• 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.
Originally Posted by DOC View Post
Here is my answer to this question, if people don't like this answer nobody is forcing them to keep coming into the thread.

http://books.google.com/books?id=PCG...ox-a#PPA275,M1
You do understand dafydd was intelligent enough to know that those arguments are nothing more than foolish fallacies? He is asking for actual evidence, not the same horribly dumb arguments that geisler made and you already parroted.

Yes I took a look and it is a load of monkey's kidneys,total nonsense.
 
Originally Posted by DOC View Post
Here is my answer to this question, if people don't like this answer nobody is forcing them to keep coming into the thread.

http://books.google.com/books?id=PCG...ox-a#PPA275,M1
You do understand dafydd was intelligent enough to know that those arguments are nothing more than foolish fallacies? He is asking for actual evidence, not the same horribly dumb arguments that geisler made and you already parroted.

Yes I took a look and it is a load of monkey's kidneys,total nonsense.
 
dafydd said:
That puzzled me too.What makesThomas Jefferson the final arbiter in such matters? I'm still waiting for the evidence promised us in the title of the thread.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't think he cares what a "logical fallacy" is. I think he willfully insulates himself from such concepts. DOC is the type of person who wants to delude himself into thinking his beliefs are based on logic, because he needs to. He has two conflicting needs:

1. He needs to believe that the Bible is the word of God.
2. He needs his beliefs to be backed up by logical reasons.

However, it's impossible for him to do both. So the result is that he twists logic around in order to fool himself that his beliefs are backed up by logical reasons. So if he appears to not understand logical fallacies, I don't think it's because he's stupid, per se. Rather, I think that emotionally, he has no choice but to mis-understand it. That's the way I see it.

I think that DOC, and people like him, are a sad statement about one of the failings of human nature.
 
paximperium said:
I don't think it is. It's the same nonsense since DOC's first post.
Click to expand...
Actually, I meant that the summary was helpful to me, because I'd skipped a large number of posts in the thread due to a lack of time to read them all and I wanted to know whether we'd actually progressed at all. The summary helped me because it showed me that we're still treading water.

I like your idea though of DOC being a "training ground" for new skeptics. I might start promoting this idea.
 
arthwollipot said:
Actually, I meant that the summary was helpful to me, because I'd skipped a large number of posts in the thread due to a lack of time to read them all
Click to expand...
I, too, liked joobz's summary - even though I have read - or at least skimmed - all of the recent posts

arthwollipot said:
I wanted to know whether we'd actually progressed at all.
Click to expand...
I'm nowhere near as optimistic... However, I do benefit from a daily dose of anti-woo in my diet

@j, p, H, etc:
Please, keep up the good work :)
 
paximperium said:
So that justifies their and Jesus' support of Slavery?
Click to expand...

Are you and Joobz saying Jesus supported the slavery of his own ancestors, the Jews, who were slaves for 400 years in Egypt and Babylon.

The Jews should be happy that slavery existed because if not the Egyptians and the Babylonians would have no need for them and most likely killed them all. Come to think of it if it wasn't for slavery all the people of Jewish decent might not exist. I'm serious about this.

This is why Joobz and others shouldn't interject our modern (post industrial revolution) concept of slavery into Biblical times. War was a way of life back then and if you couldn't use your enemy that you just beat in battle as a slave, it was in the best interest of you and your own tribes survival to kill them. There was no Geneva convention, there were no prisons that could handle hundreds of your captured enemy. You killed them or they were slaves. It would be crazy to let them go free so they could come back a month later and war with you again.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Are you and Joobz saying Jesus supported the slavery of his ancestors the Jews, who were slaves for 400 years in Egypt and Babylon.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't know. The bible doesn't say that. The bible does show, however, that Jesus condones slavery and the new testament even gave rules on how a slave and master should behave.

DOC said:
The Jews should be happy that slavery existed because if not the Egyptians and the Babylonians would have no need for them and most likely killed them all. Come to think of it if it wasn't for slavery all the people of Jewish decent might not exist. I'm serious about this.
Click to expand...

So you think there are justifiable reasons for slavery?
Then why did god go through the hassle of "freeing" them?
(assuming, of course, that the jews were slaves of the egyptians)

DOC said:
This is why Joobz and others can't inject our modern (post industrial revolution) concept of slavery into Biblical times.
Click to expand...
Yes I can, because you are speaking about jesus, who you claim is the almighty eternal GOD. He's supposed to be infallible, remember? If he condoned slavery back then, then that means he still thinks it's ok.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Are you and Joobz saying Jesus supported the slavery of his own ancestors, the Jews, who were slaves for 400 years in Egypt and Babylon.
Click to expand...
Nope, I'm saying he didn't seem to care at all.
The Jews should be happy that slavery existed because if not the Egyptians and the Babylonians would have no need for them and most likely killed them all. Come to think of it if it wasn't for slavery all the people of Jewish decent might not exist. I'm serious about this.
Click to expand...
So that's your justification for why Jesus and your God didn't speak up against slavery? Because, slavery was good for the Jews.
This is why Joobz and others shouldn't inject our modern (post industrial revolution) concept of slavery into Biblical times. War was a way of life back then and if you couldn't use your enemy that you just beat in battle as a slave, it was in the best interest of you and your own tribes survival to kill them. There was no Geneva convention, there were no prisons that could handle hundreds of your captured enemy. You killed them or they were slaves. It would be crazy to let them go free so they could come back a month later and war with you again.
Click to expand...
So your justification for Jesus' approval of slavery is because he was a backward thinking barbarian?
 
Last edited:
I'm missing something - where does Jesus talk about slavery?

Also, the Xtian line is that the human Jesus had a human's limitations, so was not all-knowing etc.
 
Mr Clingford said:
I'm missing something - where does Jesus talk about slavery?
Click to expand...
jesus makes multiple analogies to slave/master behavior to explain how one should treat god. This is seen in the parable of the talents and in Luke 12:35-48.

At no point does he condemn the practice of slavery, and indeed feels it's an apt analogy of our relationship to god.
 
joobz said:
jesus makes multiple analogies to slave/master behavior to explain how one should treat god. This is seen in the parable of the talents and in Luke 12:35-48.

At no point does he condemn the practice of slavery, and indeed feels it's an apt analogy of our relationship to god.
Click to expand...

Thanks, joobz. Jesus's non-condemnation of slavery shows him to be a product of his times. Of course, one should be wary of drawing hard and fast conclusions from Jesus's words as they can consist of stories and be full of exaggeration.
 
Mr Clingford said:
Thanks, joobz. Jesus's non-condemnation of slavery shows him to be a product of his times. Of course, one should be wary of drawing hard and fast conclusions from Jesus's words as they can consist of stories and be full of exaggeration.
Click to expand...
Certainly.

I'm not against judging the man Jesus as a product of his time. I'm not at all against giving him full credit for being a revolutionary in the advancement of social behavior.

But I simply take exception at the idea of him being the god made flesh. I see you made the argument that as a man, he was limited as a man is. So, why even bother calling him a god? If his message was likely to contain errors as any man's message, why should we place any extra weight on his opinions as anyone elses? We should merely be judging all concepts on thier own merits, independant of the person who said them.

As an example, since we can say that Jesus' view of slavery was a product of his time, we can also say that his view of homosexuality is a product of his time. This means that we should hold no special consideration in the blocking of gay rights on biblical grounds.
 
Funnily enough, I was going to comment about the complete lack of words of Jesus about homosexuality. I am pleased that there are no words which may be used by some to block gay-rights.

How the incarnated Jesus has both human and divine natures has exercised Xtians ever since the start. But just because something may be complicated does not per se mean that it is balls.
 
DOC said:
Are you and Joobz saying Jesus supported the slavery of his own ancestors, the Jews, who were slaves for 400 years in Egypt and Babylon.

The Jews should be happy that slavery existed because if not the Egyptians and the Babylonians would have no need for them and most likely killed them all. Come to think of it if it wasn't for slavery all the people of Jewish decent might not exist. I'm serious about this.

This is why Joobz and others shouldn't interject our modern (post industrial revolution) concept of slavery into Biblical times. War was a way of life back then and if you couldn't use your enemy that you just beat in battle as a slave, it was in the best interest of you and your own tribes survival to kill them. There was no Geneva convention, there were no prisons that could handle hundreds of your captured enemy. You killed them or they were slaves. It would be crazy to let them go free so they could come back a month later and war with you again.
Click to expand...
So, let me see if I've got this straight.

The all powerful God of the bible that you believe in condoned slavery because if he hadn't then his chosen people, the people from whom his son would be born, the people who would fulfil his promises to the world, and through whom he would save all mankind, would have all been slaughtered by the Egyptians?

Are you seriously saying that without slavery God couldn't have found another way to help the Jews?

Is he that powerless?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom