice did God grant a recompense...and the Jews, brought to desolation and expelled from their kingdom, are driven away into every land." CCEL Some scholars believe this describes the fall of Jerusalem as the gods' punishment for the Jews having killed Jesus.[206]The Dead Sea scrolls are 1st century or older writings that show the language and customs of some Jews of Jesus' time.[208]According to Henry Chadwick, similar uses of languages and viewpoints recorded in the New Testament and the Dead Sea scrolls are valuable in showing that the New Testament portrays the 1st century period that it reports and is not a product of a later period.[209][210]Archeology and geography[edit]Skeletal remains of Jehohanan, 1st-century CE crucifixion victim from Givat HaMivtar in Jerusalem, with a nail still lodged inside the heel bone.Main article: Biblical archaeologyArchaeological tools are very limited with respect to questions of existence of any specific individuals from the ancient past.[211]According to Eric Cline, there is no direct archaeological evidence on the existence of a historical Jesus or any of the apostles since the most direct way to address the existence of anyone in the past archaeologically, would be with a body.[211]Craig Evans notes that archaeologists have some indirect information on Jesus' life and experiences from archaeological finds from Nazareth, the High Priest Ciaphas' ossuary, numerous synagogue buildings, and Jehohanan, crucified victim that had a Jewish burial after execution.[212]A potential location of the House of Peter, which may have housed Jesus while he was in Capernaum, is another find.[213]Other various details mentioned in the gospels have been verified by archaeological evidence, such as the Pool of Bethesda,[214]the Pool of Siloam, the Temple Mount platform extension by King Herod, and a mosaicfrom a third century church in Megiddo mentioning Jesus.[211]Richard Bauckham has argued that the topography found in the Gospel of Mark, when looked from the view of a fisherman from Capernaum, is quite accurate.[79]Thomas Howe examined Luke's description of Paul's sea journeys, including Luke's references to thirty-two countries, fifty-four cities, and nine islands, and stated that he could not find any mistakes.[215]However, Mark Allan Powell believes that Luke’s knowledge of Palestinian geography seems so inadequate that one prominent scholar was led to remark “Jesus route cannot be reconstructed on a map, and in any case Luke did not possess one”.[216]See also[edit]The Bible and historyNew Testament view on Jesus' lifeDevelopment of the New Testament canonGospel harmonyBible version debateCriticism of the BibleAuthority (textual criticism)Jesus SeminarChrist myth theoryJesus Christ and comparative mythologyReferences[edit]^ Jump up to:a b c d e Sanders, E. P. (1993). The Historical Figure of Jesus. Penguin.Jump up^ The Myth about Jesus, Allvar Ellegard 1992,Jump up^ Craig Evans, "Life-of-Jesus Research and the Eclipse of Mythology," Theological Studies 54 (1993) p. 5,^ Jump up to:a b Charles H. Talbert, What Is a Gospel? The Genre of Canonical Gospels pg 42 (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977).^ Jump up to:a b Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word (Vol. II): Meditations on the Gospel According to St. Matthew – Dr Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis, Ignatius Press, Introduction^ Jump up to:a b c d Grant, Robert M., "A Historical Introduction to the New Testament" (Harper and Row, 1963) http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1116&C=1230Jump up^ In a 2011 review of the state of modern scholarship, Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees" B. Ehrman, 2011 Forged : writing in the name of God ISBN 978-0-06-207863-6. page 285Jump up^ Robert M. Price (an atheist) who denies the existence of Jesus agrees that this perspective runs against the views of the majority of scholars: Robert M. Price "Jesus at the Vanishing Point" in The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by James K. Beilby & Paul Rhodes Eddy, 2009 InterVarsity, ISBN 0830838686 page 61Jump up^ Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus by Michael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200Jump up^ Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34Jump up^ Powell, Mark Allan (1998). Jesus as a Figure in History: How Modern Historians View the Man from Galilee. ISBN 0-664-25703-8. page 181Jump up^ Jesus Remembered by James D. G. Dunn 2003 ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 page 339 states of baptism and crucifixion that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".Jump up^ Prophet and Teacher: An Introduction to the Historical Jesus by William R. Herzog (Jul 4, 2005) ISBN 0664225284 pages 1-6Jump up^ Crossan, John Dominic (1995). Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. HarperOne. p. 145. ISBN 0-06-061662-8. That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus...agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact.Jump up^ Who is Jesus? Answers to your questions about the historical Jesus, by John Dominic Crossan, Richard G. Watts (Westminster John Knox Press 1999), page 108Jump up^ James G. D. Dunn, Jesus Remembered, (Eerdmans, 2003) page 779-781.Jump up^ Rev. John Edmunds, 1855 The seven sayings of Christ on the cross Thomas Hatchford Publishers, London, page 26Jump up^ Stagg, Evelyn and Frank. Woman in the World of Jesus. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978 ISBN 0-664-24195-6Jump up^ Funk, Robert W. and the Jesus Seminar. The acts of Jesus: the search for the authentic deeds of Jesus. HarperSanFrancisco. 1998. "Empty Tomb, Appearances & Ascension" p. 449-495.Jump up^ Bruce M. Metzger's Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: Luke 24:51 is missing in some important early witnesses, Acts 1 varies between the Alexandrian and Western versions.^ Jump up to:a b "The Synoptic Gospels, then, are the primary sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus" "Jesus Christ." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2010. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 27 November 2010 [1].^ Jump up to:a b c Vermes, Geza. The authentic gospel of Jesus. London, Penguin Books. 2004.Jump up^ Bart D. Ehrman: Misquoting Jesus - The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, p. 90 (review).^ Jump up to:a b Paul Rhodes Eddy & Gregory A. Boyd, The Jesus Legend:A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition. (2008, Baker Academic).309-262.^ Jump up to:a b c The Gospel of Matthew claims, the title Nazarene for Jesus was derived from the prophecy "He will be called a Nazorean" (Matthew 2:22-23), despite the lack of any Old Testament source.Jump up^ "Historicity", The Oxford English Dictionary.^ Jump up to:a b Craig L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey (2nd Edition).425.Jump up^ Craig L. Blomberg, Historical Reliability of the Gospels (1986, Inter-Varsity Press).19-72.Jump up^ Paul Rhodes Eddy & Gregory A. Boyd, The Jesus Legend:A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition. (2008, Baker Academic).237-308.Jump up^ Craig L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey (2nd Edition).424.Jump up^ Graham Stanton, Jesus and Gospel. p.192.Jump up^ Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN 0-86012-006-6 pages 730-741Jump up^ Examples of authors who argue the Jesus myth hypothesis: Thomas L. Thompson The Messiah Myth: The Near Eastern Roots of Jesus and David (Jonathan Cape, Publisher, 2006); Michael Martin, The Case Against Christianity (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1991), 36–72; John Mackinnon RobertsonJump up^ Freke, Timothy and Gandy, Peter (1999) The Jesus Mysteries. London: Thorsons (Harper Collins)Jump up^ Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses. 117.Jump up^ James D.G. Dunn, "Messianic Ideas and Their Influence on the Jesus of History," in The Messiah, ed. James H. Charlesworth. pp. 371-372. Cf. James D.G. Dunn, Jesus Remembered.Jump up^ [2], retrieved 15nov2010Jump up^ Norman Perrin, Rediscovering the Teaching of Jesus 43.Jump up^ Christopher Tuckett, "Sources and Method" in The Cambridge Companion to Jesus. ed. Markus Bockmuehl. 132.Jump up^ Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Doubleday: 1991. vol 1: pp. 168–171.Jump up^ Bart D. Ehrman, The New Testament:A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings.194-5.Jump up^ The criteria for authenticity in historical-Jesus research: previous discussion and new proposals, by Stanley E. Porter, pg. 118Jump up^ The criteria for authenticity in historical-Jesus research: previous discussion and new proposals, by Stanley E. Porter, pg. 119Jump up^ Bart D. Ehrman, The New Testament:A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings.193.Jump up^ Stanley E. Porter, The Criteria for Authenticity in Historical-Jesus Research: previous discussion and new proposals.127.Jump up^ Ehrman 2004, pp. 479-480Jump up^ Complete photographic facsimile in Allen, T. W., Codex Oxoniensis Clarkianus 39 Phototypice editus, 2 vols. Leiden 1898–9.Jump up^ Complete photographic facsimile in Allen, T. W., Codex Oxoniensis Clarkianus 39 Phototypice editus, 2 vols. Leiden 1898–9.Jump up^ Howell, Martha C.; Prevenier, Walter (2001). From Reliable Sources: An Introduction to Historical Methods. Cornell University Press. p. 19. ISBN 0-8014-8560-6. Historians must thus always consider the conditions under which a source was produced—the intentions that motivated it—but they must not assume that such knowledge tells them all they need to know about its “reliability.” They must also consider the historical context in which it was produced—the events that preceded it, and those that followed.Jump up^ Willker, Wieland (17 April 2008). "Complete List of Greek NT Papyri".Jump up^ Peter, Kirby (2001–2007). "Early Christian Writings: Gospel of Mark". Retrieved 2008-01-15.Jump up^ Achtemeier, Paul J. (1992). "The Gospel of Mark". The Anchor Bible Dictionary. 4. New York, New York: Doubleday. p. 545. ISBN 0-385-19362-9.Jump up^ M.G. Easton, Easton's Bible Dictionary (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1996, c1897), "Luke, Gospel According To"Jump up^ Meier, John P. (1991). A Marginal Jew. 2. New York, New York: Doubleday. pp. 955–6. ISBN 0-385-46993-4.Jump up^ Helms, Randel (1997). Who Wrote the Gospels?. Altadena, California: Millennium Press. p. 8. ISBN 0-9655047-2-7.^ Jump up to:a b Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985.Jump up^ Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "John" p. 302-310Jump up^ Bart Ehrman - The History of the Bible: The Making of the New Testament Canon The Teaching Company, Lesson 12.Jump up^ Carr, David M.; Conway, Colleen M. (8 March 2010). An Introduction to the Bible: Sacred Texts and Imperial Contexts. John Wiley & Sons. p. 233. ISBN 978-1-4051-6738-3.Jump up^ Mark Allan Powell (editor), The New Testament Today, p. 50 (Westminster John Knox Press, 1999). ISBN 0-664-25824-7Jump up^ Stanley E, Porter (editor), Handbook to Exegisis of the New Testament, p. 68 (Leiden, 1997). ISBN 90-04-09921-2Jump up^ '[A]s the earliest Gospel, [Mark] is the primary source of information about the ministry of Jesus.' "The Gospel According to Mark." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2010. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 15 November 2010 [3].Jump up^ ...Overall, then, the internal evidence is not unfavorable to the tradition that Rome was the place of provenance for Mark....Antioch and Rome:New Testament cradles of Catholic Christianity By Raymond Edward Brown, John P. Meier,p197,Jump up^ Mack, Burton L “Who Wrote the New Testament: The Making of the Christian Myth” (Harper Collins)Jump up^ "Messianic secret." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005Jump up^ "Wrede, William." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005^ Jump up to:a b "Mark, Gospel of St." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005Jump up^ "form criticism." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005Jump up^ Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). Chapter 1. Quest of the historical Jesus. p. 1-16Jump up^ Bernd Kollmann, Joseph Barnabas (Liturgical Press, 2004), page 30.Jump up^ Paul L. Maier, The Church History, Kregel Publications, 2007 p 114Jump up^ F. L. Cross & E. A. Livingstone, The Oxford dictionary of the Christian Church, Oxford University Press, 1989 pp. 874-875Jump up^ Thomas Patrick Halton, On illustrious men, Volume 100 of Fathers of the Church, CUA Press, 1999 pp.17-19 [4] and the Early Church FathersJump up^ Senior, Donald P. (1998). "Mark". In Ferguson, Everett. Encyclopedia of Early Christianity(2nd ed.). New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc. p. 719. ISBN 0-8153-3319-6.Jump up^ Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). p. 24-27.Jump up^ Funk, Robert W.; Hoover, Roy W.; The Jesus Seminar (1993). The five Gospels: the search for the authentic words of Jesus: new translation and commentary. New York, New York: Macmillan. ISBN 0-02-541949-8.Jump up^ Crossan, John Dominic (1991). The historical Jesus: the life of a Mediterranean Jewish peasant. San Francisco, California: HarperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-061629-6.Jump up^ Eisenman, Robert H. (1998). James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Penguin Books. p. 56. ISBN 0-14-025773-X.^ Jump up to:a b Bauckham, Richard. "The Gospels as Eyewitness Accounts" (PDF). Retrieved 21 March 2015.Jump up^ C. E. B. Cranfield, The Gospel According to St Mark, page 250 (Cambridge University Press, 1959).Jump up^ Dennis Nineham, The Gospel of St Mark, pages 40, 203 (New York: Seabury, 1968).Jump up^ Mary Healy, The Gospel of Mark (Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture), page 146 (Baker Academic, 2008). ISBN 978-0-8010-3586-9Jump up^ ...Modern scholarship has tended to place Matthew in Syria, especially in Antioch.....Matthew: a shorter commentary By Dale C. Allison,Introduction,pXIIIJump up^ Mack, Burton L, op cit^ Jump up to:a b c "Matthew, Gospel acc. to St." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005Jump up^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. "Matthew" p. 129-270^ Jump up to:a b 'The clearest cases of invention are in the birth narratives.' Sanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993. p. 85Jump up^ '[T]he order to proclaim the good news of salvation to all the nations must be struck out from the list of the authentic sayings of Jesus.' Vermes, Geza. The authentic gospel of Jesus. London, Penguin Books. 2004. Chapter 10: Towards the authentic gospel. p. 376–380.Jump up^ "Numerous textual indications point to an author who was a Jewish Christian writing for Christians of similar background." "Gospel According to Matthew." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2010. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 27 November 2010 [5].Jump up^ Ehrman 2004, p. 110 and Harris 1985 both specify a range c. 80-85; Gundry 1982, Hagner 1993, and Blomberg 1992 argue for a date before 70.Jump up^ The Gospel of Matthew p 1Jump up^ http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/matthew.htmlJump up^ Brown 1997, p. 172Jump up^ Harrington, Daniel J. (1991). The Gospel of Matthew. Liturgical Press. ISBN 9780814658031Jump up^ James R. Edwards, The Hebrew Gospel & the Development of the Synoptic Tradition, 2009 Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2009. pp 121Jump up^ "Luke will have been composed in a large city west of Palestine." Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). p. 32.^ Jump up to:a b Mack, Burton L. op citJump up^ "biblical literature." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2010. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 15 November 2010 [6].Jump up^ Funk, Robert W., Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar. The five gospels.HarperSanFrancisco. 1993. "Luke" p. 271-400Jump up^ Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985. "Luke" p. 297-301Jump up^ '[T]he order to proclaim the good news of salvation to all the nations must be struck out from the list of the authentic sayings of Jesus.' Vermes, Geza. The authentic gospel of Jesus. London, Penguin Books. 2004. Chapter 10: Towards the authentic gospel. p. 370-397.Jump up^ The tradition "has been widely accepted." "Luke, Gospel of." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005Jump up^ The tradition is "occasionally put forward." Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). p. 32.Jump up^ The author was "certainly not a companion of Paul." Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The Historical Jesus: a Comprehensive Guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition). p. 32.Jump up^ "Introduction to the New Testament", chapter on Luke, by D. Carson and D. Moo, Zondervan Books (2005)Jump up^ Brown, Raymond E. (1997). Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible. p. 226. ISBN 0-385-24767-2.Jump up^ Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. Doubleday, 1991, v. 1, pp. 43Jump up^ Guthrie, Donald (1970). "Nine". New Testament Introduction (third ed.). Downer's Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. pp. 340–345. ISBN 0-87784-953-6.Jump up^ Horrell, DG, An Introduction to the study of Paul, T&T Clark, 2006, 2nd Ed.,p.7; cf. W. L. Knox, The Acts of the Apostles (1948), p. 2-15 for detailed arguments that still stand.Jump up^ on linguistics, see A. Kenny, A stylometric Study of the New Testament (1986).Jump up^ Udo Schnelle. The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings, p. 259.Jump up^ F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles (1952), p2.Jump up^ Aune, David. The Westminster dictionary of New Testament and early Christian literature. p. 243.Jump up^ 'John, however, is so different that it cannot be reconciled with the Synoptics except in very general ways (e.g., Jesus lived in Palestine, taught, healed, was crucified and raised). . . The greatest differences, though, appear in the methods and content of Jesus’ teaching. . . Scholars have unanimously chosen the Synoptic Gospels’ version of Jesus’ teaching.' "Jesus Christ." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2010. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 15 November 2010 [7].Jump up^ Robinson 1977 p. 125.Jump up^ "To most modern scholars direct apostolic authorship has therefore seemed unlikely." "John, Gospel of." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005Jump up^ Gospel According to John, Encyclopædia BritannicaJump up^ "John, Gospel of." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005Jump up^ Brown, Raymond E. (1997). Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible. p. 164. ISBN 0-385-24767-2.Jump up^ Kirby, Peter. "Gospel of Mark" New Testament, Apocrypha, Gnostics, Church Fathers Retrieved January 30, 2010.Jump up^ Thompson, M.M. “John, Gospel of.” In Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, edited by Joel B. Green, 370. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2013.Jump up^ Bruce, F.F. The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable? p.7Jump up^ Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus (2005), p. 46Jump up^ Ehrman, Bart D.. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. HarperCollins, 2005, p. 265. ISBN 978-0-06-073817-4Jump up^ Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus Ch 3, (2005)^ Jump up to:a b Strobel, Lee. ”The Case for Christ”. 1998. Chapter three, when quoting biblical scholar Bruce MetzgerJump up^ Guy D. Nave, The role and function of repentance in Luke-Acts,p. 194Jump up^ John Shelby Spong, "The Continuing Christian Need for Judaism", Christian CenturySeptember 26, 1979, p. 918. see http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1256Jump up^ Feminist companion to the New Testament and early Christian writings, Volume 5, by Amy-Jill Levine, Marianne Blickenstaff, pg. 175Jump up^ "NETBible: John 7". Bible.org. Retrieved 2009-10-17. See note 139 on that page.Jump up^ Keith, Chris (2008). "Recent and Previous Research on the Pericope Adulterae (John 7.53—8.11)". Currents in Biblical Research. 6 (3): 377–404. doi:10.1177/1476993X07084793.Jump up^ 'Pericope adulterae', in FL Cross (ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).Jump up^ Ehrman 2006, p. 166Jump up^ Bruce Metzger "A Textual Commentary on the New Testament", Second Edition, 1994, German Bible Society^ Jump up to:a b Bruce, F.F. (1981). P 14. The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?. InterVarsity Press^ Jump up to:a b c K. Aland and B. Aland, "The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions & to the Theory & Practice of Modern Textual Criticism", 1995, op. cit., p. 29-30.Jump up^ Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus, Ch 3, (2005)^ Jump up to:a b Heide, K. Martin (2011). "Assessing the Stability of the Transmitted Texts of the New Testament and the Shepherd of Hermas". In Stewart, Robert B. Bart D. Ehrman & Daniel B. Wallace in Dialogue: The Reliability of the New Testament. Fortress Press. pp. 134–138, 157–158. ISBN 9780800697730.Jump up^ Brown, Raymond Edward (1999-05-18). The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library). Yale University Press. p. 36. ISBN 0-300-14008-8.Jump up^ W.D Davies and E. P. Sanders, 'Jesus from the Jewish point of view', in The Cambridge History of Judaism ed William Horbury, vol 3: the Early Roman Period, 1984.Jump up^ Vermes, Géza (2006-11-02). The Nativity: History and Legend. Penguin Books Ltd. p. 64. ISBN 0-14-102446-1.Jump up^ Sanders, E. P. The historical figure of Jesus. Penguin, 1993. Sanders discusses both birth narratives in detail, contrasts them, and judges them not historical on pp. 85–88.Jump up^ Marcus Borg, 'The Meaning of the Birth Stories' in Marcus Borg, N T Wright, The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions (Harper One, 1999) page 179: "I (and most mainline scholars) do not see these stories as historically factual."Jump up^ Mark D. Roberts Can We Trust the Gospels?: Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John Good News Publishers, 2007 p. 102Jump up^ Interpreting Gospel Narratives: Scenes, People, and Theology by Timothy Wiarda 2010 ISBN 0-8054-4843-8 pp. 75–78Jump up^ Jesus, the Christ: Contemporary Perspectives by Brennan R. Hill 2004 ISBN 1-58595-303-2 p. 89Jump up^ The Gospel of Luke by Timothy Johnson 1992 ISBN 0-8146-5805-9 p. 72Jump up^ Recovering Jesus: the witness of the New Testament Thomas R. Yoder Neufeld 2007 ISBN 1-58743-202-1 p. 111Jump up^ Warren, Tony. "Is there a Contradiction in the Genealogies of Luke and Matthew?"Created 2/2/95 / Last Modified 1/24/00. Accessed 4 May 2008.Jump up^ Geza Vermes, The Nativity: History and Legend, (Penguin, 2006), page 42.^ Jump up to:a b Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN 0-86012-006-6 p. 731Jump up^ Blackburn & Holford-Strevens 2003Jump up^ Raymond E. Brown, An Adult Christ at Christmas: Essays on the Three Biblical Christmas Stories, (Liturgical Press, 1988), p. 17.For example, Dunn, James Douglas Grant (2003), Jesus Remembered, Eerdmans. p. 344. ISBN 0-8028-3931-2 Similarly, Erich S. Gruen, 'The expansion of the empire under Augustus', in The Cambridge ancient history Volume 10, p. 157.Geza Vermes, The Nativity, Penguin 2006, p. 96.W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders, 'Jesus from the Jewish point of view', in The Cambridge History of Judaism ed William Horbury, vol 3: the Early Roman Period, 1984Anthony Harvey, A Companion to the New Testament (Cambridge University Press 2004), p. 221.Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus. Doubleday, 1991, v. 1, p. 213.Brown, Raymond E. The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke. London: G. Chapman, 1977, p. 554.A. N. Sherwin-White, pp. 166, 167.Fergus Millar Millar, Fergus (1990). "Reflections on the trials of Jesus". A Tribute to Geza Vermes: Essays on Jewish and Christian Literature and History (JSOT Suppl. 100) [eds. P.R. Davies and R.T. White]. Sheffield: JSOT Press. pp. 355–81. repr. in Millar, Fergus(2006), "The Greek World, the Jews, and the East", Rome, the Greek World and the East, University of North Carolina Press, 3: 139–163Jump up^ Archer, Gleason Leonard (April 1982). Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House. p. 366. ISBN 0-310-43570-6.Jump up^ Frederick Fyvie Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (1943; republished Eerdman, 2003), pp. 87–88.Jump up^ Nikos Kokkinos, 1998, in Chronos, kairos, Christos 2 by Ray Summers, Jerry Vardaman ISBN 0-86554-582-0 pp. 121–126Jump up^ C.F. Evans, Tertullian's reference to Sentius Saturninus and the Lukan Census in the Journal of Theological Studies (1973) XXIV(1): 24–39Jump up^ The Life of Jesus of Nazareth by Rush Rhees 2007 ISBN 1-4068-3848-9 Section 54Jump up^ Geza Vermes (2 November 2006). The Nativity: History and Legend. Penguin Books Limited. pp. 28–30. ISBN 978-0-14-191261-5.Jump up^ Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, p.114.Jump up^ Alfred Edersheim Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 5.xiv, 1883.Jump up^ Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 5.xiv, 1883.Jump up^ Inter-Varsity Press New Bible Commentary 21st Century edition p1071^ Jump up to:a b Kravitz, Rabbi Zalman. "Misquoting Texts – What does Tanach really say". Jews For Judaism. Jews For Judaism. Retrieved 15 July 2014.Jump up^ Joseph Barber Lightfoot in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians writes: "At this point Gal 6:11 the apostle takes the pen from his amanuensis, and the concluding paragraph is written with his own hand. From the time when letters began to be forged in his name (2 Thess 2:2; 3:17) it seems to have been his practice to close with a few words in his own handwriting, as a precaution against such forgeries… In the present case he writes a whole paragraph, summing up the main lessons of the epistle in terse, eager, disjointed sentences. He writes it, too, in large, bold characters (Gr. pelikois grammasin), that his handwriting may reflect the energy and determination of his soul."Jump up^ Jerome Murphy-O'Connor (1 May 1998). Paul: a critical life. Oxford University Press. pp. 91–. ISBN 978-0-19-285342-4. Retrieved 28 July 2010.Jump up^ Bruce, F. F. (1977), Paul and Jesus, London: SPCK, pp.19-29; cf. Rom 1:1-4, 1 Cor 11:23-26, 1 Cor 2:8, and 1 Cor 15:3-8Jump up^ Oscar Cullmann, The Earliest Christian Confessions, translated by J. K. S. Reid, (London: Lutterworth, 1949)Jump up^ 1Corinthians 15:3-4Jump up^ Neufeld, The Earliest Christian Confessions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) p. 47Reginald H. Fuller, The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives (New York: Macmillan, 1971) p. 10Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus – God and Man translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) p. 90Oscar Cullmann, The Earlychurch: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology, ed. A. J. B. Higgins (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) p. 64Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, translated James W. Leitch (Philadelphia: Fortress 1969) p. 251Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament vol. 1 pp. 45, 80–82, 293R. E. Brown, The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus (New York: Paulist Press, 1973) pp. 81, 92Jump up^ see Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus – God and Man translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968)p. 90; Oscar Cullmann, The Early church: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology, ed. A. J. B. Higgins (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) p. 66–66; R. E. Brown, The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus(New York: Paulist Press, 1973) pp. 81; Thomas Sheehan, First Coming: How the Kingdom of God Became Christianity (New York: Random House, 1986 pp. 110, 118; Ulrich Wilckens, Resurrection translated A. M. Stewart (Edinburgh: Saint Andrew, 1977) p. 2; Hans Grass, Ostergeschen und Osterberichte, Second Edition (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1962) p96; Grass favors the origin in Damascus.Jump up^ Hans von Campenhausen, "The Events of Easter and the Empty Tomb," in Tradition and Life in the Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968) p. 44Jump up^ Archibald Hunter, Works and Words of Jesus (1973) p. 100Jump up^ James L. Bailey; Lyle D. Vander Broek (1992). Literary forms in the New Testament: a handbook. Westminster John Knox Press. pp. 83–. ISBN 978-0-664-25154-3. Retrieved 31 July 2010.Jump up^ 1John 4:2Jump up^ Cullmann, Confessions p. 32Jump up^ 2Timothy 2:8Jump up^ Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament vol 1, pp. 49, 81; Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesus translated Norman Perrin (London: SCM Press, 1966) p. 102Jump up^ Romans 1:3-4Jump up^ Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus – God and Man translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) pp. 118, 283, 367; Neufeld, The Earliest Christian Confessions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) pp. 7, 50; C. H. Dodd, The Apostolic Preaching and its Developments (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980) p. 14Jump up^ 1Timothy 3:16Jump up^ Reginald Fuller, The Foundations of New Testament Christology (New York: Scriner's, 1965) pp. 214, 216, 227, 239; Joachim Jeremias, The Eucharistic Words of Jesustranslated Norman Perrin (London: SCM Press, 1966) p. 102; Neufeld, The Earliest Christian Confessions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) pp. 7, 9, 128Jump up^ Julius Africanus, Extant Writings XVIII in Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. A. Roberts and J. Donaldson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973) vol. VI, p. 130Jump up^ Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 11–13 in The Works of Lucian of Samosata, translated by H. W. Fowler (Oxford: Clarendon, 1949) vol. 4Jump up^ Morton Smith, Jesus the Magician: Charlatan or Son of God? (1978) pp. 78–79.Jump up^ Celsus the First Nietzsche^ Jump up to:a b Bruce, F.F. (1981). The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?. InterVarsity Press.Jump up^ Chronicle, Olympiad 202, trans. Carrier (1999).Jump up^ Tertullian, Apologeticus, Chapter 21, 19 cited in Bouw, G. D. (1998, Spring). The darkness during the crucifixion. The Biblical Astronomer, 8(84). Retrieved November 30, 2006 from [8].Jump up^ Tertullian, Apologeticus, Chapter 21, 19Jump up^ Rufinus, Ecclesiastical History, Book 9, Chapter 6Jump up^ Ussher, J., & Pierce, L. (Trans.)(2007). Annals of the World [p. 822]. Green Forest, AR: New Leaf Publishing Group. ISBN 0-89051-510-7Jump up^ Josephus Antiquities 18.3.3Jump up^ Alice Whealey, Josephus on Jesus (New York, 2003) p.194.Jump up^ Vermes, Géza. (1987). The Jesus notice of Josephus re-examined. Journal of Jewish StudiesJump up^ Josephus Antiquities 20:9.1Jump up^ Louis H. Feldman, "Josephus" Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 3, pp. 990–91Jump up^ Tacitus, Annals 15.44 (Latin, English and also at Fordham.edu)Jump up^ Robert Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament, pp. 42–43 as quoted at earlychristianwritings.comJump up^ Robert E. Van Voorst (2000). Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Wm. B. Eerdmans. p. 43. See also the criterion of embarrassmentJump up^ Theissen and Merz p.83Jump up^ Iudaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit; Uchicago.eduJump up^ see his translation of Suetonius, Claudius 25, in The Twelve Caesars (Baltimore: Penguin, 1957), and his introduction p. 7, cf. p. 197Jump up^ Francois Amiot, Jesus A Historical Person p. 8; F. F. Bruce, Christian Origins p. 21Jump up^ Singer, Rabbi Tovia. "Does the Hebrew Word Alma Really Mean "Virgin"?". Outreach Judaism. Outreach Judaism. Retrieved 15 July 2014.^ Jump up to:a b c d e Theissen, Gerd and Annette Merz. The historical Jesus: a comprehensive guide. Fortress Press. 1998. translated from German (1996 edition)Jump up^ Sanhedrin 43a.Jump up^ Douglas R. Edwards (2004). Religion and society in Roman Palestine: old questions, new approaches. Routledge. pp. 164–. ISBN 978-0-415-30597-6. Retrieved 4 August2010.Jump up^ Henry Chadwick (2003). The Church in ancient society: from Galilee to Gregory the Great. Oxford University Press. pp. 15–. ISBN 978-0-19-926577-0. Retrieved 4 August2010.Jump up^ George J. Brooke (1 May 2005). The Dead Sea scrolls and the New Testament. Fortress Press. pp. 20–. ISBN 978-0-8006-3723-1. Retrieved 4 August 2010.^ Jump up to:a b c Cline, Eric H. (2009). Biblical Archaeology : A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195342631.Jump up^ Evans, Craig. "The Archaeological Evidence For Jesus". Huffington Post.Jump up^ "The House of Peter: The Home of Jesus in Capernaum?". Biblical Archaeology Society.Jump up^ James H. Charlesworth, Jesus and archaeology, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2006. p 566Jump up^ Howe, Thomas, "When Critics Ask" (Wheaton Ill: Victor, 1992), 385.Jump up^ Powell, Mark (1989). What are they saying about Luke?. Paulist Press. p. 6. ISBN 0-8091-3111-0.Bibliography[edit]Barnett, Paul W. (1997). Jesus and the Logic of History (New Studies in Biblical Theology 3). Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press. ISBN 0-385-49449-1.Barnett, Paul W. (1987). Is the New Testament History?. Servant Publications. ISBN 0-89283-381-5.Blomberg, Craig L. (2008). The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (2nd ed.). IVP Academic. ISBN 978-0-8308-2807-4.Brown, Raymond E. (1993). The Death of the Messiah: from Gethsemane to the Grave. New York: Anchor Bible. ISBN 0-85111-512-8.Bock, Darrell L., Studying the Historical Jesus: A Guide to Sources and Methods.. Baker Academic: 2002. ISBN 978-0-8010-2451-1.Gerhardsson, Birger (2001). The Reliability of the Gospel Tradition. Peabody, Ma: Hendrickson. ISBN 1-56563-667-8.Grant, Michael. Jesus: A Historian's Review of the Gospels. Scribner's, 1977. ISBN 0-684-14889-7.Meier, John P., A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Doubleday,v. 1, The Roots of the Problem and the Person, 1991, ISBN 0-385-26425-9v. 2, Mentor, Message, and Miracles, 1994, ISBN 0-385-46992-6v. 3, Companions and Competitors, 2001, ISBN 0-385-46993-4Sanders, E.P. Jesus and Judaism. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1987.Wright, N.T. Christian Origins and the Question of God, a projected 6 volume series of which 3 have been published under:v. 1, The New Testament and the People of God. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1992.;v. 2, Jesus and the Victory of God. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 1997.;v. 3, The Resurrection of the Son of God. Augsburg Fortress Publishers: 2003.Wright, N.T. The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering who Jesus was and is. IVP 1996External links[edit]The various endings of Mark Detailed text-critical description of the evidence, the manuscripts, and the variants of the Greek text (PDF, 17 pages)Extracts from authors arguing for the authenticity of Mark 16:9–20Catholic Encyclopedia: Gospel of Saint Mark: Section IV. STATE OF TEXT AND INTEGRITYLast Twelve Verses of the Gospel According to S. Mark Vindicated Against Recent Critical Objectors and Established A Book written by Burgon, John WilliamThe Authenticity of Mark 16:9–20 A detailed defense of Mark 16:9–20, featuring replicas of portions of Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus and a list of early patristic evidence. Now that should answer your question thank you for you question.

Remarkable contributions of missionaries to India?Medical Field:Before the arrival of the Christian missionaries, there were no organized health services in India. Ayurveda, India’s indigenous medical system stood un-developed for the last 2000 years. The knowledge of the physicians who practice Ayurveda was limited. They had caste prejudices and they refused to treat the so-called “untouchables”.Missionaries who saw the need for scientific health care began mission hospitals in India. Christian missions contributed much to the medical scene in India. Mission hospitals were started in several districts in the country. Modern medicine was made available to all people. Doctors treated patients with love, concern, and care. There was no discrimination against people based on caste. Missionary doctors would be happy to touch the patients even if they are from low castes while society treated them as “untouchables”.Another great contribution was the founding of hospitals for women. Ida Scudder who witnessed the death of pregnant women who were refused by their husbands to be treated by men doctors in 1893 founded the hospital for women that grew to be one of the best hospitals in India – Christian Medical College and hospital, Vellore. This hospital has produced world-class doctors who have served with love, dedication, and sacrifice.Christians served the community by becoming nurses, as of 1940, 90% of nurses in India were Christians. “Nursing” was considered a mean job and only Christians were willing to take up this job. Most women were attracted to this profession, and soon it came to be accepted as a noble profession.Treating leprosy patients with dignity was a far cry in those days. Lepers were considered as enduring the wrath of God according to their karma. So, they were ill-treated worse than animals. And in some places, they were buried alive. Christian doctors began ministry among them by caring for them. Many TB (Tuberculosis) sanatoriums were created by medical missionaries. All show how service was used as a tool for social transformation.Godfrey Philips said in 1936, “Of the six million Indian Christians, the great majority are of depressed class origin. Yet no one thinks of the Christian community as a depressed class. The church has actually uplifted more depressed class people than all other organizations put together.”Despite the much-trumpeted surgery in ancient India (for which there is hardly any documentary evidence) and Ayurveda, the Indian medical situation was pathetic, to say the least.To illustrate;(1) there was no inpatient treatment in India. It was missionaries who started it(2) women were generally ignored for treatment (gender bias): it was Christian missionary doctors who changed it(3) leprosy patients were burned alive: it was missionaries who started leprosy homes and almost all leprosy homes by the time of independence were run by missionaries So and so forth. Dr. Manoj then points out the current gloomy situation where each year 2 crore of Indian brothers and sisters are now pushed below the poverty line due to medical treatment. Is the Church going to imitate corporate hospitals (as many have already done) making hospitals a money-making business or will it once again regain its original Christ-like vision of serving people? It is now for us to make that decisionEducation:Christian missionary activity in India generally involved the establishment of high-quality schools. Obviously, the Christian community's impact does not end there. Accompanying the schools came printing presses, which were helpful in the dissemination of literature of all kinds. In fact, the early overseas missionaries were responsible for pioneering English and modern vernacular education. R. L. Rawat, in his History of Indian Education, suggests that India will forever be indebted to the missionaries for the production of textbooks, dictionaries, and grammars, and for their zealous pursuit of educational advancement.The "good works" carried out by missionaries and Christians have always been understood to be an expression of their love and obedience to Jesus. The underlying motivation, of course, was their obligation to proclaim the salvation of God through the Christian faith. Indians have by and large been willing to receive the former, but many have rejected the need for the latter, particularly upper-caste Hindus, who would say, "we have our own saviors." Still, the Christian community has felt that it has contributed to the building of the nation and to upward social mobility that has changed lives and benefited families and communities, particularly among the Dalits (the former "untouchables").In the sixteenth century, it was the Jesuits who first established Christian institutions of learning. They were followed by the German Tranquebar missionaries. Later the renowned Friedrick Schwartz began Christian schools in both vernacular languages and in English. William Carey and the British Baptists who arrived in Calcutta in the late eighteenth century pioneered modern education in North India. By 1818 there were 111 schools located as far away from Calcutta as Shimla and Delhi in the north, and Rajputna in the south.With the renewal of the British East India Company's charter in 1813 and the arrival of a host of British mission societies, there was a proliferation of schools and printing presses across the country. The first Western-type postsecondary school, Serampore College, was organized in 1818. The American Mission opened schools for boys in Bombay from 1815 and to 1829. John Wilson saw to it that a school was also set up in Bombay for girls.The arrival in Calcutta of Alexander Duff in 1830 marked the beginning of a new approach to learning, namely, English-language education. Duff was captivated with "the glowing prospects of Christianity in [India]," and with what he referred to as the "ultimate evangelization of India." Duff pondered the question of what was to be the future language of learning in India, wondering which would prove to be the "most effective instrument" of a liberal and enlightened education? Not surprisingly, Duff's idea to set up an English-language school was, at first, controversial. There was significant opposition, but soon Duff's modest experiment began to catch the imagination of the upper classes and those who possessed aspirations for their children. Duff's work was a great success and resulted in the expansion of English-language educational institutions throughout British India in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, at the primary, secondary, and university levels; in time English became the veritable lingua franca of India. The widespread and popular adoption of English by people of all language groups and classes has certainly given India an advantage in today's global economy, as well as in diplomacy, politics, and technology.Language, Literature and Journalism:Christians have also made a significant contribution in India in the fields of languages, literature, and journalism. Constanzio Beschi (1680–1747) reformed Tamil alphabetical characters, making them more suitable for the printing press. He also produced a fourfold Tamil dictionary, which was divided according to words, synonyms, classes, and rhymes. Bishop Robert Caldwell's (1815–1891) Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian Languages and G. U. Pope's (1820–1908) translations of classics of Tamil literature into English are noteworthy. Vedanayagam Pillai (1824–1889) and H. A. Krishna Pillai (1827–1900) are two other Christian writers who produced some of the first Tamil novels.The French priest Francis Mary of Toure began work on Hindustani as early as 1680, composing a massive dictionary titled Thesaurus Linguae Indianae. Modern Hindi, the national language, developed out of Hindustani. Henry Martyn and a Dr. Gilchrist, a professor of Hindustani and an American Presbyterian missionary, and the Reverend S. H. Kellogg all contributed to the formation and popularization of Hindustani. Kellogg, in fact, drew more than a dozen dialects together to assist in creating what is today known as Hindi. He produced in 1893 A Grammar of the Hindi Language, which is still in circulation. William Carey and his Baptist colleagues, beginning in 1818, were the first to produce periodicals, journals, and a newspaper. Their publication, the Friends of India, lived on and is now an English daily, the Statesman, published from Calcutta and New Delhi.Jawaharlal Nehru in his Discovery of India acknowledges the contribution of the early missionaries, especially the Baptists of Serampore, concerning the shift from the dominating influence of both Sanskrit and Persian. The printing of books and newspapers by the missionaries, together with English-language education, no doubt broke the hold of the classics, says Nehru, and allowed regional languages to emerge and blossom. While Nehru saw no difficulty in missionaries dealing with the major languages, he notes that they, "even labored at the dialects of the primitive hill and forest tribes. . . . The desire of the Christian missionaries to translate the Bible into every possible language thus resulted in the development of many Indian languages. Christian mission work in India has not always been admirable or praiseworthy . . . but in this respect, as well as in the collection of folklore, it has undoubtedly been of great service to India" (Nehru, pp. 317–318).Social Reforms:From the very first, missionaries were shocked at the social evils that persisted in India, including the practice of Sati (the immolation of widows on their husbands' funeral pyres), the killing of lepers, and the sacrifice of children.William Carey was active from his arrival in 1793 in any issue that he felt needed change or reform. Within a year, near Malda, he reported having found the remains of an infant that had first been offered to a god as a sacrifice and then abandoned to be eaten by white ants. Moreover, children were thrown into the Ganges in fulfillment of vows taken for answers to prayer. Carey used his connections to those in authority and power to campaign for the outlawing of such practices. Governor-General Lord Wellesley asked him to submit a report on the matter and subsequently, in 1802, declared infanticide to be an act of murder; those who performed such horrible deeds, if caught, would themselves be put to death.Carey employed his publications to educate public opinion on matters of humanitarian concern. The first issue of the Friend of India carried an exhaustive report of an actual sati. Subsequently, he kept the practice before the public eye and did all he could to see sati abolished. By 1814 Ram Mohan Roy joined Carey in the campaign against sati. Armed with accounts of 438 widow burnings, Carey and his Serampore colleagues implored the government to forbid the rite by law. At first, very little progress was made, due to strong opposition from high caste Hindu leaders. The Christians kept up the pressure, and eventually, public opinion turned against the orthodox Hindus. In 1829 Lord William Bentinck finally signed an order prohibiting sati in the occupancies of the East India Company.The field of medicine is another area in which Christians have made a significant contribution to the welfare and the common good of India. Jesuits in the late sixteenth century opened infirmaries attached to their living accommodations. John Thomas, an associate of William Carey, began his work in 1799. In the nineteenth-century medical establishments of various kinds were created throughout India, set up by almost every missionary society. Two have been internationally recognized. The first, the Christian Medical College Hospital, Ludhiana, was founded by Dr. Edith Brown in 1893; the other, the Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore, grew out of Dr. Ida Scudder's roadside clinics, first begun in 1895. In time both of these hospitals added to their facilities, becoming the first government-recognized medical colleges for women and subsequently for men.There have also been programs set up for the mentally challenged and the disabled. The first institution for the deaf was organized by an order of nuns in Bombay in 1884. Since then, Catholic and Protestant Christians have established numerous homes throughout India for the abandoned, the abused, and the exploited. Two of the most impressive of these centers are the Mukti Mission in Kedegoan, near Pune founded by Pandita Ramabai in 1898 for orphaned girls and abused women. The other, the Dohnavur Fellowship, was first organized in 1901 by Amy Carmichael in South India. Its object was to rescue girls who had been forced into temple prostitution.Another matter of concern among Christians over the years has been the practice of child marriage, whereby alliances are made among Hindus between children as young as five years of age. Carey's solution was to promote female education. Child marriage was legislatively banned in 1929. Christians since then have made a concerted effort to promote the approval of widow remarriage.Christian reform efforts also included establishing sanatoriums for tuberculosis patients and for those who had contracted leprosy. The Scheflin Research and Training Centre in Karigiri, near Vellore, has carried out much original creative work in the area of leprosy reconstruction and rehabilitation.While most of the early expressions of Christian social initiatives were pioneered by foreign missionaries, Indian Christians have carried on and even multiplied the legacy handed down to them. This has been so much the case that well into the late twentieth century a preponderance of doctors and nurses in any area of health care and medicine were Indian Christians. Moreover, many Hindus and Muslims still prefer to go to Christian hospitals.Christians were also involved in rural development. Typical has been the Allahabad Agricultural College, organized in 1910, and the Bethel Agricultural Fellowship near Salem, Tamil Nadu, in the early 1960s. Their aims were to assist and improve the productivity of farmers. K. T. Paul had similar concerns and came up with the idea of what he called "rural reconstruction." The Basel Mission, which began its work from its headquarters in Mangalore, is well known for introducing into India the manufacture of cheap terra-cotta tiles and other related products to improve village house construction. Such tiles are still popularly known, no matter who produces them, as mission tiles.Disaster relief is another area in which the Christian community has made an impressive impact. Over the years the Churches Auxiliary for Social Action, the Evangelical Fellowship of India Commission on Relief, Catholic World Relief, World Vision, and others have all been at the forefront of nongovernmental organizations willing to assist in providing both immediate and long-term reconstruction to people and places wherever the tragedy of disaster has struck.There were a number of Christians involved in the freedom movement, including K. T. Paul, V. Chakkarai, and his colleagues, Bishop Paul Appaswamy, Bishop Waskom Pickett, E. Stanley Jones, and to a lesser extent Bishop V. Z. Azariah. In addition, several Christians played an important role in framing the Indian Constitution. There were six appointed to the Minority Advisory Committee by the Constituent Assembly: Raj Kumari Amrit Kaur, Elbar D' Souza, P. K. Salvry, H. C. Mukherji, J. J. M. Nichols Roy, and J. N. P. Roch Victoria. The committee met under the leadership of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in late 1947. To the surprise of many, the Christian representatives expressed their commitment to the Christian ideal of oneness and their eagerness to participate in the building of the nation, therefore turning down the need for any political safeguards to protect any parochial interests they might otherwise have had. They also gave up any claim they may have requested regarding seat reservations in the new Parliament. To their credit, and on behalf of a majority of the Christian community, they believed that the reservation of seats was not necessary, and in the interests of national integration merged with the constituency at large to become part of the general electorate.Christians were perhaps less flexible when it came to those sections of the Constitution that dealt with religious prerogatives. Their concerns were threefold: the right to practice and propagate one's faith; the freedom to offer religious instruction in aided schools; and the right of conversion from one religion to another. Obviously, all of these issues generated considerable discussion and debate. Ultimately the Constituent Assembly approved these provisions, which became law on 26 January 1950. The Christian representatives were convinced that these were constitutional rights essential to Christian freedoms and central to the strengthening of India's secular democracy and the Christian contribution to it.At the center of India's struggle for freedom from the British was the towering figure of Mahatma Gandhi. He was well acquainted with Christianity. However, it was Jesus Christ, more than Christians, that touched his heart. In 1920 he wrote "I revere the Bible. Christ's sermon on the mount fills me with bliss even today. Its sweet verses have even today the power to quench my agony of the soul." Writing in the Harijan in January 1939 he said, "Though I cannot claim to be a Christian in the sectarian sense, the example of Jesus' suffering is a factor in the composition of my undying faith in non-violence which rules all my actions, worldly and temporal."Understandably Gandhi had a host of friends. Among those who were Christians, and most cherished, were Charlie Andrews and the principal of St. Stephen's College, Sushil Kumar Rudra. In earlier times Gandhi wrote of his being a guest in Rudra's home whenever he visited Delhi. When writing a condolence letter upon his death in 1925 Gandhi said, "[Rudra] and Charlie Andrews were my revisionists. Non-cooperation was conceived and hatched under his hospitable roof."