[avb3]

Originally Posted by 30Cal

Absolutely right! However, they consider the writings to be accurate accounts, passed along through actual observers, who realized after the event that the accounts needed to be written down to prevent them from being lost or distorted.

There is much evidence that gospels were "re-written" to fit certain "facts" before being "finalized" at the Council of Nicaea.

The individuals writing these accounts would be moved in the same spirit as the ones who wrote the Old Testament. Would this be impossible for God, to direct and move his creation to record these events? To believe it is impossible for Him would be to challenge His power, and makes one believe they are a god for themselves.

The only person involved with the NT who is a confirmed real person is Saul (Paul). All the rest is speculative as to who the person was that a gospel is attributed to. All were written AFTER the Pauline writings.

So, as that is the case, why does Paul not resemble at least the Synoptic gospels?

You present much factual material in your argument, but don’t provide full disclosure. Likewise I am often guilty of this same practice possible due to my own biases. For example, the Egyptian figures you presented in one of our earlier discussion, to show comparative births to Christ. You chose to omit that their births were not foretold thousands of years before their coming, and as “Saviors” they were not born for the purpose of removing sin once and for all from their people. In addition, these myths do not provide a transition for their people from Old to New, if you understand what I mean. These comparisons are extremely weak, as they might have only one or two things in common. However, I believe you were trying to use them to imply that the events of the birth of Christ were stolen from them.

Not only implying, but insisting.

The virgin birth/saviour/resurecion stories in the middle east pre-date the Jesus one by hundreds and some by thousands of years.

As far as a transition from old to new, there were a number of "adjustments" that needed to be made.

Birthplace...Bethlehem or Nazareth?

Connection to David.. how many generations? There is a discrepancy

Connection to David... Jewish standard was that lineage was traced through the father, not the mother. Joesph was the descendant of David, but not the father of Jesus. There is no way that Jesus could have descended from David, is there?

There is surmounting information that defends the faith, even if you are objectionable to some of it being taken from the Internet. The Internet can be a good resource if there is reference given as to where the information has come from, so one might confirm its authenticity. After all is it not on the Internet we have chosen to present our beliefs and opinions from which our readers will form an opinion?

I have no problem with information coming from the internet, as long as it is authentic, and verifiable. Opinions don't count, and you must admit, faith is a form of opinion.

In respect to the Fishermen, under what pretence can you conclude they were not literate? Such a comment would be somewhat prejudicial would it not? Should I concluded that all hunters are illiterate, simply because they hunt? I would like to believe that the Fishermen selected by Christ may have been lacking in knowledge, but what better way to become an intellect than to walk, learn, and listen to the Creator of the Universe. Hand picked, selected and learned for the purpose of God

The preponderance of evidence would suggest that there is a very high percentile of Middle East residents of 2000 years ago who were illiterate.

In fact, outside of some government officials and rabbis, most of the rest of the population was. We can't view the stigma of illiteracy of today with then.