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

Status
Not open for further replies.
the entire OP's premise is predicated on the assumption that people who true believe what they are writing, will write the truth.

since it is clear that Luke made a story up to support what he thought was the truth, the OP premise is invalid. As such, there's really nothing else to say here.
 
DOC said:
Why report something that is likely to stir up revolutionary feelings of the inhabitants of the land you conquered. That's like the US conquering an Indian tribe and putting them on a reservation and then handing out sheets of information to the tribe that a US general slaughtered 200 babies of another tribe on another reservation. It is something that would not make sense to do.
Click to expand...

Never the less, some historian would have reported it. Non have. So it's just like the resurrection story, a fable, nothing more.
 
paximperium said:
Hence the continued lack of evidence.
No. Luke is doubted as much as Josephus. The thing is Josephus' claims in certain things can be corroborated.
Click to expand...
You were unable to tell me where Josephus got his info about the time of the census. You are very trusting of someone who some in here think made a mistake about something.
 
zooterkin said:
No, really, it isn't. It wasn't the Romans who committed the alleged slaughter, so it would not have reflected badly on them. Indeed, once they were in charge they could have used it to their benefit, pointing out the sort of thing which happened under the previous regime.
Click to expand...
So do you believe Herod's action of killing 200 or so babies in Bethlehem would have helped Herod's status with the Jews? And if it wouldn't, why write about it and let many know?
 
pakeha said:
Could we get back to the OP?
DOC, how about posting up some evidence?
Click to expand...

Well if you scroll down the following website, you'll see just how accurate Gospel writers Luke and John were in reporting highly detailed information. It lists 84 facts for Luke and 59 for John.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643

And here is some more evidence (only US viewers will be able to see all of the info on this site):

http://books.google.com/books?id=PC..._brr=0#v=onepage&q=Geisler 10 reasons&f=false
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
You were unable to tell me where Josephus got his info about the time of the census. You are very trusting of someone who some in here think made a mistake about something.
Click to expand...
Trusting? Are you making crap up again DOC?
I have no idea where he got his info from. In fact, he may be completely and utterly wrong and making crap up. You know; making up crap about this Moses person and Jesus fella hence there is no corroboration evidence that the "New Testament writer's told the truth." So still NO evidence for why the New Testament writer's told the truth huh?

Thanks for agreeing to this fact.
DOC said:
So do you believe Herod's action of killing 200 or so babies in Bethlehem would have helped Herod's status with the Jews?
Click to expand...
Oh, DOC, are you making up more crap again that no one agrees with? Please stop arguing with yourself, it is creepy.
And if it wouldn't, why write about it and let many know?
Click to expand...
He wouldn't but EVERYONE else would. So still NO evidence for why the New Testament writer's told the truth huh?

DOC said:
Well if you scroll down the following website, you'll see just how accurate Gospel writers Luke and John were in reporting highly detailed information. It lists 84 facts for Luke and 59 for John.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643

And here is some more evidence (only US viewers will be able to see all of the info on this site):

http://books.google.com/books?id=PC..._brr=0#v=onepage&q=Geisler 10 reasons&f=false
Click to expand...
Spiderman has even more facts. Thanks for showing that Luke is as accurate as any work of fiction and that it's writer's are as reliable as suicide bombers.

You do have an amazing ability to make your Bible truly look silly.
 
DOC said:
Well if you scroll down the following website, you'll see just how accurate Gospel writers Luke and John were in reporting highly detailed information. It lists 84 facts for Luke and 59 for John.
Click to expand...
Does it contain Luke's "complete nonsense" census story? or explanation as to why Jesus condones beating slaves or why there are NO historical records of a baby killing rampage?
 
Akhenaten said:
Doesn't the book of Numbers tell us that Moses had an Ethiopian wife?

Would he have married her before or after the war, do you think?

Do you think she was welcome at functions in the Officers' Mess?


Josephus took a Punt on history and got it wrong, Doc. Deal.



ETA:
Click to expand...

Ahh! This explains why Cecil B. DeMille was at such pains to suggest that Heston!Moses had ('way before he learned about his real heritage) had something going with the Ethiopian king's sister. Bingo.
 
kurious_kathy said:
The resurrection of Christ is certainly no fable, it is the absolute truth!
Click to expand...
It doesn't take much for you, does it KK. You'll just grab onto anything that makes you fell better, no matter how little it has to with real life.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
DOC said:
So do you believe Herod's action of killing 200 or so babies in Bethlehem would have helped Herod's status with the Jews? And if it wouldn't, why write about it and let many know?
Click to expand...



The Roman did support Herod for a while, until they decided 'screw that' and took direct control of the country themselves.
Anti-Herod propagando might have been bad for the Romans when he was working for them, but would have been pretty useful later, to justify their taking over.

A modern example: the U.S actually helped Saddam take control of Iraq and supported him for years. At that point, anti-Saddam information would have been a nuisance to American policy. Later on, tables turned and the U.S decided to go in. Then, as you will remember, the U.S government actually made efforts to depict Saddam in a bad light.

So, Josephus is in the situation of some kind of first century local correspondent for CNN or Fox News.
Do you think he would be covering up for Saddam?
 
DOC said:
zooterkin said:
No, really, it isn't. It wasn't the Romans who committed the alleged slaughter, so it would not have reflected badly on them. Indeed, once they were in charge they could have used it to their benefit, pointing out the sort of thing which happened under the previous regime.
Click to expand...
So do you believe Herod's action of killing 200 or so babies in Bethlehem would have helped Herod's status with the Jews? And if it wouldn't, why write about it and let many know?
Click to expand...

What on earth are you talking about?

You were asking why Josephus would tell a story that would make the Romans look bad, and I pointed out that the story of the slaughter of the innocents wouldn't make the Romans look bad because they didn't do it. Now, do you want to try again?

ETA: Not specifically Josephus, but any writer at the time. The story is only recorded in the bible, and no other contemporary writing.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
You were unable to tell me where Josephus got his info about the time of the census. You are very trusting of someone who some in here think made a mistake about something.
Click to expand...

DOC said:
Well if you scroll down the following website, you'll see just how accurate Gospel writers Luke and John were in reporting highly detailed information. It lists 84 facts for Luke and 59 for John.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643

And here is some more evidence (only US viewers will be able to see all of the info on this site):

http://books.google.com/books?id=PC..._brr=0#v=onepage&q=Geisler 10 reasons&f=false
Click to expand...
Both sites are run by christians. You expect some historical evidence from them?
kurious_kathy said:
The resurrection of Christ is certainly no fable, it is the absolute truth!
Click to expand...
Never, in the history of this planet has anyone who has been proclaimed dead has ever, ever come back to life again, unless they were not dead in the first place. Do you have some Earth shattering new evidence that it's possible to come back as a zombie?? :eye-poppi
 
DOC said:
Well if you scroll down the following website, you'll see just how accurate Gospel writers Luke and John were in reporting highly detailed information. It lists 84 facts for Luke and 59 for John.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643
Click to expand...

Oh wow! Teh stoopid... it just burnz!

FEATURED ARTICLE: I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist - TheologyWeb Campus said:
Now, why would Luke be so accurate with trivial details like wind directions, water depths, and peculiar town names, but not be accurate when it comes to important events like miracles?
Click to expand...
Why? How about 'because he - like every theist - suffered from delusions'?

Or... how about 'because he - like every theist - was more than willing to accept woo as an explanation for the mundane yet complicated aspects of reality'?

In all sincerity DOC, if you want to be taken seriously, you must try harder, at least try to think before you post any more inane waffle
 
Josephus is not our only source for non-Biblical versions of the Exodus story;
here's another:
http://books.google.es/books?id=nJv...resnum=7#v=onepage&q=Hecataeus Exodus&f=false

Joephus reported what he heard.
Hecataeus did, as well.
In any case, let's face it, these Hellenised takes on thousand year old Egyptian stories could have their parallel in trying to understand early European history through reading Geoffrey of Monmouth.
Back to the NT, please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom