• 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:
Quotes from Jefferson:
Click to expand...

Thanks, DOC. I couldn't find those quotes anywhere. Here's a website that has some more quotes by Jefferson that you should check out:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/jefferson.htm

Here's a couple of quotes from Jefferson I think you should pay attention to:

"Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him [Jesus] by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being."

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."

"Man once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship without rudder, is the sport of every wind."

You'll note that in the quote you used, "A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen" is referring to "I, too, have made a wee-little book from the same materials, which I call the Philosophy of Jesus; it is a paradigma of his doctrines, made by cutting the texts out of the book, and arranging them on the pages of d blank book, in a certain order of time or subject." In other words, he's not specifically talking about the Bible, he's talking about his edited version of the Bible where he cuts all the craziness out and just keeps the parts that he likes.

DOC said:
ETA: If a messiah did come doesn't it seem logical that he would preach the most moral and sublime teachings ever known to man.
Click to expand...

It would, except that by modern standards, I think a lot of people would agree that the morals in the Bible are questionable. You and Jefferson are welcome to your opinion, but that's all it is. My opinion is that the morals of the Bible are archaic and out-of-date. Both of our opinions are subjective, but I think mine is a bit more realistic and unbiased, where as yours is based on a need for the Bible to be real.

DOC, honest question. Do you know the difference between subjective and objective? Could you describe it for me?

And also, I would still really like to hear if you know what a logical fallacy is. Would you mind answering that? Thanks.
 
Belz... said:
Well... "reason #1" was that the authors mentioned embarassing details about themselves.

Whoever said the authors were disciples ? This has been known since forever, and DOC should know better.
Click to expand...

You must have missed the sites I brought in giving evidence that John and Matthew (who wrote 2 of the 4 Gospels) were apostles and thus eyewitnesses.

And another Gospel writer Mark was an associate of the apostle Peter (whom was an eyewitness and leader of the early Church).

And the physician Luke, the 4th gospel writer, was a traveling companion of the apostle Paul. Paul, who originally hated and persecuted Christians, was converted after claiming to have witnessed the presence of Jesus. Paul also had a meeting with apostles Peter and James for 15 days from which he undoubtedly received a lot of eyewitness information. The physician Luke has been described as a very good historian by several academics.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4574964#post4574964
Click to expand...
You agreed with the quote that Jesus' teaching was the "most moral and sublime teachings ever known to man".

Jesus condoned Slavery and the beating of slaves (Luke 12:35-48).

Do you believe that slavery is part of the "most moral and sublime teachings ever known to man"?



---
just becuase you don't want to answer the question or can't, doesn't mean I'm flooding the thread. I am directly challenging your claim that Jesus' teaching is the "most moral and sublime teachings ever known to man".
 
DOC said:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4574964#post4574964
Click to expand...

If you follow the links, then he's saying Jesus logic is that it was for that time. This, then, strongly suggests that either:

1 - Jesus' rules are only for that time, and no longer applicable, or
2 - Jesus wasn't the omniscient Son of God, otherwise He would have known that the times, they are a changin', and would have addressed this subject for all people down through the ages, thus potentially preventing the enslavement, abuse, death and torture of millions of people throughout the ages who used the Bible to justify their actions.

Which one of those two do you prefer DOC?
 
DOC said:
There is more evidence for the Resurrection than there is that a living cell can be created over time from non-living chemicals.
Click to expand...
Are you quite sure about that? You've yet to produce any evidence for the resurrection. On the other hand, I'm surrounded by people and animals that are made up of living cells which were created from non-living chemicals.
 
zooterkin said:
Are you quite sure about that? You've yet to produce any evidence for the resurrection. On the other hand, I'm surrounded by people and animals that are made up of living cells which were created from non-living chemicals.
Click to expand...

Hey, hey, hey. Quit using your fancy logic to confuse us. We'll have none of that here!

We rely on faith!
 
RobRoy said:
If you follow the links, then he's saying Jesus logic is that it was for that time
Click to expand...

You don't feed babies prime rib. Jesus was speaking in ways the unlightened of that time could digest. That's why he spoke in parables. And He must have done a good job getting his point across because he seems to have convinced the black Barack Obama to go to church on Sunday.
 
DOC said:
You don't feed babies prime rib. Jesus was speaking in ways the unlightened of that time could digest. That's why he spoke in parables. And He must have done a good job getting his point across because he seems to have convinced the black Barack Obama to go to church on Sunday.
Click to expand...
So are you claiming that Jesus DIDN'T condone slavery and the beating of slaves, even though the bible clearly shows this to be the case?

Do you believe that slavery is part of the "most moral and sublime teachings ever known to man"?

ETA:
So then am I to assume that we can disregard other parts of the bible we find immoral and simply discount them as "that was then"?
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
You don't feed babies prime rib. Jesus was speaking in ways the unlightened of that time could digest. That's why he spoke in parables. And He must have done a good job getting his point across because he seems to have convinced the black Barack Obama to go to church on Sunday.
Click to expand...
Obama is un[en]lightened because he is black?
 
DOC said:
You don't feed babies prime rib.
Click to expand...

So the truth is mutable to time and place?

Sounds like your god isn't omniscient at all.

Jesus was speaking in ways the unlightened of that time could digest. That's why he spoke in parables.
Click to expand...

Yet he still condoned having and beating slaves?

And He must have done a good job getting his point across because he seems to have convinced the black Barack Obama to go to church on Sunday.
Click to expand...

Even I have to use the WTF acronym here, and I hate that kind of a response . . . but WTF are you on about here? Barack Obama going to church proves that Jesus did a good job using parables? Is there a more specious argument in your bag of tricks? No, wait, don't answer that. Just explain what in the names of Zues' left ball you're on about with the above statement. Seriously, I want to know how Barack Obama's church going habits proves anything to anyone regarding anything that you've said before this?
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
If a messiah did come doesn't it seem logical that he would preach the most moral and sublime teachings ever known to man.
Click to expand...

DOC said:
You don't feed babies prime rib. Jesus was speaking in ways the unlightened of that time could digest. That's why he spoke in parables.
Click to expand...

Serious question: How do these two seemingly incongruous statements gel - in your view - DOC?
 
DOC, ignore all else.
Please answer Six7s outstanding question regarding the logical disconnect we all see in your argument.

If you wonder why I keep raising slavery as an issue in this thread, it is right there!
 
joobz said:
DOC, ignore all else.
Please answer Six7s outstanding question regarding the logical disconnect we all see in your argument.

If you wonder why I keep raising slavery as an issue in this thread, it is right there!
Click to expand...

Agreed. You're welcome to disregard my WTF rant . . . though it's still applicable. Six7s' is the crux of the issue, and has been for about 300 posts.
 
I agree too. Don't bother answering my questions right now, DOC. I'd really like to see you answer Six7s's question as well.
 
Annual De-Lurk Alert

I have read every last post of this thread, eagerly anticipating the next reply, wearing out the F5 key @ work.

The reason I keep checking in is to see what mysterious mental machinations you will next produce, but, more importantly, I enjoy the critical thinking analysis from the JREF forumites. This website is an oasis in the electronic sea, b/c it allows & encourages rational discussion.

I appreciate the amount of effort expended on your part in keeping a dialog open for this amount of time. For that, & the sheer entertainment value, I am grateful.

However, I think all of us can agree, that the discussion has reached it's denouement (sp), if you will. IMHO, the conclusion should honor the amount of time invested.

DOC,
If you have truly come here in the spirit of debate & discussion, then please give your honest answers to the questions which have been posed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom