本帖最後由 lautze 於 2016/10/18 04:42 編輯
看，
你講了大半天的福音是假編出來，
仍是很有可能， 但無証據啵
猶如， 你很有可能是那屋邨色魔， ...
beebeechan 發表於 2016/10/18 00:59 
那，你應該拿出屋邨色魔的假設和合理論點來看看。
空口說白話如果沒有任何觀察考證相似規律經驗下提出來的假說沒有任何學界的"假設意味"
如果那些福音書的記載，作者不熟悉該地理環境，也有高等教育，而文字和風格對比也是不符合教會自稱的傳統版本的推理，那合理質疑早期教會的資訊有不實之處也是正常，同樣，很可能也是靠證跡下的推理，如果你想要百分之百的證據，我也要求你拿出百分之百的最原始文本證明它們可以做法庭上的證供。
馬可福音被學者和歷史學家廣泛認為馬可福音的作者對猶太人的地理和文化背景不了解，而且文字學和風格也強調這不可能是原作者是猶太人的背景，我用的資料都是用acepted among/gernerally accpeted/most等用詞，是大多學者認為，而非少數派的見解。
https://www.amazon.com/Who-Killed-Jesus-Exposing-Anti-Semitism/dp/0060614803
Gospel of MarkIt is fairly well accepted among historians and biblical scholars that the errors regarding Judean geography and customs, as well as the author's need to explain Jewish law and ideas, indicate the author of Mark is not a low or middle class Judean Jew.
還有，就算馬可福音是最早成書而且是原作者寫的，而它的結尾也是被認為不是馬可的手筆，換句話，復活後的故事在早期根本沒被記錄，所以耶穌復活後的早期文本根本不存在。
C、基督徒文摘解經系列 就算你們基督教的解經資料大傳都承認:在教會歷史最早肯定知道這段長的結尾存在的可能是愛任紐（Irenaeus，ca.130-200），基於文體以及語言和用字的研究，大部分學者都認為這段長的結尾不大可能出自馬可的手筆。但是沒有任何學者可以絕對肯定它書寫的日期，有些
http://www.churchinmarlboro.org/Biblestudy/New%20Testament/41Mark/41IT16.htm
The language, theology, and style of Mark suggest that Mark was written for the Gentile, not for practicing Jews
資料來源:
9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 J.D. Crossan, Who Killed Jesus (1995)
13.0 13.1 13.2 Mack The Christian Myth 2001
11.0 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 Five Gospels, Funk, 199
most scholars agree that Matthew was composed between 80 and 90 CE, with a range of possibility between 70 to 110 CE (a pre-70 date remains a minority view).[16][17]
Biblical Scholars and linguists generally accept that Matthew is a compiled work from three different sources: Mark, the Q Document, and the religious "church" community the author ofMatthew would have been part of. Based on the same language analysis, the author of Matthew was likely a highly-educated Jew who wrote in Greek, but with a Jewish worldview and schooled in Jewish law.[9][13]
16.0
16.1 Dulling, 2010, The Gospel of Matthew | 
2016/10/18 01:42
| 
