• Flax@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    If you can get me several people who saw it and are willing to die for that fact, I’d believe you

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      The supposed water walking event wasn’t documented by anyone until 5 decades later. Paul never mentions it, all the other early writings don’t mention it, only in about 81AD or so did it appear. Where did Mark get it? We have no clue. Maybe he saw the optical illusion of people walking by water looking like they are walking on water, maybe local magicians were using the rocks underneath and he heard about, maybe it was symbolic that Cephus was involved and he wanted to talk more smack about the man (Mark really hated him), maybe there was a local play that had a god in it that did it. Point is the chain of evidence was broken.

      And the deaths of the apostles are even more poorly documented. There was a huge incentive to lie about everything. We don’t know how James died, we suspect he was very old when it happened, there is a possible reference to him being killed as an old man but for what crimes we don’t know. The idea that he was killed for his beliefs doesn’t show up until nearly two centuries later in text form.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        There couldn’t have been rocks underneath as Peter began to sink. John was the one who talked smack about Peter.

        For historical accounts from that time, 5 decades after is rather close. Most records we have about history from that point in time are written centuries later. Generally copies of copies, etc. When mark wrote it though, there’d be several other guys who would have been there who could have said “actually this didn’t happen”, by this point they were spreading all over the world, but they already accepted Mark’s gospel.

        Also worth noting that the 5 decades date primarily comes from the presumption that Jesus couldn’t have told the future in the Olivet discourse. Which if Christianity is true, the account could very well have come earlier.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          If Christianity was true, you wouldn’t need to make these sorts of arguments because the words of Jesus would have been enough to make them for you.