• 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.
I am having trouble understanding why people who allegedly claim to have faith are constantly out to prove the validity of the bible, surely if they do prove their beliefs correct they will no longer have faith, the whole reason theres no evidence is supposed to be some kind of test to ensure that only the truly faithful get into heaven. So please continue, prove the bible infallible and go straight to Hell.
should be fun eh
as a comparison I know that I love my mother, I am not constantly out to prove to myself and everyone else that the love is real, I know it is. Should someone claim that belief erroneous I wouldn't be bothered as I have enough faith in me to know they are wrong
:D

a couple of years ago I proved that satan didn't exist, the only people who were upset were again the faithful who apparently are the only ones who need him. I find the irony in religion awesome, apparently you fundies can't believe in your god without evidence and you need his enemy in your lives to back up your assertion that you need God, funny old world isn't it
 
paximperium said:
Wrong.

Nero ruled Rome from 37-68AD and he was the "First Persecutor" of Christianity. He only started to persecute Christians in the later 60sAD. So unless you want to concede that the Bible writer's didn't put to paper their great superman story until after 60AD(30years after the death of an alleged god-man), it is not a valid excuse.
Click to expand...

The fire which Nero used the Christians as scapegoats happened in 64 ad. so it is reasonable to conclude that was the year of tortures and killings of Christians. This also shows that a Church was established in Rome only about 30 years after the death of Christ in far away Jerusalem. Also from Paul's writings we know that a church was established in the Greek city of Corinth and was having a communion service (remembering the Last Supper) only 25 years after the death of Christ.

And as you yourself pointed out most of the people couldn't read so what was the hurry to write everything down. Jesus was always moving around during his life, would you want to carry around heavy scrolls to write down material for the masses who couldn't read anyway.
 
Last edited:
paximperium said:
Wrong.

Nero ruled Rome from 37-68AD and he was the "First Persecutor" of Christianity. He only started to persecute Christians in the later 60sAD. So unless you want to concede that the Bible writer's didn't put to paper their great superman story until after 60AD(30years after the death of an alleged god-man), it is not a valid excuse.
Click to expand...

to be fair though, there was a lower level of persecution that existed prior to Nero. It stemmed from Christians not following the local customs. This is akin to being in Green Bay, WI and being a Bears fan...
 
DOC said:
And as you yourself pointed out most of the people couldn't read so what was the hurry to write everything down.
Click to expand...
Because humans forget and make crap up as time goes by.
Jesus was always moving around during his life, would you want to carry around heavy scrolls to write down material for the masses who couldn't read anyway.
Click to expand...
So you concede that your Bible was written decades after the supposed events by people you can't claim to know as the writers because your books weren't signed?

Why should we believe anything in your book again?
 
kmortis said:
to be fair though, there was a lower level of persecution that existed prior to Nero. It stemmed from Christians not following the local customs. This is akin to being in Green Bay, WI and being a Bears fan...
Click to expand...
But that's not an excuse for these "martyrs" who as per DOC are all to willing to die for their beliefs but are too chicken to put their name down as authors of their holiest writing.

Are they brave martyrs or cowards?
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
So I would say it can safely be assumed it was dangerous to put your name on a manuscript that promoted Christianity. But as someone pointed out, we don't have the original manuscripts, only several thousands of copies that were made; so who knows, some might have have been signed and for whatever reason the copyist didn't attach the name of the author.
Click to expand...


Whether or not that was true is a bit beside the point, I'm afraid. (1) Persecution leading to death was, as has been pointed out to you several times, only local and short-lived initially. (2) The early Christians (and many of the later ones) believed the end of the world was imminent and that martyrdom brought them closer to Jesus as a way of imitating his sacrifice (they wouldn't consider writing down their theology dangerous but rather divine -- look at Paul's way of discussing it while imprisoned). (3) The best available evidence suggests that the early gospels remained local documents, circulating in small Christian groups initially before spreading to other regions, so there was essentially no chance for anyone outside the community to know about them.
 
DOC said:
The fire which Nero used the Christians as scapegoats happened in 64 ad. so it is reasonable to conclude that was the year of tortures and killings of Christians. This also shows that a Church was established in Rome only about 30 years after the death of Christ in far away Jerusalem. Also from Paul's writings we know that a church was established in the Greek city of Corinth and was having a communion service (remembering the Last Supper) only 25 years after the death of Christ.

And as you yourself pointed out most of the people couldn't read so what was the hurry to write everything down. Jesus was always moving around during his life, would you want to carry around heavy scrolls to write down material for the masses who couldn't read anyway.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to argue that because they got some dates and places right that all those unlikely events took place ?
 
Marduk said:
I am having trouble understanding why people who allegedly claim to have faith are constantly out to prove the validity of the bible, surely if they do prove their beliefs correct they will no longer have faith, the whole reason theres no evidence is supposed to be some kind of test to ensure that only the truly faithful get into heaven. So please continue, prove the bible infallible and go straight to Hell.
should be fun eh
Click to expand...
Indeed :)



QED

Black = White

Dingos Kidneys​
 
DOC said:
(boldness added)


And from Wiki:

* Saint Stephen, Protomartyr, was stoned c. 34 A.D.
<snip>
Click to expand...


I've read this thread from the beginning (I know, I'm a masochist), and I know I've seen you post this list at least 3 other times. Every time you've posted it, I saw the question "What evidence other than the Bible do you have that these apostles were martyred", and you still have yet to give a straight answer. I don't think you actually care about exposing people to the truth...I'm pretty sure you're posting here out of some narcissistic need to have people respond to you. Of course, I'm feeding this narcissism (as are the rest of the posters here), but that's because none of us can simply let baseless assertions stand. So I will ask again: What source, other than your Bible, do you have for these claims?
 
paximperium said:
But that's not an excuse for these "martyrs" who as per DOC are all to willing to die for their beliefs but are too chicken to put their name down as authors of their holiest writing.
Click to expand...
Granted. I just didn't want to have the record show that the concept that there was some level of persecution of Christians existed prior to Nero. Much like any societal outlier, they were picked on because they didn't measure up to the social norm.

Are they brave martyrs or cowards?
Click to expand...
I'm sure there was a mixture of both. I highly doubt the list that McCarthy DOC keeps bandying about. How much evidence for those people existing do we have? How much evidence for their deaths do we have? Even assuming that all of the people on the list existed (small order) and died at the hands of other because of their beliefs (again, not a big deal) how much of the description is real, and how much is hagiography?

It's not a testament to a religion that people want to die for it; it's a testament when the followers actually practice the supposed moral code it's supposed to encourage. Since no religion can make humans stop behaving like total schmucks, I find it no more usefull than the null hypothesis. I'd rather try to be kind to my fellow man without all that other crap hanging over my head, thank-you-very-much.
 
paximperium said:
But that's not an excuse for these "martyrs" who as per DOC are all to willing to die for their beliefs but are too chicken to put their name down as authors of their holiest writing.

Are they brave martyrs or cowards?
Click to expand...

Probably they were brave but not stupid enough to sign their probable death warrants by putting their name on a document that could of got them tortured and killed.

If you worked in the French underground (during the Nazi occupation of France) during World War 2 would it mean you weren't brave because you didn't put your name on a document you wrote and pinned up on trees describing your philosophy about why France should be free.
 
DOC said:
Probably they were brave but not stupid enough to sign their probable death warrants by putting their name on a document that could of got them tortured and killed.
Click to expand...


And as joobz pointed out the last time you stated this, you have basically disproven Geisler's point 10.

Geisler said:
Reason #10

The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death
Click to expand...


Well done.
 
DOC said:
If you worked in the French underground (during the Nazi occupation of France) during World War 2 would it mean you weren't brave because you didn't put your name on a document you wrote and pinned up on trees describing your philosophy about why France should be free.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, no--but that doesn't say anything about the evidence you're claiming exists about the truth of the New Testament. It really has nothing to do with this point of inquiry. The point is that you're attributing writings to people without evidence of who wrote them--if the people they are commonly attributed to had such clear and distinct writing styles that allowed for them to anonymously write their books (by not signing their names), but allow future generations to know without doubt who wrote them, this would not have protected their identities in any way. There is no way of knowing for sure who wrote the gospels...the authorship was attributed long after the fact.
 
Fireshadow said:
... Every time you've posted it, I saw the question "What evidence other than the Bible do you have that these apostles were martyred", and you still have yet to give a straight answer.

<Snipped> the ad hom part that is false

So I will ask again: What source, other than your Bible, do you have for these claims?
Click to expand...

Well I seriously doubt that the part I bolded above is correct... If someone seriously wanted to know about each of the many persons martyred they could do their own research. For example the martyr St. Stephen who was stoned in 34ad could be found by googling "St. Stephen and Catholic Encyclopedia" Stephen was mentioned twice in the book of Acts. And several academics have basically stated that the author of Acts (Luke) was a first rate historian. So when someone who has been described as a first rate historian by several academics mentions someone twice and says they were martyred, it takes more faith to believe they were not martyred then to believe they were martyred.

ETA: And Jesus and James (the first bishop of Jerusalem) were reported to have been killed by Non Christian sources and of course the many who were tortured and martyred in 64ad in Rome were described by Tacitus. In addition Pliny the Younger (a Roman govenor) talks of killing Christians for not renouncing their faith.
 
Last edited:
Hokulele said:
Did you miss the "other than the Bible" part of Fireshadow's question?

Why yes, yes you did.

And since Luke was such an excellent historian, do you now agree that John was uneducated?
Click to expand...

Well as many times you didn't give me a chance to complete my response. see my ETA

Luke didn't think John was uneducated, he reported the Jewish authorities who just saw the apostles preach thought this. And remember John was an old man when he wrote his works. You can learn a lot in 30 or 40 years don't you think.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Luke didn't think John was uneducated, he reported the Jewish authorities who just saw the apostles preach thought this. And remember John was an old man when he wrote his works. You can learn a lot in 30 or 40 years don't you think.
Click to expand...

You can also forget a lot in 30 or 40 years, and misremember things that you thought you saw. The mind has endless ways to play tricks on itself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom