Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View The Gospels unplugged
11 years ago  ::  Dec 05, 2007 - 11:38PM #1
Posts: 1,972
My basic premise here is that it seems there are some embarrassing stuff in the Gospels, that if it was fabricated, someone would have pulled the plug. Historians take note of potentially embarrassing elements found in historical documents. Why? Because those who are writing true history don’t normally include things that might turn their face red. If you are embellishing something, you leave all that stuff out!

This is why the potentially embarrassing elements of the Gospels are a significant part of their historicity. I have listed a number of embarrassing accounts from the Gospel of Mark, that if the early church made up, would be like shooting themselves in the proverbial foot.

1. Jesus’ own family did not believe him and even questioned his sanity (Mark 3:21)
2. Jesus was rejected by people in his hometown and couldn’t perform many miracles there (Mark 6:2-5)
3. Some thought Jesus was in collusion with, and even possessed by, the devil (Mark 3:22)
4. At times Jesus seemed to rely on common medicinal techniques (Mark 7:33; Mark 8:23)
5.Jesus’ healings weren’t always instantaneous (Mark 8:22-25)
6. Jesus’ disciples weren’t always able to exorcise demons (Mark 9:18), and Jesus’ own exorcisms weren’t always instantaneous (Mark 5:8-13)
7. Jesus seemed to suggest he wasn’t good (Mark 10:18)
8. Jesus associated with people of ill-repute and gained a reputation of being a glutton and drunkard (Mark 2:15-16)
9. Jesus sometimes seems to act rudely to people (Mark 7:26-27)
10. Jesus seemed to disregard Jewish laws, customs, and cleanliness codes (Mark 2:23-24)
11. Jesus often spoke and acted in culturally “shameful” ways (Mark 3: 31-35)
12. Jesus cursed a fig tree for not having any figs when he was hungry, despite the fact that it wasn’t the season for figs (Mark 11:12-14)
13. The disciples who were to form the foundation of the new community consistently seem dull, obstinate, and cowardly (Mark 8:32-33; Mark 10:35-37; Mark 14:37-40)
14. Jesus was betrayed by an inner-circle disciple (Mark 14:43-46), and Peter cowardly denied any association with him (Mark 14:66-72)
15. Women were the first to discover Jesus’ tomb was empty—while the men were hiding in fear! (Mark 16:1-8)
16. The primary hero (Jesus) was crucified on a cross bringing a definite curse upon him (cf. Deut. 21:22-23)

Finally, the idea that the Messiah they wanted was a total failure, he died at the hands of the Romans, the exact people he was expected to defeat. How after such an embarrassing fact did the church turn around so quickly, or better why would they?

Any thoughts?

Quick Reply
11 years ago  ::  Dec 06, 2007 - 3:53PM #2
Posts: 688
I agree that these and other aspects of the gospels show lack of editing and transparent integfity
Quick Reply
11 years ago  ::  Dec 12, 2007 - 9:28AM #3
Posts: 556
Shalom Aleichem!
How 'bout the fact that Gospel writers all agree the disciples were idiots. They're portrayed a buffoons. If this was forged, wouldn't they make themselves look better?  :)
Peace of Christ!
Quick Reply
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing

    Beliefnet On Facebook