Specifically the bible contributors. How good were their writing skills for the era? Do the scriptures reflect this?

Well, Luke was a doctor and Matthew a tax collector. I would assume there would be some decent level of education involved with those. Having interacted with the IRS before, I may be wrong about the tax collectors . Paul was Pharisee, if I'm not mistaken, which I would also assume meant he was highly educated.

I was under the impression none of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John actually wrote the books for which they are named after. Paul is correct though and would've been pretty educated. Jesus himself I assume was fairly uneducated (compared to Paul) if a carpenter by trade.

quote:

---

Jesus himself I assume was fairly uneducated (compared to Paul) if a carpenter by trade.

---

Well, maybe "uneducated" in the traditional sense, but even at 12, those in the Temple were amazed at His understanding and answers.

Jesus was considered a Rabbi, even though he was a rebel as far as the Jewish synagogs were concerned.

I would say that Jesus was pretty well educated. He know more about the Torah than his opposers did.

As said above, pretty sure both Luke and Mathew could write.

It would not be far fetched that the majority of the rest of the apostles learned how to read and write after Jesus left. When your job changes to focus primarily on teaching, it would not be surprising to learn to write late in life.

The language in the gospels is not considered to be eloquent, complex or complicated. Even in the translations into English, the writing is pretty plain.

Anybody who has a well paying job and quits it to follow some hippie, watches said hippie die, write fanatical stories about him, then starve, get beaten, and die defending those stories is not very educated in my opinion. I don't care how well they write or where they went to school.

Anybody have a gif of Aggies at a baseball/basketball game pointing saying "stuuuuupid, stuuuuupid, stuuuuupid"?

quote:

---

The language in the gospels is not considered to be eloquent, complex or complicated. Even in the translations into English, the writing is pretty plain.

---

This was part of the reason I was curious.

quote:

---

Anybody who has a well paying job and quits it to follow some hippie, watches said hippie die, write fanatical stories about him, then starve, get beaten, and die defending those stories is not very educated in my opinion. I don't care how well they write or where they went to school.

---

I like the sarcasm and the scenario is well played. In any other circumstance they would have been considered dumb.

I think that just shows that they really believed in something....you might call that uneducated b/c you don't believe it. Just the same for someone who lives and breaths to fight for America or abortion or whatever. If you believe Yeshua was the Messiah, then you should want to go all out.

quote:

---

Anybody who has a well paying job and quits it to follow some hippie, watches said hippie die, write fanatical stories about him, then starve, get beaten, and die defending those stories is not very educated in my opinion. I don't care how well they write or where they went to school.

---

Uh, ok?

quote:

---

I think that just shows that they really believed in something....you might call that uneducated b/c you don't believe it. Just the same for someone who lives and breaths to fight for America or abortion or whatever. If you believe Yeshua was the Messiah, then you should want to go all out.

---

Not the same at all. Those are ideas. The Apostles didn't die for a belief, but a person. A person they saw, followed, and wrote down what they saw...or didn't see and died for that. Again, they would be called a lot of things, but educated is not one of them.

Paul studied under Gamaliel and was a voting member of the Sanhedrin, not exactly Team Blinn material.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I think that just shows that they really believed in something....you might call that uneducated b/c you don't believe it. Just the same for someone who lives and breaths to fight for America or abortion or whatever. If you believe Yeshua was the Messiah, then you should want to go all out.

---

Not the same at all. Those are ideas. The Apostles didn't die for a belief, but a person. A person they saw, followed, and wrote down what they saw...or didn't see and died for that. Again, they would be called a lot of things, but educated is not one of them.

---

I disagree. There belief was that Yeshua was the Messiah....not just a man. A lot of smart people do things because they believe in something, but others would see that it is dumb. Some people like to give millions to a school, others believe that is dumb. You may see the value in it, others don't. It is all in how a person sees things.

quote:

---

Paul studied under Gamaliel and was a voting member of the Sanhedrin, not exactly Team Blinn material.

---

Great post. That's the kind of info I am looking for. That would be a well educated person.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Paul studied under Gamaliel and was a voting member of the Sanhedrin, not exactly Team Blinn material.

---

Great post. That's the kind of info I am looking for. That would be a well educated person.

---

He also studied stoicism. He debated Stoics in Acts and often used stoic terms and metaphors.

He arguably gave up even more than the disciples as a wealthy, well educated Roman citizen to follow and teach about Jesus whom he only met as a vision at conversion.

quote:

---

Anybody who has a well paying job and quits it to follow some hippie, watches said hippie die, write fanatical stories about him, then starve, get beaten, and die defending those stories is not very educated in my opinion. I don't care how well they write or where they went to school.

---

Some people have different priorities than you, therefore they make decisions that you see as foolish.

It would be interesting to contemplate whether or not any of these above mentioned men would have a stronger belief that they lived a more rewarding, fulfilling life than you do.

Maybe that was more important to them than the comfort you enjoy?

quote:

---

quote:

---

I think that just shows that they really believed in something....you might call that uneducated b/c you don't believe it. Just the same for someone who lives and breaths to fight for America or abortion or whatever. If you believe Yeshua was the Messiah, then you should want to go all out.

---

Not the same at all. Those are ideas. The Apostles didn't die for a belief, but a person. A person they saw, followed, and wrote down what they saw...or didn't see and died for that. Again, they would be called a lot of things, but educated is not one of them.

---

I will draw a distinction between Jesus and David Koresh.

I will stipulate that I agree that, if Jesus was not the Son of God, he was bat **** crazy, if you believe the Gospels as representative of what he actually taught.

However, I ask you: do you believe that the concepts and philosophies that Jesus taught have value? Do you see him as an influential philosopher? Do you think that there is value in following the philosophies that Jesus taught, even if you have doubts related to his deity?

quote:

---

He arguably gave up even more than the disciples as a wealthy, well educated Roman citizen to follow and teach about Jesus whom he only met as a vision at conversion.

---

what do you mean.. Only met as a vision at conversion? Jesus came to him in a vision?

Moves, take 2 minutes out of your day and read Acts Chapter 9, you can even google search it.

Amazing,
This is what he's referring to:

Acts 9:1-9
1 Now Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest,
2 and asked for letters from him to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, both men and women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.
3 As he was traveling, it happened that he was approaching Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him;
4 and he fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?"
5 And he said, "Who are You, Lord?" And He said, "I am Jesus whom you are persecuting,
6 but get up and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do."
7 The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.
8 Saul got up from the ground, and though his eyes were open, he could see nothing; and leading him by the hand, they brought him into Damascus.
9 And he was three days without sight, and neither ate nor drank.

quote:

---

Specifically the bible contributors. How good were their writing skills for the era? Do the scriptures reflect this?

---

Their writing skills were probably irrelevant for telling the story, because the less educated ones likely dictated to a scribe. Even Paul, as educated as he was probably dictated most of his letters, because he makes a point in both Galatians 6:11 and Philemon 1:19 that he was writing in his own hand, so that was probably not normal for him.

As a side note, I think it most probable that the language of the streets and the language of the original texts were Aramaic and not the Greek that most people assume (FYI, the language of Babylon, where they were captive for 3 generations was Aramaic speaking). There is an English translation of the Aramaic NT texts (Google AENT).

The disciples were not pulled from the rabinnic schools, which were the equivalent of the Ph.D. in that culture. So while they may have been literate and quite intelligent,they were not the cream of the crop, as measured by the academy. They were uncredentialed. Paul was the exception.

WAL, I see you posted before me. Please chime in if you think my post was incorrect. the characterization of the apsotles was a remark about their "letters," and not their intelligence. They were teaching university classes with bachelor's degrees, or some such anachronistic metaphor.

Being that this is my first post in the R&P board, I'm not sure how serious to take this being that I spend a lot of time in the zoo, however, I do have some thoughts that might add to this conversation:

In Hebrew culture, becoming a Rabbi was actually the pinnacle of Education. There were three schools of Jewish education, Bet Sefer, Bet Talmud, and Bet Midrash.

The first would have taught children the Torah until the age of 13. A rabbi would then select the best of that group and send them to Bet Talmud, which is where they would learn the rest of the Hebrew Oral Tradition, what we now know as the written Hebrew Scriptures. However, those who were not accepted to Bet Talmud went into the family trades. So by trade standards, those from whom the New Testament (in particular Gospel Texts) were named for were educated primarily in their trade...not so much the ways of theology or ways of the Scriptures. They would have, by Old Testament standards, have an elementary education, followed by an education and mastery of their trade.

This is part of the beauty of Jesus picking the people he did. In particular with the Narrative about Jesus choosing the fishermen and making them "Fishers of men," Jesus chose the "uneducated" to spread the Gospel. Which speaks into our context today, suggesting that ALL have the ability to be considered a part of the family of God.

I know this is a forum on Texags, but since I am somewhat interested in this for various reasons, I figured I as within my bounds to post.

Blessings,

Solid first post

quote:

---

which is where they would learn the rest of the Hebrew Oral Tradition, what we now know as the written Hebrew Scriptures

---

No. The oral law is what was later codified in the Talmud, not the Tanakh. Though you are correct that rabbis would have been part of the most educated class in Palestine, at the time of Jesus there was a Jewish merchant class across the Roman Empire.

From Acts 4

13 When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.