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

[Hokulele]

Why should I believe the gospels all can't be right?

Maybe you can answer my questions for DOC. Did Paul get along with James? Was he welcomed by the church in Jerusalem?

I am not seeing anything that is contradictory!

That is most likely due to the fact that, like DOC, you haven't even read the bible. Much like you do not read other books you have promised to try to discuss.

Different writers explained things a bit different but that does not prove they are not all telling the truth of what they know and witnessed.

Well, other than the fact that most of the New Testament was written long after Jesus' death, so they couldn't possibly be witnesses to anything like the resurrection. Paul's visions can (and have) been attributed to epileptic seizures.

As I have been telling DOC since post #3, all of this is only evidence of what they believe, not what it true.

I believe God preserved his Word quite nicely.

That's nice, too bad the evidence shows otherwise. There is another book by Ehrman that documents all of the examples that show otherwise.

Blather

Ia ia Cthulhu Fhtagn!

 

[X]

Why should I believe the gospels all can't be right? I am not seeing anything that is contradictory! Different writers explained things a bit different but that does not prove they are not all telling the truth of what they know and witnessed. I believe God preserved his Word quite nicely.

What were Jesus' last words before dying on the cross?

 

[kurious_kathy]

Except for the fact that the report from the gospel of Mark is widely believed to be fabricated.

Oopsie.

Well why should I believe that? Do you have any proof of this??

 

[Hokulele]

Well why should I believe that? Do you have any proof of this??

Here is one of the, well, kinder articles on this issue.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/mark_16.htm

A quick Google will find plenty more.

 

[DOC]

That's nice, too bad the evidence shows otherwise. There is another book by Ehrman that documents all of the examples that show otherwise.

If you say so, but I've already shown Ehrman was wrong to conclude Jesus was just portrayed as a prophet in the gospel of Mark.

 

[DOC]

So they remembered Jesus being resurrected completely differently?

Was a stone over the tomb or not?
Were angels hanging by the tomb or not?
Who visited the tomb?
What time did they arrive?
Where and when was the resurrected Jesus sighted?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4142084#post4142084

http://www.mobilise.xtn.org/resources/whathappenedoneastersunday

 

[six7s]

If you say so, but I've already shown Ehrman was wrong to conclude Jesus was just portrayed as prophet in the gospel of Mark.

DOC, a quick skim through any thread you have participated in will show what you should really know by now, which is that:

If you think you're right:

• you're wrong

If you think you're wrong:

• you're right (i.e. you are wrong)

 

[DOC]

It is not logical to assume that a man like Luke, who has been called a first rate historian and highly detailed by some academics, would just make up his own details.

Did Paul get along with James or not? Was he welcomed by the church in Jerusalem or not?

Explain, with verses.

 

[DOC]

DOC, a quick skim through any thread you have participated in will show what you should really know by now, which is that:

If you think you're right:

• you're wrong

If you think you're wrong:

• you're right (i.e. you are wrong)

Another rule breaking empty "attack the messenger" post with no examples.

Did it ever occur to you to respond to my actual post where I said I showed Ehrman was wrong?

 

[DOC]

Here is one of the, well, kinder articles on this issue.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/mark_16.htm

You've already brought this in before, so I'll just give the response I did before:

"Even if this theory is true (and even your article says its alleged), it doesn't explain the Transfiguration reported in Mark Chapter 9 where Jesus is witnessed to meet with Moses and Elijah on the mountain. And a voice comes down from heaven saying this is My Son and listen to Him. This shows that the author of Mark is saying Jesus is the Son of God and not just some teacher."

 

[Mojo]

Just because you cannot see him does not prove he isn't there. HE IS!

Evidence?

 

[joobz]

Why should I believe the gospels all can't be right? I am not seeing anything that is contradictory!

So, if 1 eye witness tells you that the murder was a 5 foot white guy and the other person tells you it was a werewolf, you'd see no contradiction in these accounts?

Different writers explained things a bit different but that does not prove they are not all telling the truth of what they know and witnessed. I believe God preserved his Word quite nicely.

Then his word is bizarre contradictory.

And I am here to testify to you I have experienced the resurrection myself because Jesus is still very much alive and active in the world today. Christians do not tell people we are born again of the Holy Spirit to lie to you. God is my witness and I tell you the truth, Jesus died to redeem this lost word but death could not keep him just as he said, he rose again and lives in me and my hubby,and millions of other Christians around the globe. Just because you cannot see him does not prove he isn't there. HE IS! Jesus lives!!

But, according to you, the other 4-5 billion non christians are wrong and will be punished with eternal torment.

Wow, talk about a merciful god.

 

[kmortis]

You've already brought this in before, so I'll just give the response I did before:

"Even if this theory is true (and even your article says its alleged), it doesn't explain the Transfiguration reported in Mark Chapter 9 where Jesus is witnessed to meet with Moses and Elijah on the mountain. And a voice comes down from heaven saying this is My Son and listen to Him. This shows that the author of Mark is saying Jesus is the Son of God and not just some teacher."

And at the end of Star Wars we can clearly see Obi Wan and Anikan standing next to each other. It doesn't make either of them more real.


[OT]Weird, my spell checker has no problems with "Obi Wan", but doesn't recognize "Anikan".[/OT]

 

[joobz]

You've already brought this in before, so I'll just give the response I did before:

"Even if this theory is true (and even your article says its alleged), it doesn't explain the Transfiguration reported in Mark Chapter 9 where Jesus is witnessed to meet with Moses and Elijah on the mountain. And a voice comes down from heaven saying this is My Son and listen to Him. This shows that the author of Mark is saying Jesus is the Son of God and not just some teacher."

And we had also explained that the "Son of God" doesn't mean what you think it means.
from the wiki.

Son of God is a phrase found in the Hebrew Bible, various other Jewish texts and the Christian Bible. In the holy Hebrew scriptures, according to Jewish religious tradition, Son of God has many possible meanings, referring to angels, or humans or even all mankind

Really, the main question is why do you rely on such an easily misinterpreted phrase. Why couldn't mark had written

And Jesus looked to his deciplines and said, "Ok, seriously. This part is important. I'm like totally the actual divine son of god. You know. Not what you jews call the son of god, but like his real actual son. Like, you know my mom. Right? Mary? You see, god made her pregant and had me! It's like I'm god. Ok? Do you get it now? Oh yeah, and one other thing. Slavery's bad, mmm'k?"

 

[wollery]

And at the end of Star Wars we can clearly see Obi Wan and Anikan standing next to each other. It doesn't make either of them more real.


[OT]Weird, my spell checker has no problems with "Obi Wan", but doesn't recognize "Anikan".[/OT]

Because obi and wan are both valid words, an obi is a sash worn around the waist of a kimono, and wan means pale.

See, you can learn some things from this thread!

 

[Elizabeth I]

Why should I believe the gospels all can't be right? I am not seeing anything that is contradictory! Different writers explained things a bit different but that does not prove they are not all telling the truth of what they know and witnessed. I believe God preserved his Word quite nicely.

And I am here to testify to you I have experienced the resurrection myself because Jesus is still very much alive and active in the world today. Christians do not tell people we are born again of the Holy Spirit to lie to you. God is my witness and I tell you the truth, Jesus died to redeem this lost word but death could not keep him just as he said, he rose again and lives in me and my hubby,and millions of other Christians around the globe. Just because you cannot see him does not prove he isn't there. HE IS! Jesus lives!!

Is it just me, or are KK's posts taking on a more hysterical note? (Even than before, that is...)

And at the end of Star Wars we can clearly see Obi Wan and Anikan standing next to each other. It doesn't make either of them more real.


[OT]Weird, my spell checker has no problems with "Obi Wan", but doesn't recognize "Anikan".[/OT]

Because obi and wan are both valid words, an obi is a sash worn around the waist of a kimono, and wan means pale.

See, you can learn some things from this thread!

Also, I think the script spells it "Anakin".

 

[X]

[OT]Weird, my spell checker has no problems with "Obi Wan", but doesn't recognize "Anikan".[/OT]

Spellcheck doesn't like "Anakin" either.
Oddly, it doesn't even like "spellcheck".


DOC, I ask again:
Do you actually read the responses people make, or do you just skim them and forget their contents?

 

[Hokulele]

You've already brought this in before, so I'll just give the response I did before:

"Even if this theory is true (and even your article says its alleged), it doesn't explain the Transfiguration reported in Mark Chapter 9 where Jesus is witnessed to meet with Moses and Elijah on the mountain. And a voice comes down from heaven saying this is My Son and listen to Him. This shows that the author of Mark is saying Jesus is the Son of God and not just some teacher."

Who cares? That has nothing to do with the point I was making to KK. Nice evasion of the problem with your holy book.

ETA: DOC's latest posts in this thread demonstrate one of the fundamental problems with the way he thinks. Apparently if any part of a book/hypothesis is false, you can simply throw away the entire thing. If Ehrman gets one thing wrong (and I have never argued for Ehrman's inerrancy), DOC feels justified in ignoring everything the man has written. This is most likely why he is so defensive over the the concept that the bible has errors, because he apparently believes that if any one part of the bible is wrong/false, he has to throw everything in it away. That also seems to account for why DOC cannot grasp many basic scientific theories. Sad, really.

 

[DOC]

Just because you cannot see him does not prove he isn't there. HE IS! Jesus lives!!

Evidence?

Gospel of Luke chapter 17 verses 20,21

"And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:

Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you."

And I am here to testify to you I have experienced the resurrection myself because Jesus is still very much alive and active in the world today. Christians do not tell people we are born again of the Holy Spirit to lie to you. God is my witness and I tell you the truth, Jesus died to redeem this lost word but death could not keep him just as he said, he rose again and lives in me and my hubby,and millions of other Christians around the globe. Just because you cannot see him does not prove he isn't there. HE IS! Jesus lives!!

 

[Hokulele]

Gospel of Luke chapter 17 verses 20,21

"And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:

Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you."

Then why do the fundamentalists make such a big fuss over the separation of church and state?