Once again a cop out. This tells me you and others are not really serious when you ask for evidence.
Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.
- Thread starter DOC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bible evidence new testament
- Status
Once again a cop out. This tells me you and others are not really serious when you ask for evidence.
six7s
veretic
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2007
- Messages
- 8,716
Bollocks!
It's your mind-numbing confirmation bias that tells you that requests for evidence, here on a critical thinking forum, are anything other than serious
If you disagree with my interpretation, please put it to the test and post some bloody evidence
Otherwise, stop trolling and lying for your messiah
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
The evidence in the OP has always been there for anyone who has read the New Testament, its nothing new. But it took someone like Geisler to point out what's been there all along for us to see. We've been blind to the evidence that's been right under our noses. Sometimes it takes a logical closing argument to put all the pieces together. And when you see the big picture for the first time, something that did not seem to be evidence before suddenly clearly becomes evidence.
six7s
veretic
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2007
- Messages
- 8,716
teh stoopid, it burnz!
DOC, don't be obtuse...
It has been pointed out to you, ad nauseum, that (in the context of this thread, at least) Geisler's so-called evidence ain't worth squat to anyone with even the most rudimentary critical thinking skills
Forget Geisler
Forget all of your woo-affirming woo
EITHER provide some evidence OR acknowledge that you have been talking out of your arse from the outset
Last edited:
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
paximperium
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 30, 2008
- Messages
- 10,696
Deja vu...didn't we have this exact DOC weaseling pattern...oh...about twice in this thread alone?
articulett
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2005
- Messages
- 15,404
Yes, everyone, it's YOUR fault if you don't see the evidence-- just pray harder-- have faith-- beg god to let you know the truth (or Xenu or Allah or whatever invisible guy has "the truth" this era!) Clearly, the gods find you unworthy so they are not revealing the evidence to you! Or maybe Satan has walked off with your souls because of your skepticism. If you'd just be more like DOC, then you'd have evidence galore! Jeez!
Oh, and have you seen the glorious magical robes of the Emperor?
Oh, and have you seen the glorious magical robes of the Emperor?
Paul (who at one time was a great enemy of Christians) wrote several letters. At the time he wrote them there was no New Testament. So when the previous Christian persecutor (Paul) wrote his letters he was outside of current scripture. Paul who said Christ appeared to over 500 people and over 250 of them are still alive (at the time he wrote his letter) put himself and his whole life's work on the line by saying there were still over 250 people still alive who saw the risen Christ because this fact could easily be verified by skeptics of the day. This letter about the 250 people still being alive who saw Christ is very good historical evidence. As someone once said, if you take away the supernatural bias, Christ and his resurrection would be considered a historical fact (based on the historical evidence available.) This is probably one of the reasons why the famous Oxford historian Thomas Arnold , the author of the 3 volume "History of Rome" whom I mentioned about 6 months ago in other threads said the following:
"The evidence for our Lord’s life and death and resurrection may be, and often has been, shown to be satisfactory; it is good according to the common rules for distinguishing good evidence from bad. Thousands and tens of thousands of persons have gone through it piece by piece, as carefully as every judge summing up a most important cause. I myself have done it many times over, not to persuade others, but to satisfy myself. I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one in the history of mankind which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer than the great sign which God has given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead" (ref.7, pp.425-426).
http://www.newtestamentchurch.org/html/Christian_Evidence/Historical_Evidence.htm
Also, here is a site that gives 23 more historical reasons why Oxford historian Thomas Arnold might have said what he said:
http://www.truthortradition.com/iph...=49:23reasons&catid=28:jesus-christ&Itemid=56
Last edited:
Off topic again. The title of this thread is 'Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth'. You are now trying to use the existence of part of the New Testament to be proof the that New Testament is true.
Before I waste more of my time on yet another appeal to authority, do any of those 'reasons' have anything to do the with title of this thread?
Yes, after a quick run through, I'd say 1,2,3,4,5,6,11,12,13,14,15,17,18, and 19 have something to do with the title of this thread.
boloboffin
Unregistered
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2006
- Messages
- 4,986
Lothian
should be banned
Doc, these arguments supporting the resurrection (summarised below) are not evidence but arguments and have already been dealt with.
1, The story sounds like it could happen
2, An apostle said it was true
3, The bible says the Tomb was empty
4, The disciples wouldn’t lie
5, The bible mentions the existence of women therefore Jesus was resurrected
6, We don’t have his body so he was resurrected
11, The bible says a load of people saw him resurrected
12, It is a stupid story so it must be true
13, Some people today believe it
14, Early Christians believed it
15, Some people who believed it have died.
17, The bible says the disciples didn’t believe it
18, No honestly I know I said it is a stupid story but it is a really, really stupid story
19 Did I mention the bible said the Tomb was empty
Last edited:
malbui
Beauf
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2004
- Messages
- 4,688
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
paximperium
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 30, 2008
- Messages
- 10,696
It makes perfect sense.
Paul wrote the letter BEFORE there was a Bible therefore all of the Bible are extra-Biblical sources...for the Bible.
To all the people in here who are complaining about no evidence for the resurrection (like Hokulele, Zooterkin, Paximperium, Lothian, Articulett, Arthwollipot etc.) I want each one of you to tell us what is the least amount of evidence that would make you believe that Christ rose from the dead 2000 years ago. If you can't do that you're hypocrites for continuing to complain about evidence.
Last edited:
six7s
veretic
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2007
- Messages
- 8,716
Anything that ain't circular in its illogic or obviously a lie would be a fine start
Fixed that for you
I do like 'em!
They're honest, smart, and present arguments that are coherent, concise, consistent with reality and supported by the E word
Is that why you don't like 'em?
Last edited:
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
Independent, contemporary, non-Biblical writings that say that Jesus was killed and came back to life.
As opposed to independent, conteporary, non-Biblical writings that say that Christians believe that Jesus was killed and came back to life.
Mind that distinction.
I would consider this to be valid evidence. But it alone would not be convincing evidence unless it were corroborated by other sources.
- Status