Back to Windows...

[Nikolai]

Jason Taylor wrote:

> Not to kick this off again :)... but
> 
>      . Consider also, that the Gospels themselves are often mutually
>     contradictory, and
>     subtly change th story each time.
> 
> 
> Its actually more of a problem that 3 of the gospels are so similar :)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_problem 
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_problem>


Not sure what exactly you're referring to as a problem but wouldn't you 
expect 3 truthful accounts of the same events to be similar? Besides, it 
doesn't take too much thinking to realise the higher critic's *theories* 
can be easily demolished on logical grounds alone without even looking 
at the manuscripts. Also, the scholars these and similar articles are 
talking about are not just any scholars, in theological circles they are 
usually referred to as 'liberal scholars' (i.e. the scriptures for these 
scholars are mostly historical documents, not divinely inspired writings 
reflecting the very mind of God). Being liberal doesn't make them wrong 
(although I think they are) but it is important to keep in mind that not 
all scholars believe the same things.

And finally, since you provided the link, you should have, in all 
honesty, read what's under 'External links' heading. A pdf document, 
linked there, begins with this rather intriguing paragraph:

"Imagine flying to a non-existent island on an airplane that has not yet 
been invented. Even if this impossible trip were to take place during 
the thirteenth month of the year, it would not be as fantastic as the 
tale, recently christened as scientific certainty by some NT scholars, 
concerning the so-called lost gospel Q and the earliest Church."

All of the sudden, it seems like what you're referring to as a problem 
is not a problem at all but an empty sound in the air.

Nikolai