• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.

Status
Not open for further replies.
DOC said:
That's the point, there was no explanation for your post #2. Your post adds nothing to the thread. It was simply meant to be derogatory with no explanation as to your reasoning. And, If you choose to explain your reasoning, please do it in the appropriate thread.
Click to expand...

Not at all, it adds my unsubstantiated opinion to this thread. I thought from the OP that's what we were all doing?
 
DOC said:
Reason #3

The NT Writers Left in Very Demanding Sayings of Jesus.

For example: (Matthew 5:28) "I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart".

And (Matt. 5:44-45) "I tell you Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you...

As the book says "They certainly didn't make up a story that made life easier for themselves."
Click to expand...

Beerina said:
Ironic, given these stories did make life easier for themselves as they stood atop a growing empire of donations. Oh, sure, some got the axe as their groups slammed into other political and religious groups and they fought for dominance. Nothing unusual there.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the persecution of Jews and early Christians in the Roman Empire. Wouldn't it be nice to be told that even though you have little goods and wealth, or are a slave, or have been persecuted and perhaps exiled, you are better than everybody else (who can't quite get their camels through the eye of a needle) because of it and stand to inherit a glorious eternal life with god?

They certainly didn't make up a story that made life easier for modern Christians in charge of their own country.
 
DOC said:
Yes, but the Greek and Roman gods were not writing about themselves. There is a difference from what I was saying in post #1.

ETA: And none of the Greek gods were prophecized as being the long awaited Messiah.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't that dogma be on a leash?
 
joobz said:
Yes, it was derogatory. However, it was also extremely accurate.

Geisler's scientific statements were found to be inaccurate (providing missleading quotes).

His book contained a horribly, factually wrong etymology.

And now it also includes rather weak, horribly poor logic regarding evidence.
Click to expand...

Which post in that other thread points out Geisler's scientific statements were found to be inaccurate. You forget it was because of his book, that I had enough of an understanding of the Big Bang to know your definition of a singularity was wrong. That's why I asked you where you got your definition of singularity.

And please don't keep bringing up that tired old -- Geisler's co-author Frank Turek gave an origin of the word "university" that might have been wrong. I say might have been because I'm still not convinced he was wrong. This has to be at least the fifth time you made a big deal out of some minor non religious point Frank Turek stated.

And in a way I am glad you keep using words like "horribly" and "extremely" because Geisler is obviously a very smart man (even if your disagree with his beliefs). Using over-exaggerated words like those in a derogatory manner against such a man I believe hurts rather than helps your case, and hurts your own credibility.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
And in a way I glad you keep using words like "horribly" and "extremely" , because Geisler is obviously a very smart man
Click to expand...
So was Dr Harold Shipman, but I don't want to derail the thread.

The title of the thread is "Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth."

You have still to provide some.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Which post in that other thread points out Geisler's scientific statements were found to be inaccurate. You forget it was because of his book, that I had enough of an understanding of the Big Bang to know your definition of a singularity was wrong. That's why I asked you where you got your definition of singularity.

And please don't keep bringing up that tired old -- Geisler's co-author Frank Turek gave an origin of the word "university" that might have been wrong. I say might have been because I'm still not convinced he was wrong. This has to be at least the fifth time you made a big deal out of some minor non religious point Frank Turek stated.

And in a way I am glad you keep using words like "horribly" and "extremely" because Geisler is obviously a very smart man (even if your disagree with his beliefs). Using over-exaggerated words like those in a derogatory manner against such a man I believe hurts rather than helps your case, and hurts your own credibility.
Click to expand...
That's nice...how is this relevant to the dozens of posts that has completely destroyed your weak claim and which you have refused(or unable) to respond to?
 
DOC said:
Which post in that other thread points out Geisler's scientific statements were found to be inaccurate. You forget it was because of his book, that I had enough of an understanding of the Big Bang to know your definition of a singularity was wrong. That's why I asked you where you got your definition of singularity.
Click to expand...
You never demonstrated that my error changed my point. But here's the link to the inaccuracy I was referring to.
FireGarden said:
Their language was misleading. That is why you were misled into thinking that Eddington's experiment had something to do with showing that the universe is expanding.
Click to expand...
Either Geisler was simply wrong, or intentionally deceitful.

DOC said:
And please don't keep bringing up that tired old -- Geisler's co-author Frank Turek gave an origin of the word "university" that might have been wrong. I say might have been because I'm still not convinced he was wrong. This has to be at least the fifth time you made a big deal out of some minor non religious point Frank Turek stated.
Click to expand...
There's nothing tired about a blatant factual error. Truth isn't dependant upon you acknowledging it.

DOC said:
And in a way I am glad you keep using words like "horribly" and "extremely" because Geisler is obviously a very smart man (even if your disagree with his beliefs). Using over-exaggerated words like those in a derogatory manner against such a man I believe hurts rather than helps your case, and hurts your own credibility.
Click to expand...
Geisler is horribly wrong and so far you've offered no proof that he's intelligent.

In fact, the list you presented here would prove the contrary.
For example, In the light of the example I gave regarding Stephen King, do you agree that Geisler's Reason 1 is simply wrong?
 
paximperium said:
That's nice...how is this relevant to the dozens of posts that has completely destroyed your weak claim and which you have refused(or unable) to respond to?
Click to expand...
It doesn't. DOC is attempting to affirm the consequent.
Geisler's smart becuase he's smart, and therefore what he says is true.
 
DOC said:
And none of the Greek gods were prophecized as being the long awaited Messiah.
Click to expand...
Greek pantheon: "We got it right the first time. We didn't need no stinkin' Messiah to fix up our **** up."
 
paximperium said:
That's nice...how is this relevant to the dozens of posts that has completely destroyed your weak claim and which you have refused(or unable) to respond to?
Click to expand...

Please list the post numbers of the at least 24 posts that have completely destroyed the claim made in post #1. If you can't do that then you should retract the statement.
 
Well, I see this thread about New Testament writers has been moved to the History, Literature, and Arts section.
 
DOC said:
Please list the post numbers of the at least 24 posts that have completely destroyed the claim made in post #1. If you can't do that then you should retract the statement.
Click to expand...

Why don't you read every single one since THEY ALL dismantle your ridiculous assertion?

Your blind and dishonest inability to own up to your pathetic arguments is telling. It goes to show your "faith" relies on lies and delusion...but keep it up.

I'm not going to bother arguing with blind fool for 1000 posts. Have fun winning an argument purely by just being blind and stubborn...that's all you ever seem to do.
 
Please list the post numbers of the at least 24 posts that have completely destroyed the claim made in post #1.
Click to expand...
Oh, I don't know... what about the posts pointing out that the 'evidence' applies equally well to several other religions? No? How about the fact that in this thread and other threads you've basically stated that Christendom is true because some historic person associated with said religion had some good trait or strong will ("the apostles refused to turn away from Christ!") - for then to ignore every other example of people of other religions being great people, or refusing to cave in to, say, Christianity, even on the pain of death.

For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.
Click to expand...
So Jesus was a lying, drunken, demon-vessel?
Click to expand...
DOC, if the Bible says Jesus was a liar, drunken and demon-possessed, and the Bible is the Infallible, True Word of God...
 
Lothian said:
Makes sense. The thread discusses the New Testament. You have given no evidence of its veracity so it gets filed under fiction.
Click to expand...

It should be filed under Conspiracy Theories since it as deluded, fictional and paranoid as many of them.
 
joobz said:
Yes, it was derogatory. However, it was also extremely accurate.

Geisler's scientific statements were found to be inaccurate (providing missleading quotes).

His book contained a horribly, factually wrong etymology.

And now it also includes rather weak, horribly poor logic regarding evidence.
Click to expand...

Since you used the word horrible twice above would you describe your error (defining singularity) as horrible? If not, why not?

And should we think less of your views because you made such a large error. You seem to have no problem thinking we should think less of Geisler. My opinion is that people who make such large errors in understanding something like a singularity should not be throwing stones (and horribles) around so forcibly.

boldness added
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Please list the post numbers of the at least 24 posts that have completely destroyed the claim made in post #1. If you can't do that then you should retract the statement.
Click to expand...

Let me help:

3,10,14,16,19,23,
27,32,33,35,36,37,
38,40,41,42,43,44,
45,46,48,49,54,59,
64,65,66,67,71,73,
76,78

Of course, "completely destroyed" will always be a matter of opinion, but these post hold clear argumentation against your case. Argumentation that you have only answered to sporadically.

Note that a couple of the posts listed are your own. This is because I consider those posts to weaken your original argument.

Hans

ETA: These are the ones I found through a quick read. Forgive me if I have overlooked some.
 
Last edited:
Some of us are still waiting for you to substantiate your claim that the gospel writers were apostles. Are we waiting in vain?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom