tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30648257.post9112640881640702172..comments2024-02-19T04:50:58.170-08:00Comments on Shuck and Jive: The Forbidden Gospels and EvolutionJohn Shuckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00798753206614838161noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30648257.post-9746200539561907842007-02-07T16:08:00.000-08:002007-02-07T16:08:00.000-08:00I think someone on her blog raised a great point t...I think someone on her blog raised a great point that the early church accepted these accounts as their closest acceptance of what happened while rejecting others - in that I think there is some confidence. In some sense there is aspects of history in there but that was not the concern of that day - which I find 100% true. <br /><br />But I find the NT accounts to be quite honest about the faith and if early church fathers and disciples of the disciples accepted them - or even penned them - I just have to think they have weight. <br /><br />After studying the histoy of the alphabet, the jewish religion, and the oral tradition I can see that 30 years would be no problem whatsoever to bring accuracy to the words of someone...namely if that someone is of extreme importance to you. I don't think those disciples wrote as Jesus spoke but I am willing to bet all I have on this earth they wrote these sayings later - put them into a group of teachings - and others put them into books. I would see them being fairly accurate about their portrayal of jesus - and in those 4 gospels in the NT - I see very little dispute from gospel to gospel - not saying things weren't added (they were) - but the basic essences of the person (and what he taught) - is quite similar. But maybe I trust disciples of disciples too much and the early church determination of these books - very possible.SocietyVshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10892870801259282254noreply@blogger.com