On Creationism

The Gospel of John is quite different to the other gospels. It is dated to 90 to 130 AD, so is later, but it has been suggested that it had multiple authors, or to put it another way, it got revised several times before it achieved (more or less) its final form. This might suggest it is the work of a community somewhat in isolation, and while mainstream Christianity has the passion narrative, which was edited to became Mark, which was itself edited to become Matthew, in John we only have the product of a similar development process. In John we see a somewhat different theology, which may be due to the time it was written, or could represent the theology of the isolated community - or a mixture of the two. Either way, in John it was believed that Jesus had existed even before his birth, and perhaps for that reason the author felt a nativity story was not needed. Like Luke, John has Jesus appearing in Jerusalem subsequent to the resurrection, indicating some familiarity with Luke

While the Gospel of Matthew might be seeking to redress the loss of Judaism in Christianity, the Gospel of Luke veers the other way. It too is based soundly on Mark, and likely shares another source with Matthew (or draws on Matthew), in particular a book of sayings, called Q. Unlike Matthew it makes no attempt to link the narrative to prophecies of the Old Testament. Traditionally the author is Luke, a physician and traveling companion of Paul, but the evidence is not convincing either for or against. It is, however, pretty much agreed the same author wrote both Luke and Acts. Luke has the virgin birth, but the nativity he tells is quite unlike that of Matthew, and the census puts it about six years later! In Luke we see an elaboration of the Jerusalem appearances , after the very brief appearance in Matthew. He was writing sufficiently long after the event that such stories could start to circulate in the community without the people who were actually there refuting it. Luke di

The author of the Gospel of Matthew was not the tax collector that Jesus knew. The author probably wanted to create an updated version of the existing gospel, one that included the birth of Jesus among other things that Mark had omitted. He also wanted to show how Jesus' life followed the prophecies of the Old Testament. Thus, he started with the text of Mark, but added much to it, to create what today is considered another gospel. The work is quite Jewish in nature, but reflects how the religion has very much moved away from Judaism. Paul's missionary work had established Christianity in the gentile world, whilst the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD following the Jewish revolt had seriously reduced the Jewish side of Christianity. By the time the Gospel of Matthew was written, many pagan idea had influenced the new religion. Virgin birth One of the most significant of these ideas was the virgin birth . That this is in Luke too indicates it predates Matthew by some se

The Gospel of Mark is undoubtedly the most important work we have with regards to Jesus life, as it is the earliest gospel (and Paul does not discuss Jesus' life at all). It also gives us a snapshot of the beliefs of that moment in time. It was written around 60 to 80 AD; mention of the fall of the Temple suggests after 70 AD. Even if it was written by St Mark - which is by no means certain - this is not an eye witness account; St Mark joined the movement after the events recorded in the gospel. Jesus was adopted When Mark was written, the early Christians believed Jesus was adopted as the son of God at his baptism, following the precedent of earlier Jewish Kings. This is discussed at length here . Mark's beliefs were very similar to the Ebionites (allowing that we do not know quite what they believed for certain), a group of Jewish Christians considered heretical who survived for some centuries. The Resurrected Jesus The gospel originally ended at verse 8, and even

The passion narrative was a text that described the last few days of Jesus from his entry to Jerusalem, up to and possibly including the Empty Tomb. It was one of numerous texts used by the very early church that are now lost. Although I have placed this after Paul, it may well have pre-dated Paul's epistles. Although today the gospels are "carved in stone" this was very much not the case back then, and the texts were subject to frequent modification. The Passion Narrative was a text that developed over time, and much of it was devised from scripture rather than history. Why think it changed? We do not know what the original passion narrative was, let alone its version history, so why suppose it changed? We can look at the way other texts have changed. The second half of the last chapter of Mark is absent in the earliest manuscripts. The verses that are in the Bible today were a later addition - and some Bibles even acknowledge this: https://www.biblegateway.com/pa

Paul was a Pharisee , and as such it was his job to ensure the Jews were diligently following the laws of the oral tradition to bring about the arrival of the messiah. Jesus had rejected the oral tradition, and his followers of course did too, so Paul was involved in putting a stop to them. On the road to Damascus, however, he saw a bright light, and heard a voice in his head. He was looking forward to the arrival of the messiah and for the dead to be resurrected in bodies shining brightly, and so naturally concluded that this was Jesus, the messiah, resurrected! Paul did not think Jesus was God or was a part of the trinity. That is not what the messiah was. To Paul, Jesus was the king of the Jews (thus Paul consistently called Jesus "lord"), and his resurrection indicating the Messianic age was finally on its way. Jesus was but the first of a general resurrection event that Paul was confident would occur in his life time. Paul referred to Jesus as the "first fruits&

Jesus was a follower of John the Baptist. When John was arrested, Jesus started his own movement. He was an itinerant preacher, who spoke about the coming kingdom of God, urging his fellow Jews to get their lives in order so when the day of judgement arrived they would be judged righteous, not sinful (eg Mark 8:34-38). Among other things, Jesus urged his followers to give up all worldly goods (Mark 10:17-31), which is exactly what he did himself. We get hints that he was knowledgeable of Jewish law, but that his family thought him crazy (Mark 3:21), and people in his home town were not impressed (Mark 6:1-6). He healed the sick and drove out demons, but this was not as exceptional as we might think: https://infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/kooks.html https://www.publicchristianity.org/was-jesus-miracle-work-unique/ He did not claim to be God, or part of the trinity. It is questionable whether he even claimed to be the Messiah, but it seems others hailed him as such

Over the course of a few posts during lent, I want to present one possible scenario for how the death of Jesus led to the birth of Christianity, hopefully explaining all the evidence we have today. It assumes the authors of the various texts had good reason to write what they did (and certainly none of them were lying!), but not that the texts were necessarily true. I will try to support each claim as I go along. I will start by looking at what the Jews believed; the culture in which Jesus lived. The Messiah Judea was conquered by the Babylonians in 587 BC, who were conquered by the Persians under Cyrus in 539 BC, who in turn was conquered by Alexander the Great in 322 BC. After a brief  of self-rule from 167 BCE to 63 BCE, they became part of the Roman Empire (see here ). In this milieu, the idea of a messiah was established - a saviour and liberator of the Jewish people. The Messiah would be a direct male descendant of David (2 Samuel 7:12-16), a new king who would usher in

Okay, bit of a shock title, but it is true, according to the Bible. I wrote most of this is a forum post , but thought it was worth preserving for the next time. Children that God killed by drowning How about all the children drowned in the Flood? Millions of them, presumably. Children that God struck dead We can discuss the killing of the first born in Egypt (Exodus 12:29). 29 At midnight the Lord struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. 30 Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up during the night, and there was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead. Children that God burned to death This is from Genesis 19:24: 24 Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens. 25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire pl