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

[joobz]

So you read that 13 page thread given in post 3116 in 15 minutes??

DOC, why did you avoid this question?

DOC, correct me where I'm wrong. You're saying that the Bible is "the most moral teaching ever known to man", but also that it can't be taken at face value, and you need to remember that some morals in the Bible are only correct for their time, or that Jesus needed to make some moral concessions in order to get his overall point across.

Is this what you think?

It's curious that you would not answer a simple yes or no question.

 

[Wally]

So you read that 13 page thread given in post 3116 in 15 minutes??

Check the joined date in my header. I've been lurking around here 4 years before you began posting. I read your threads in real time. A great deal can be learned in the interactions between someone making foolish claims and his intellectual superiors explaining to him why he is a fool. And I mean fool in it's most literal definition and not as an ad hominem.

 

[zooterkin]

So you read that 13 page thread given in post 3116 in 15 minutes??

How long do you think it would take to read all the valid points you made in that thread?

 

[Mojo]

If there is no evidence for consciousness separate from the physical body how is it possible for the soulless bodies in here to keep demanding evidence?

It doesn't make sense for soulless bodies to demand evidence. Can physical living material demand evidence?

Can physical living material post thousands of posts on a Randi site?

Oh boy, I'd forgotten that one!

 

[Hokulele]

Shall we look at some of them?

Heh.

 

[paximperium]

How long do you think it would take to read all the valid points you made in that thread?

Lothian posted DOC's best evidence so far...I'm trying hard not too feel sorry for DOC.

 

[dafydd]

I'm outnumbered by about 130 to 1. If someone wants to give me a million dollars so I can quit my job and other activities, then I will respond in full to each and every question. Which one question do you want me to respond to the most?

Why are you so deluded? That would be a good place to start.

 

[DOC]

Check the joined date in my header. I've been lurking around here 4 years before you began posting. I read your threads in real time. A great deal can be learned in the interactions between someone making foolish claims and his intellectual superiors explaining to him why he is a fool. And I mean fool in it's most literal definition and not as an ad hominem.

Sounds like you spend a lot of time in the threads of someone you think is a fool?? One could reason that is foolish.

 

[six7s]

Sometimes I think you don't realize that my 650+ posts in this thread are out there for everyone to read.

Shall we look at some of them?

I have over 80 posts in this thread.

I don't have the time right now to go through my other 80+ posts.

And I asked you to list only 3 fallacious arguments in my 100 posts in this thread and which post they came from.

List one specific lie contained in my 163 posts and your proof that it is a lie.

But it is my belief God does give enough evidence (some of which I have pointed out in my 160+ posts) to rationally believe in Him,

Huh, haven't you read my 174 posts?

Would it be possible for me to post 200+ times in an evidence thread that has around 90 other posters without giving any evidence

And a lot of the evidence or reasons or whatever you want to call it that I've presented in my 200+ posts have been from the book posted in post #1.

You must have missed my last 215 posts.

And your comment about me not being well read in my faith is a joke that my 27 or so threads with thousands of posts will attest to.

Haven't you read my 259 posts..

I left over 400 posts in that thread.

Your welcome to read my 319 posts.

Your post might confuse someone who haven't read my 319 posts

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'll be happy if people read at least half of my 319 posts in here and they can judge for themselves.

I'll be happy if people with an open mind read at least half of my posts.

My 358 posts are out there for everyone to read and then they can make up their own mind.

Name one post out of my 395 posts in this thread where I lied. Of course you won't be able to.

there is also more evidence within my 400 posts.

Can living things without souls leave thousands of posts on the Randi website.

Sometimes I think you don't realize that my 650+ posts in this thread are out there for everyone to read.

And the evidence is the thousands of posts this soul puts forth the effort to leave.

Name one spambot that has left thousands of posts in the Randi threads?

Can physical living material post thousands of posts on a Randi site?

I've been on this site over 2 years and left over 2800 messages.

[And of course other information is brought out in my 460+ posts.

I believe it and in my 500 or so posts in this thread I given you some reasons why you should believe.

I've given my reasons based on facts in my 560 posts in this thread

My 500 posts in the following thread say otherwise:

My close to 3000 posts about Christianity have to have some substance behind them

Maybe 2 to 3 % at most of my 2900+ posts have to do with those topics

Is it really possible to make 634 posts in an evidence thread like I have in this thread without any evidence.

the good news for me is my #634 posts are out there to read.

And I guess my 650 posts are not enough for some people.

Wow!


I mean... WOW!

 

[six7s]

Sounds like you spend a lot of time in the threads of someone you think is a fool?? One could reason that is foolish.

Yes, one could

And one would, if one were blatantly yet futilely trying to dodge the issues

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)​

Of course... you know and believe that you're right, don't you DOC?

 

[paximperium]

Sounds like you spend a lot of time in the threads of someone you think is a fool?? One could reason that is foolish.

You're really really reaching DOC. I guess you've noticed that the multitude of lurkers here enjoy seeing you torn apart and actually enjoy learning from the other posters here. There is nothing foolish about lurkers or posters who keep talking to a delusional and ignorant fool when they themselves learn new things.

Only the fool himself seem oblivious to the obvious. You are a joke DOC. You have been since the beginning and still are. Even Christians are embarrassed by you.

Pax, the membership agreement calls for members to be civil toward each other. In addition, please confine yourself to attacking the argument and not the person going forward.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jmercer

 

[Wally]

Sounds like you spend a lot of time in the threads of someone you think is a fool?? One could reason that is foolish.

"One" could, but many may not.

Thanks for reinforcing my position.

 

[Sholto]

You're really really reaching DOC. I guess you've noticed that the multitude of lurkers here enjoy seeing you torn apart and actually enjoy learning from the other posters here. There is nothing foolish about lurkers or posters who keep talking to a delusional and ignorant fool when they themselves learn new things.

As a long-time lurker, I agree wholeheartedly with pax. The best (and most entertaining) part of reading these threads is watching the ignorant get schooled. But don't tell DOC!

 

[Elizabeth I]

Sounds like you spend a lot of time in the threads of someone you think is a fool?? One could reason that is foolish.

Your posts are like a really horrible accident. You want to look away...you know you should look away...but you just can't. And then you think, maybe I could help...

 

[Simon39759]

I agree that I learned a lot in this thread. But, to be honest, I am not sure any of it was from DOC.

On a similar note, I was looking at Jesus 'harrowing in hell' earlier today. It is purely apocryphal, isn't it?

 

[joobz]

Sounds like you spend a lot of time in the threads of someone you think is a fool?? One could reason that is foolish.

DOC, you are attempting to present yourself as a serious individual, questioning the motives of people who disagree with you.

Yet instead of actually answering the question that has been asked of you multiple times, you post responses to derailing motive posts. All this does is raise your post count without contributing substance to the thread.

Instead of making yourself a mockery, why not answer the question?

DOC, correct me where I'm wrong. You're saying that the Bible is "the most moral teaching ever known to man", but also that it can't be taken at face value, and you need to remember that some morals in the Bible are only correct for their time, or that Jesus needed to make some moral concessions in order to get his overall point across.

Is this what you think?

 

[DOC]

These are all reasons to believe the NT authors wrote what they believed was true, but it is not evidence that it was true.

Sure it is evidence it was true; it is not proof it was true but it is evidence it was true. People in these threads tend to confuse the word evidence with the word proof.

The same thing can be said about the current scientific theory that living cells came from non-living matter over time -- there is no proof it is true because it has never been proven in an experiment.

 

[six7s]

People in these threads tend to confuse evidence with proof.

People?



I know of ONE person (who conflates evidence with allusions of proof)

Do you know of another person who confuses evidence with proof?

If so, who are they and how do you know?

 

[DOC]

Shall we look at some of them?

I think you have too much time on your hands. And the very first quote I looked at was cut off in middle sentence and you put a period at the end of it instead of a comma. Why not just leave the comma in, so people know you cut it off in the middle of the sentence. I'm not even going to waste my time going over the other "out of context" ones.

 

[six7s]

...the current scientific theory that living cells came from non-living matter over time -- there is no proof it is true because it has never been proven in an experiment.

None that you have read or heard, perhaps

N.B. You really, really don't know everything

Turn up the volume and be prepared to learn


youtube: The Origin of Life - Abiogenesis

This has been CONFIRMED in Dr. Szostak's LAB!!

It's been 55 years since the Miller-Urey Experiment, and science has made enormous progress on solving the origin of life. This video summarizes one of the best leading models. Yes there are others. Science may never know exactly how life DID start, but we will know many ways how life COULD start. Don't be fooled by creationist arguments as even a minimal understanding of biology and chemistry is enough to realize they have no clue what they are talking about.

<snip/>

Source: youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg