I am overwhelmed with the hearsay in the bible. Most of it was written 40 to 140 years after the resurrection. The term hearsay is a statement made by a third party not available in the trial, taken for the truth of what was said out of court. The reason for this is there is no way to cross examine what was said and is painfully unreliable . It is simply no evidence and not permitted in any civilized courts. http://antinomianism-salvation.blogspot.com/p/the-bibledespite-contridictionserrors.html
Ok.
I actually do not know your point here.
Third parties were eye witnesses.
Are you saying that Jesus was not The Son of God and was not The Savior?
Sorry, I really do not understand your point.
I think you might be wrong on the dates here.
The Old Testament was written from the oral tradition that had been handed down generation to generation while the Israelites were in exile — at least most of it was.
The dates of the New Testament writings go anywhere from around 30 to 40 years after Christ died till 90 years after Christ died.
Look up any Bible (Catholic) online and you will see the approximate authorship dates in the introduction of each book of the Bible.
Howdy Benchim! Care to update your list of prior aliases, before you get zotted again?
marygonzo
Since Jun 15, 2012
delbertt
Since May 16, 2011
wildcarduces
Since Apr 12, 2011
Benchim
Since Sep 09, 2010
Your examples are all from specifically the Gospels, but the same answer applies.
Like any historical claim, we take the Gospel in some measure on faith. That is in fact the basis of Christian faith: that the belief of the Church in the Incarnation and the Resurrection of Christ, as told in the Gospels are true accounts of historical events.
If Christianity could be proven by an exacting scientific or juridical standard, we would not have the faith, we would have objective knowledge.
Ancient history is generally like that: an event is recorded by a chronicler long after it happened. This is considered historical evidence, not a legal evidence. Some people believe all ancient history as it is taught is wrong chronology, same persons are presented as different people, etc. It is possible to not believe the Christian Church just in the same sense as it is possible not to believe the modern historians of antiquity. Most believe the Gospels like they believe modern historians, because both groups present plausible, albeit not scientifically only possible, version of events. There is, of course that difference that the Gospels speak of miracles. But so far as the evidence of these miracles goes, we Christians are no worse off than the rest of the students of 1c AD.
This does not mean our knowledge of ancient history is unreliable, nor, specifically, that the events of the Gospels are told unreliably. For starters, it is not true that they are all hearsay: the Apostles all saw Christ arrested; St. John was present at the moment of His death, and all saw resurrected Christ on several occasions. St. Peter saw Christ transfigured on Mount Tabor. When they speak of these events, they speak as direct witnesses.
It is clear that when St. Luke records the events of Jesus's birth, he is interviewing Mary, the direct participant and witness. For example, Luke presents a lengthy poem, the Magnificat, as her direct speech. I don't know where it would be in a courtroom, but by journalistic standards that makes them proven fact.
Then there is a question of motivation. The New Testament is written precisely when Christians faced death penalty for their beliefs. The immediate aftermath of the death of Jesus had them all suspect as blasphemers and insurgents. If they knew the essence of Christianity, the Resurrection, was based on a lie, why would they so stubbornly propagate it?
Further, the manner in which the Gospels and the Letters are written show lack of coordination. They appear exactly what they say they are: not polished myths and fables but personal accounts based on individual's memory, and instructions to already existing believing churches, all written in individual styles and at times not agreeing on details.