Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mike Van Pelt <usenet@mikevanpelt.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: 25 Classic Books That Have Been Banned
Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 04:27:51 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <10163c6$32seg$1@dont-email.me>
References: <03gqqj562r4vi0kpi2vl8flsi59jsbot56@4ax.com> <1012fr2$25mfe$1@dont-email.me> <v6pb3kd7d7nircpct73hli1l5284fs6irf@4ax.com> <whmZP.20802$WUcf.8194@fx01.iad>
Injection-Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 06:27:51 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f99a8d38533f18a07ea1aaa5cb28a27c";
	logging-data="3240400"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/WZb1gF41iYzt/Z5oNqsT/XXr7ariUF3s="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:gymRt7OjMDL10MgGSi+R6Mvj2l8=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: mike@Mike-Laptop.localdomain (Mike-Laptop)

In article <whmZP.20802$WUcf.8194@fx01.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>>More assertions:
>>1. Jesus had something to say about those who sought "signs and
>>wonders". And it wasn't very nice.
>
>1) How do you know such a person actually existed?
>
>2) How do you know that person, assuming he existed,
>   said anything about "signs and wonders"?

The Gospels were some of the later books of the New Testament
written.  Of those, John was clearly written after the other
three; among other things, it has more of the concept that
Christianity was becoming something separate from a sect
of Judaism, and it names the disciple who cut off the chief
priest's servant's ear -- quite probably because the others
were written while Peter was still alive; John was written
after Peter was safely dead.

The Rylands manuscript, a fragment of the Gospel of John,
is reliably dated about 120 AD.

Much earlier writings are the various letters by Paul and
others, clearly written before 70AD.

The standards for reliability of ancient documents are:

1) Number of copies of the documents
2) How well the copies agree with each other
3) How close in time the earliest copies are to the events.

By all of these standards, compared to the New Testmanent,
how do, say, the works of Tacitus, Cicero, Julius Caesar rate?

Not remotely close.  The works collected in the New Testament
blow them all away by these tests of reliability.

There is, of course, a fourth standard, which is never stated
by determinedly secular academicans, but is followed rigidly:
"Except Bible, we throw it all out if it's Bible."

>Don't point to the KJV - primary contemporaneous sources only.

This is utter nonsense.  Nobody (except a few ... non
mainstream types ...) thinks the Bible originated with
the translators hired by King James.  I'm talking about
the originals, written mostly in Koine Greek, one or two,
I think may be written in Aramaic.

-- 
Mike Van Pelt       |  "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com   |   -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH              |      Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston