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

[Hokulele]

Lucian, even though a critic, gives us a lot of info about early Christianity outside the New Testament.

Umm, yeah, that their contemporaries thought they were odd and misguided.

Plus ça change . . .

Oh, and how does this prove that the NT authors were telling the truth? You know, that Jesus rose from the dead and all.

 

[six7s]

Umm, yeah, that their contemporaries thought they were odd and misguided.

Plus ça change . . .

Oh, and how does this prove that the NT authors were telling the truth? You know, that Jesus rose from the dead and all.

Moins d'evidence
Beaucoup de faith

 

[wollery]

I would personally like to thank DOC.

He has proven to me, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that there were christians in the first and second centuries, and a lot of contemporary non-christian writers thought they were weirdo nutjobs.

I'm really looking forward to his next thread, where he will reveal that penguins live in the southern hemisphere, and seals like to eat them (although the seals sometimes have trouble getting the wrappers off).

 

[imjohn]

Well it doesn't have to be 500, but if 200 of 500 witnessses became evangelists to the world it would make more sense than the alternative. The alternative being the heavily entrenched system of Roman and Greek gods (so entrenched that huge expensive labor intensive temples were put up in their honor)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_temple#List_of_Roman_temples

was brought down by Peter, Paul, and the 11 other apostles who came from a distant provence with no communication other than their own voices and a few handwritten letters.

Wow. And here I thought that Roman paganism was brought down by Constantine and the emperors who followed Constantine several hundred years after Jesus, Peter, Paul, etc.

 

[DOC]

There are lies, repeated lies and DOC lies.









All of this is found in this thread. He has no excuse for his continued lying. But then, that's all he has left to keep his delusion and house of cards from falling down.

More shock words. List one specific lie contained in my 163 posts and your proof that it is a lie. Once again be specific, no generalities.

 

[DOC]

I would personally like to thank DOC.

He has proven to me, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that there were christians in the first and second centuries, and a lot of contemporary non-christian writers thought they were weirdo nutjobs.

I wonder what has changed. Because I don't see any writers calling the devout Christian Barack Obama a nutjob.

 

[DOC]

Oh great. These again?
Little tid-bits from wikipedia

Tacitus:
Publius (or Gaius) Cornelius Tacitus (ca. 56 – ca. 117): Talks about Christians and their belief AFTER Jesus is already a legend...

Isn't that what world famous historians are supposed to do -- talk and write about events AFTER they happen?

And your use of the word legend is inappropriate because the historian/Roman Senator Tacitus talks about how Christus {Christ} suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of Pontius Pilatus. World famous historians don't put legends and 2 well known historical figures together in the same sentence.

So it looks like this is not a lie after all.

 

[DOC]

Oh great. These again?
Little tid-bits from wikipedia

<snip>

Pliny the Younger:Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, born Gaius Caecilius or Gaius Caecilius Cilo (61/63 - ca. 113): Ditto. Talks about Christians and their beliefs...

Yes, this governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (Pliny the Younger) did write about Christians. But you didn't mention it was in an official letter to Emperor Trajan where Pliny explained his strategy his strategy and also asked advice in dealing with the Christians.

Pliny, in addition to other things, mentions that the Christians sang hymms to Christ. Why didn't you mention that Pliny, the governor, mentioned Christ by name.

Looks like this is another case of a lie not being a lie.

 

[arthwollipot]

Yes, this governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (Pliny the Younger) did write about Christians. But you didn't mention it was in an official letter to Emperor Trajan where Pliny explained his strategy his strategy and also asked advice in dealing with the Christians.

Pliny, in addition to other things, mentions that the Christians sang hymms to Christ. Why didn't you mention that Pliny, the governor, mentioned Christ by name.

Looks like this is another case of a lie not being a lie.

Oh my. I've been keeping out of this one, but this is far to egregious for me to stay silent any longer.

DOC. Pliny says that Christians sing hymns to Christ. This is evidence that Christians sang hymns to Christ, nothing more. It is no more evidence in favour of Christ's existence than anything else you've posted here.

I find it extremely hard to understand why you don't get this simple fact. All you have posted is hearsay. And there's a reason why hearsay evidence is not accepted in a court of law - it's unreliable.

We're looking for evidence of the existence of Christ and His resurrection, not the existence of Christians and their beliefs.

Please, have a care for this next time. Thank you.

 

[six7s]

Tacitus talks about how Christus {Christ} suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of Pontius Pilatus.

Really? Tacitus' writings are a primary source of evidence that a man called Jesus lived and died under Pilate?

The first few SERPs from Google: Results 1 - 10 of about 29,200 for tacitus christ pilate. suggest otherwise

World famous historians don't put legends and 2 well known historical figures together in the same sentence.

Says who? You? Hah! Don't make me laugh! You wouldn't know an historian if you swallowed one. Consequently, your argument is bollocks

So it looks like this is not a lie after all.

Maybe to you. However, given your reputation and the complete lack of supporting evidence to the contrary, why should anyone doubt that you are still lying?

 

[autumn1971]

Yes, this governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (Pliny the Younger) did write about Christians. But you didn't mention it was in an official letter to Emperor Trajan where Pliny explained his strategy his strategy and also asked advice in dealing with the Christians.

Pliny, in addition to other things, mentions that the Christians sang hymms to Christ. Why didn't you mention that Pliny, the governor, mentioned Christ by name.

Looks like this is another case of a lie not being a lie.

Dude, Christ wasn't a name.
Saying that Royalists praised royals isn't proof of Queen Elizabeth.

 

[DOC]

Really? Tacitus' writings are a primary source of evidence that a man called Jesus lived and died under Pilate?

Strawman, you're putting words in my mouth.

 

[arthwollipot]

Strawman, you're putting words in my mouth.

Then just what the hell are your words, pray tell?

 

[DOC]

We're looking for evidence of the existence of Christ and His resurrection, not the existence of Christians and their beliefs.

I've already mentioned some evidence of the Resurrection, maybe you missed it:

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

 

[arthwollipot]

I have come to the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is either one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted on the minds of human beings--or it is the most remarkable fact of history.

That immediately sounds like a false dichotomy.

Here are some of the facts relevant to the resurrection: Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish prophet who claimed to be the Christ prophesied in the Jewish Scriptures, was arrested, was judged a political criminal, and was crucified. Three days after His death and burial, some women who went to His tomb found the body gone. In subsequent weeks, His disciples claimed that God had raised Him from the dead and that He appeared to them various times before ascending into heaven. From that foundation, Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire and has continued to exert great influence down through the centuries.

No, I would say "here are some of the claims".

The New Testament accounts of the resurrection were being circulated within the lifetimes of men and women alive at the time of the resurrection.

Evidence? I thought that the gospels were written 40-70 years after Christ's death?

F. F. Bruce, Rylands professor of biblical criticism and exegesis at the University of Manchester, says concerning the value of the New Testament records as primary sources: "Had there been any tendency to depart from the facts in any material respect, the possible presence of hostile witnesses in the audience would have served as a further corrective."

Once again, the argument that if it were wrong, someone would or should have refuted it. This is exactly the same argument that apologists dismiss when we non-theists say that God should have designed the human retina the right way around.

The New Testament witnesses were fully aware of the background against which the resurrection took place. The body of Jesus, in accordance with Jewish burial custom, was wrapped in a linen cloth. About 100 pounds of aromatic spices, mixed together to form a gummy substance, were applied to the wrappings of cloth about the body. After the body was placed in a solid rock tomb, an extremely large stone was rolled against the entrance of the tomb. Large stones weighing approximately two tons were normally rolled (by means of levers) against a tomb entrance.
A Roman guard of strictly disciplined fighting men was stationed to guard the tomb. This guard affixed on the tomb the Roman seal, which was meant to "prevent any attempt at vandalizing the sepulcher. Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb's entrance would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law.

Unfortunately, none of this detail is mentioned in the Bible. And hang on - one hundred pounds of aromatic spices??? That would have been rather expensive, would it not?

As we have already discussed, another obvious fact after the resurrection was the empty tomb.

Obvious only if you consider the Bible to be an accurate source!

I'm going to stop there, because the entire article assumes that the Biblical account is an accurate source. There is no evidence here. Only self-supporting, circular arguments that take the form of "if this source is accurate, then this source must have been accurate".

No evidence here. Sorry.

 

[zooterkin]

They say that Jesus lived, and yes there is historical documentary evidence of Christ or of Christians. Read

Roman Senator/Historian Tacitus

Jewish historian Josephus

http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMN...dence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm

If you want more non-Christian sources you can check out:

Roman Seutonius

Thallus

Pliny the Younger

Trajan

Hadrian

Jewish Talmud

Toledoth Jesu

Lucian

Phlegon

Mara Bar-Seraption

Ok, which of these is historical documentary evidence of Christ?

 

[DOC]

...And let's get real. Initially the only persecutions came not from the Romans but from Jewish leaders (despite your earlier protestations that Matthew would not have signed his name to the gospel that is now attributed to him because the Roman world was so dangerous for Christians). The first Roman persecutions were not oriented toward belief, if we are to believe Tacitus, but an attempt by Nero to shake the charge that he burned parts of Rome for his grand rennovation scheme...

I noticed there is no sources for this. This following excerpt of a letter by Pliny the Younger, a Roman governor of an Asia Minor province, to the Roman emperor tells a different story of the Roman Empire mindset.

"...In the meanwhile, the method I have observed towards those who have denounced to me as Christians is this: I interrogated them whether they were Christians; if they confessed it I repeated the question twice again, adding the threat of capital punishment; if they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed. For whatever the nature of their creed might be, I could at least feel not doubt that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy deserved chastisement. There were others also possessed with the same infatuation, but being citizens of Rome, I directed them to be carried thither.

These accusations spread (as is usually the case) from the mere fact of the matter being investigated and several forms of the mischief came to light. A placard was put up, without any signature, accusing a large number of persons by name. Those who denied they were, or had ever been, Christians, who repeated after me an invocation to the gods, and offered adoration, with wine and frankincense, to your {Emperor Trajan} image, which I had ordered to be brought for that purpose, together with those of the gods, and who finally cursed Christ -- none of which acts, it is into performing -- these I thought it proper to discharge. Others who were named by that informer at first confessed themselves Christians, and then denied it; true, they had been of that persuasion but they had quitted it, some three years, others many years, and a few as much as twenty-five years ago. They all worshipped your statue and the images of the gods, and cursed Christ..."

http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/pliny-the-younger.htm

------

If I was to write a gospel in Pliny's Roman province, I sure as heck wouldn't sign it, if I planned on doing anymore evangelizing.

 

[DOC]

They say that Jesus lived, and yes there is historical documentary evidence of Christ or of Christians. Read

Roman Senator/Historian Tacitus

Jewish historian Josephus

http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMN...dence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm

If you want more non-Christian sources you can check out:

Roman Seutonius

Thallus

Pliny the Younger

Trajan

Hadrian

Jewish Talmud

Toledoth Jesu

Lucian

Phlegon

Mara Bar-Seraption

Ok, which of these is historical documentary evidence of Christ?

10 of them can be considered historical evidence that Christ existed and in 2 of them, Trajan and Hadrian, Christ is implied to exist.

 

[zooterkin]

I noticed there is no sources for this. This following excerpt of a letter by Pliny the Younger, a Roman governor of an Asia Minor province, to the Roman emperor tells a different story of the Roman Empire mindset.

Off topic. Pliny the younger was born around 62 AD. First, this does not answer Ichneumonwasps point that "Initially the only persecutions came not from the Romans but from Jewish leaders". Secondly, it is off topic for this thread which is for you to give evidence of the truth of the New Testament, not the existence of Christians a hundred years after Jesus's birth.

 

[zooterkin]

10 of them can be considered historical evidence that Christ existed and in 2 of them, Trajan and Hadrian, Christ is implied to exist.

And which can be considered primary sources, if any? Are there any of these sources which are not merely reporting the fact that there were Christians who believed certain things?