Were the Gospels evangelistic documents?

[stevencarrwork]

Holding continues to argue both ways, whenever it suits him.

http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_03_01_01.html


Here he claims that the documents were vital, as they could go all around the Empire, while there were only so many Apostles and evangelists to go around.

''Being that Christianity was evangelistic, even if we could prove a widespread notion in the early church that Jesus' return was imminent, this would actually support the idea of recording the words and deeds of Jesus on paper, since there were only so many Apostles and evangelists to go around; whereas documents could be sent all around the Roman Empire, and be left behind when the Apostles moved on!'

Notice that documents had to be written, because Christianity was evangelistic.......


http://www.tektonics.org/tillmagged.html

And here he claims that the Gospels were never used for evangelism.


'Skeptic X's gafunga statement that, "the picture [readers] formed in their minds after reading Matthew's gospel could not have included anything that was written in gospels that came after Matthew's" comes from the wrong side of the tracks of fundaliteralism, in non-knowledge of the interaction and purposes of orality and literacy in the ancient world, and after years of using the Gospels as evangelistic documents they were never intended to be.'

http://www.tektonics.org/paperweight.html

And here Holding slams Till for comparing the OT to the New Testament.

'The OT documents were not evangelistic and were not intended for distribution to a widely spread audience -- we're talking "Roman Empire and beyond" versus "part of Palestine" and accordingly a larger number of people both in time and space.'

So Holding slams Till because he is compares the NT to documents which were not evangelistic. Strange, if Holding is adamant that the NT documents were also not evangelistic.

Holding is quite happy arguing both sides of a story, just as he argues that the sixth hour in John 4 means noon, and that the sixth hour in John 19 means 6 AM......

[Sher]

Are you simply masochistic ...
Do you enjoy the constant spankings JP gives you?
Or do you really have such poor reading comprehension skills?

/me shrugs ... and grabs a bowl of popcorn to watch the entertainment begin


OTOH ...
............................. I am sure JP appreciates the advertising
............................. You are repeatedly proven wrong
............................. AND his articles get added exposure
............................................................ Double his pleasure
............................................................ Double his fun

[stevencarrwork]

Today @ 02:12 AM
stevencarrwork:




'Not only was oral transmission quite adequate for the task of preserving the words and deeds of Jesus, but the widespread use of note-taking and ample supply of literate listeners almost guarantees that VERY early written sources for the gospel materials would have existed.'

So oral transmission was quite adequate, but Holding thinks the evangelistic nature of Christianity supported putting Jesus words on paper.

Holding even quotes with approval , Glenn Miller, who claims 'Literacy among the common populace was highly developed and wide-reaching, and had been so for centuries.'


Don't forget the widespread use of note-taking and the ample supply of literate listeners.


Oh dear. Holding forgets....

HOLDING
'So likewise Skeptic X assumes that the written Gospels were the key to the growth of ancient Christianity. They were not. How could they be? 90-95% of the population was illiterate.'

What happened to this ample supply of literate listeners, who were so important in the growth of ancient Christianity?

And Miller's highly developed literacy among the common populace?

Till destroyed the idea of the Gospels being consistent, so Holding knew he couldn't get away with the Gospels being used, and so Holding has these 'very early written sources' and 'notes' , which , rather conveniently, have all disappeared, leaving no trace anywhere, other than in Holding's fantasy world.

Holding's evidence was shot to pieces by Till, so Holding simply produces imaginary evidence......



The reality is that Holding is a spin doctor. When he wants to have oral transmission, he will spin that way,and ridicule literacy and stress oral culture.

When he wants literate listeners, he spins note-taking and literacy. Whatever it takes, is his motto. His aim is to win debates, not provide truth.

You name it Holding will spin the evidence for it.

Just as the sixth hour is noon or 6 AM, depending upon what spin he wants to have at that moment in time........

[jpholding]

Gee, how did I miss this thread?

So oral transmission was quite adequate, but Holding thinks the evangelistic nature of Christianity supported putting Jesus words on paper.

Psst -- Stevie -- that was an answer to the "hypothetical" of people who say that the faith's eschatological outlook kept them from writing things down...I'm showing that their own logic turns against them! See Stevie read. See Stevie comprehend. Go, Stevie!

Holding even quotes with approval , Glenn Miller, who claims 'Literacy among the common populace was highly developed and wide-reaching, and had been so for centuries.'

Yep. 5% could do so. And?

Holding's evidence was shot to pieces by Till, so Holding simply produces imaginary evidence......

Note taking was the normal way to compose a document of any length at this time, Stevie. Do you think Luke just sat down and wrote all 24 chapters at once?

Get your act together, Stevie.

[skepticbud]

Today @ 07:52 PM post located here
jpholding:


Holding even quotes with approval , Glenn Miller, who claims 'Literacy among the common populace was highly developed and wide-reaching, and had been so for centuries.'

Yep. 5% could do so. And?

Holding says 5% is "widespread"?

"There was an ABUNDANCE of people with scribal skills in 1st century Palestine..."

"Certainly it is difficult to imagine that the seats of government and diplomacy and other centers were without a substantial literate elite even earlier [than the 8th century], but these 'provincial' finds are perhaps more impressive because they indicate how widespread literacy training might have been by the eighth century...."

"Sanders points out on p.179f that the ancient world required vast numbers of scribes, and that most priests would have had to supplement their income with such occupations as 'common' scribal work."

Holding first uses the synonymous term 'wide-reaching' about the literacy the common people enjoyed for centuries, and then uses the synonymous term "widespread" to indicate how many people were literate by the eighth century...

So if "wide-reaching" for the first century means "5% of the populace", you must think 5% is a good figure also for the synonymous "widespread" literacy you alleged to have existed not later than the 8th century.

So in 800 BC Israel, literacy was wide-reaching at 5%.

Then in the first century, Israel's literacy was widespread at 5%, and "had been so for centuries".

Gee whizz, Mr.!? All that learning in 800 years, and their literacy is STILL at 5%?!

[jpholding]

Holding says 5% is "widespread"?

It wouldn't be if they were all clustered in say, Galatia, rather than spread over the Empire. You lovable goof!

the synonymous term "widespread" to indicate how many people were literate by the eighth century...

And, what of it? You're off base on the other, so what of this?

So if "wide-reaching" for the first century means "5% of the populace", you must think 5% is a good figure also for the synonymous "widespread" literacy you alleged to have existed not later than the 8th century.

So in 800 BC Israel, literacy was wide-reaching at 5%.

Actually the 5% number was for the ancient world as a whole. Israel (Judaea) was probably ahead of the curve at about 10-15%.