Oh, for gods’ sake! ”He’s making it up as he goes along”

Here’s an interesting article …

Everyone’s Favorite Gospel Is a Forgery

 

And a few snippets.

 

…new research, which claims that the Gospel of John is an ancient forgery, is poised to overturn much of what we know about everyone’s favorite biography of Jesus.

A provocative and well-argued article published this week in the Journal for the Study of the New Testament threatens to turn this argument on its head. Hugo Mendez, an assistant professor of religious studies at UNC-Chapel Hill, argues that the so-called “Johannine community” never existed and that the Johannine literature are forgeries that claim to be written by a disciple even though they were not.

Mendez told The Daily Beast, “I find it telling that we’ve never found a trace of anything like a ‘Johannine Christianity’—no mentions in other ancient writings and no archeological traces. I think there’s a reason for that; I think the community never existed.”

 

A forgery? In the bible! Really, I am shocked to the core!

Ark.

 

(https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0142064X19890490)


73 thoughts on “Oh, for gods’ sake! ”He’s making it up as he goes along”

    1. STEVE:

      I’m no expert or aficionado — but ‘John’ does have a certain delightful appeal; there’s no holding back with that guy, Boom boom! (There was a school of thought back in the sixties/seventies that thought he was away with the MM fairies when he scribbled those notes.)

      (MM = Magic Mushroom)

      Liked by 1 person

    1. And not a moment too soon, either. Those Jews were about to ruin everything!
      All I can say is thank god … sorry … God that Jesus was a Christian …. and white. Well, whitish.

      Liked by 2 people

          1. Ark, a little secret gem of a tip for your Fantasy Footballing with your son, Ehm, etc…

            This is the son of one of our Greatest American footballers (easily Top 6) Claudio Reyna. He is only 17 and his name is Giovanni Reyna with Borussia Dortmund. This was his Senior Team debut:

            Anyway, just in case you were not aware of him. 😉 After all, we American footballers still get overlooked today a lot of the time. Why? Usually because we are so arrogantly obsessed with our own way of National Football Development—sending our young boys thru the NCAA system and wasting FOUR critical years there playing mediocre-at-best university soccer, against mediocre rosters, and coaching. (facepalm)

            Like

  1. Shocking, I tell you, simply shocking. But then, who needs source materials when belief alone should carry the day?

    (Now, let me explain a few things to you Ark because you obviously don’t get why you are actually a terrible person for raising this issue about the role of independent evidence necessary to informing a justified belief and daring to criticize beliefs that do not posses it.)

    Tsk, tsk. That’s a no-no.

    Donchaknow, the reliance on belief alone is identical to what justifies Critical Social Justice, today’s dominating ideology that tells us subjective belief alone defines and takes the place of evidence-based objective truth, you see… lived experience, so to speak (what we once called ‘circumstantial evidence’ but is now the Harbinger of Truth when enunciated by a victimized Group Member). Of course, by ‘lived experience’, we really should include ‘what one wishes to believe is the case in spite of anything reality has to say in the matter’ and this, to avoid making more victims of a vicitimized group (like ‘believers’ you seem to enjoy targeting), you need to adapt and accept the truthiness of the belief because, well, it’s a belief, you see. What you’re doing by appealing to evidence and primary source material and reality is a left-over from White supremacy colonization. Did I mention this makes you a racist? How could I forget that?

    Duh.

    So I’m sorry to be the one to tell you this, Ark, but by ‘attacking’ these believers in their preferred belief (due to a lack of evidence is a ideological mistake you keep making:’ it’s not relevant to the discriminatory racial power structure you unwittingly defend by these bullying tactics) you are being an intolerant and nasty person. Probably a bigot, too. Actually, let’s just assume that. Toma(y)toes, toMAToes.

    Now, I’d moderate you myself for your own good and the moral health of those who might read your hate speech, but – in spite of my belief that I AM the Administrator of your site in the name of being the one who is woke enough to champion the downtrodden victims you create – you seem to remain the Administrator of the site.

    Damn that reality. It’s so biased!

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Did I mention this makes you a racist?

      Only in a foot race, but Mak will very likely beat me on a bicycle.

      Pee Ess.
      Thanks for co-moderating my blog.
      One cannot say the cheque’s in the post anymore so should I make an EFT?
      😉

      Liked by 1 person

      1. No, no, no… egads, man, accepting filthy lucre would make me a capitalist. Very very bad. The worst.

        On a side note, just read this tweet from James Lindsay I thought highly bigoted and racist:

        “Coronavirus is going to be a pretty decent reminder of a simple truth that a post-truth society tends to let slip out of focus: reality is the thing you run into when your beliefs are false.”

        The man should obviously be sent to a re-education camp.

        Liked by 2 people

          1. He’s one the authors of the Sokal Squared hoax (along with Helen Pluckrose and Peter Boghossian) who wrote about 20 papers based on woke ideological gibberish and having a half dozen of them accepted for publication by ‘peer reviewed’ grievance study journals. For a mathematician, he’s a pretty funny guy.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. Ark doesn’t tweet? Not away with the birdies? Damn! Another illusion shattered.
            And I’m not a Twit either (but the Pres of the USA is/does) (should we be worried? I mean all those atoms he holds …)

            Liked by 2 people

          1. I think you have the complexions wrong. It’s more navy bluish & whitish. Talking of which I know of people who you only see in darkness because they have white teeth

            Liked by 2 people

        1. maka:

          Racist? I think every honest person is, one way or the other.

          As a dog I’m free of that stigma … us dogs judge not by the colour of ‘their’ fur but the size of their teeth and the wag of their tail. Much better.

          Like

  2. Okay, I read the article linked above and it is as it purports to be, a challenge to “standard scholarship.” Standard scholarship is, all too often, built upon a basis of faith, faith that the writings that are being studied are authentic, at least to some degree. In this case the Gospel we call “John” and the three letters 1, 2, 3 John “led” scholars to hypothesize a Johannine community that these documents served. The article disembowels that argument by pointing out that such a connection is historically unsupported and certainly inappropriate.

    The thrust here is to determine more about who the authors of such documents were and what their motives for writing were. This long overdue effort is illuminating the rose colored glasses scholars donned in their original studies.

    That there are forgeries in the Bible is not new. That “John” has not been recognized as such a document is to me beyond the pale as it clear has an axe to grind and contradicts the other three gospels over and over. For example, “John” is the only gospel to mention the resurrection of Lazarus. Since John was written last of the four canonical gospels (exactly when is hard to pin down), how is it that the other three missed that bit? Can you imagine the authors of the other three thinking “Oh, I can’t include that bit, too strange; no one would believe it.” If “gossip” (aka an oral tradition) of such a resurrection had been in circulation and stayed in circulation until “John” was written (ca. 90+-120 CE) it is unthinkable that it wouldn’t have been commented on by someone.

    Also “John” is the only gospel claimed to be written by an eyewitness (One upped that other lot, eh?). An eyewitness, an actual disciple? Even if that disciple were say 20 years old at the beginning of Jesus’ mission, he would have been 80 years old in 90 CE and 110 years old in 120 CE, with life expectancy in Palestine at the time being somewhere in the 30’s. There are many other signs of “forgery” than just these. (Forgeries were common and not unexpected by many, but the gullible … and the forgery aspect tends to get lost in time (old documents seem authentic just by being old).

    heck, there is no mention of the disciples by name in any other documents besides the gospels and Acts which was written after the gospels (most likely). I tend to believe that they were forged also.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Steve:

      Steve, Steve … oh, Steve … you don’t read it critically, you take it as fact. Fact! Jesus Crust, Man, how often to we have to tell you?

      The holy word is NOT to be doubted, or investigated, or (gulp!) criticised. Sheesh! Do that and you’ll get God grumpy, so be warned; it’s never good to have God grumpy at you — how many millions pf Jews (His very own Chosen People, don’t forget) found that out the hard way a generation or so back?

      (And I imagine, in Heaven or Hell most of them still have no idea what they did wrong …)

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Amazing ark the time and attention you give to something you find entirely irrational and fictitious.

    Unless of course, the simple fact remains that God’s word has a hold on you that you cannot rid yourself of.

    Sooooo, in the gospel of John, what part of ‘grace and truth came by Jesus Christ’ do you find unreliable?

    Like

    1. Amazing ark the time and attention you give to something you find entirely irrational and fictitious.

      The fact that your half-wit vice president had a recent prayer circle for the corona virus should be explanation enough I reckon.

      Liked by 2 people

    2. CS:

      I’ve just read your commentual query … but I have this feeling you don’t really want an answer so much as you delight in cranking ol’ Ark up?

      Like

      1. “Very accurate transmission” Just like the coronavirus. 🙂 Oh, BTW, I was stricken with said virus AND terminal cancer until our illustrious VP, Mike, Jesus fan, Pence held a prayer service and asked Jesus to protect us from it. I was instantly cured of both the virus AND the cancer. Eff science, I say! Flush those idiot scientists and medical doctors down the drain and pray, baby, pray! Best way to better world! (BTW, Jesus saved me even though I’m Muslim. Kinda white of ’em, eh?)

        Liked by 3 people

        1. You fellows are lucky- the president is a stable genius who inherited the genes from his uncle Dr. John who taught at (?) for many years like no one else and you have Pence who can pray viruses away

          Liked by 1 person

        2. You forgot (and would that we could) Jim Bakker and his quesa slop, slop buckets, and now silver woo to cure your viruses. Or is that viri? It was nice he and the VP worked so well on this. I haven’t had even a sniffle in at least a week.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. Interestingly, the UNC biblical scholar seems to be claiming that if we cannot prove the community ever existed, it must not have. What else can we apply that logic to?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I always thought the onus was on those making the positive claim – ie mostly /initially Christian biblical scholars who claim … ”Oh, there was obviously a Johanine community – ‘cos look, we have these letters that were obviously written by members of the Johanine community. See?Easy peasy!”

      Liked by 2 people

      1. ARK:

        As a wise old dog I once knew (and trusted implicitly) often stated, with one paw held up for silence—and arguably the greatest heehoo of the lot:

        “Heehoo alleges must prove!”

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Which for context means that the anus of Truth falls upon the Book and its pushers. Not on anyone else. (And, religiosi, you God fearers do one helluva lot of alleging!)

          And yes indeed, when you find typos in my wordings they are mostly deliberate (or acts of God—the line between the two is sometimes thin).

          Like

  5. I think we ought to start our own invisible event, discuss the meetings, the members, what kind of entertainment (the remaining Pythons would be excellent), and food. Yes, food. We could have write ups, commentary, Invisible newspapers would comment on the whole thing, and sooner or later, in a hundred years or so we could become famous for the Insitute we didn’t create. Hm?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Judy:

      Been done before, I’m afraid. Nothing original here, move along, move along …

      … can I be Treasurer?

      Like

  6. I think the author of 2 Peter 1:16 gave the game away a long time ago when he wrote:

    “For we were not making up clever stories when we told you about the powerful coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. We saw his majestic splendor with our own eyes.”

    It’s a clear case of the apologist doth protest too much, methinks.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Your point being, Ark?

    I mean—come on, come onnnnn … you don’t really think it would make any difference, do you?

    But perhaps it might, to some. But not to the True Believers. Satan moves in mysterious ways too, you know; and using Satan’s works to ‘disprove’ the Beloved and/or his Good Books … oh, dear, that’s just ever so loooooowww!

    Liked by 2 people

  8. What’s the alarm here Ark? Is Hugo Mendez trying to say/imply to all biblical scholarship that since there may never have been a “Johannine community” that therefore the Gospel of John was written by one man, the Apostle John? 🤣 Btw, that implication would be ignoring that the word Johannine also means a literary style present in the Greco-Roman Patristic-Apostolic Church (not the Mishnaic-Syro-Arabic Jewish communities) between ca. 95 CE and 150 CE.

    This Mendez proclamation doesn’t poise to overturn anything at all really, not when one considers the ENTIRE historical context of that time-period and all extant sources, Christian and independent non-Xian sources and evidence. Am I missing something here? 🤔 😛

    Like

  9. I find the analytical prowess of some people quite amazing. But in the end the believer will believe. “It’s a miracle how god even uses forgers to preserve gods word”

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s