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

[dafydd]

The attack the messenger mode is heating up again, some of my posts must have hit home.

A strawman is misrepresenting someone's position in a debate which is what you did in post 5523 when you said this

"I completely agree with your statement that Ramsay's opinion are irrelevant without any ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE."

I never said this knighted archaeologist's opinions are irrelevant in any way and thus you are misrepresenting my position and thus a strawman.

I must admit though that you (and some others) are quite good at misrepresenting my position.

Here you are Doc,from grammar.about.com

''Strawman-A fallacy in which an opponent's argument is overstated or misrepresented in order to be attacked or refuted.''

It was the simplest explanation I could find.

 

[six7s]

The attack the messenger mode is heating up again, some of my posts must have hit home.

I very much doubt that ANY of your posts have EVER 'hit home'

However, almost each and every post you make does 'hit a nerve'; the nerve that twitches in response to unadulterated crap masquerading as evidence and/or valid argument

 

[Elizabeth I]

strawman

...aaaaand once again he shows he has no idea what the meaning of "strawman" is...

 

[BobTheDonkey]

DOC has never once shown an understanding of "strawman". He thinks by just calling something "strawman", it magically makes it so.

Paximperium-->Strawman!!!
Joobz-->Tinman!!!
Lothian-->Cowardly Lion!!!
RobRoy-->Dorothy!!!

DOC-->The Wizard!!!

Strawmen, and ad hom, and appeal to authority, oh my!

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I very much doubt that ANY of your posts have EVER 'hit home'

However, almost each and every post you make does 'hit a nerve'; the nerve that twitches in response to unadulterated crap masquerading as evidence and/or valid argument

You have that nerve too? I thought maybe I was the only one who's nerve twitches at a KK or Doc post...

 

[DOC]

I very much doubt that ANY of your posts have EVER 'hit home'

However, almost each and every post you make does 'hit a nerve'; the nerve that twitches in response to unadulterated crap masquerading as evidence and/or valid argument

...aaaaand once again he shows he has no idea what the meaning of "strawman" is...

Strawmen, and ad hom, and appeal to authority, oh my!

You have that nerve too? I thought maybe I was the only one who's nerve twitches at a KK or Doc post...

As I said the attack the messenger mode is in full gear, but my 1000+ posts in this thread are out there and they have little if anything to do with me.

 

[Hokulele]

As I said the attack the messenger mode is in full gear, but my 1000+ posts in this thread are out there and they have little if anything to do with me.

True. They mostly have to do with your unsubstantiated claims.

 

[pakeha]

Sorry to backtrack

Matthew didn't say Mary and Joseph lived in Bethlehem, Father Murphy O'Connor did.

I think DOC will regret using the good father as a source, especially in light of DOC's tenacity in maintaining Luke's status as an historian.
I found this, written by father Murphy O'Conner, at the BAR website:

http://www.bib-arch.org/online-exclusives/nativity-03.asp

...Now let us turn to Luke. Mason recognizes (as do all scholars) that the census mentioned in Luke (2:1–2) took place in 6 A.D., which is far too late to be of any relevance to the birth of Jesus in the days of Herod the king (37–4 B.C.): In other words, Joseph and Mary could not have been traveling to Bethlehem for this census. Thus, the linchpin of Luke’s narrative slips out, and the story fragments into a number of individual, unrelated elements. But the fact that Luke is wrong on X (the census) does not necessarily mean that he is wrong on Y (the location of Jesus’ birth). ...

 

[DOC]

True. They mostly have to do with your unsubstantiated claims.

I guess if joobz can talk about slavery a 100 times I can talk about this 25 times:

These people didn't think the claims were unsubstantiated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_martyrs

 

[paximperium]

I guess if joobz can talk about slavery a 100 times I can talk about this 25 times:

Joobz keeps talking about slavery because your arguments(or often lack of) completely fail when you attempt to apologize for the Bible's pro-slavery(or at its best, neutral) stance.

These people didn't think the claims were unsubstantiated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_martyrs

So? They could still be stupid, delusional or just being plain wrong.

 

[Lothian]

I guess if joobz can talk about slavery a 100 times I can talk about this 25 times:

So I can keep on reminding you that Sir William Ramsay who you have trumpeted all over this and other threads said, that when it comes to the essential parts of the bible, there is no Evidence the New Testament writers told the truth.

 

[paximperium]

I guess I can also keep stating the obvious continued conclusion that in this thread that DOC has completely failed to produce any significant or even intelligent Evidence the New Testament writers told the truth.

 

[pakeha]

DOC wrote:

These people didn't think the claims were unsubstantiated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_martyrs

Fantastic.
Argumentum ad populum.

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cach...rgumentum+ad+populum&cd=6&hl=es&ct=clnk&gl=es

 

[paximperium]

These people didn't think the claims were unsubstantiated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_martyrs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(religious_group)

 

[DOC]

Sorry to backtrack



I think DOC will regret using the good father as a source, especially in light of DOC's tenacity in maintaining Luke's status as an historian.
I found this, written by father Murphy O'Conner, at the BAR website:

http://www.bib-arch.org/online-exclusives/nativity-03.asp

We've already been over all this many times in this thread and the archaeology thread. Many scholars including Sir William M. Ramsay, Norman Geisler, and others show how there could have been a census during the time of Jesus. And even Pax admits the friend of the Roman emperor Josephus could have got the date of the census wrong or even just made it up to make the scriptures and Christianity look incorrect (this obviously would have made his Roman Emperor friend happy). Some skeptics want to believe Josephus was right about a census but was wrong about Moses being in Egypt.

 

[paximperium]

We've already been over all this many times in this thread and the archaeology thread. Many scholars including Sir William M. Ramsay, Norman Geisler, and others show how there could have been a census during the time of Jesus. And even Pax admits the friend of the Roman emperor Josephus could have got the date of the census wrong or even just made it up to make the scriptures and Christianity look incorrect (this obviously would have made his Roman Emperor friend happy). Some skeptics want to believe Josephus was right about a census but was wrong about Moses being in Egypt.

Sure, Jojo could have made the whole thing up but so could Lukey boy.

We have Jojo, who has no reason to make it up and we have Lukey boy who has all the reason in the cosmos to make it up and make this fella, that he never met but believes is super magic man, look so important instead of the multitudes of other wannabee holy men during that time period...nevermind all the other gospel authors who forgot about this "event".

 

[pakeha]

We've already been over all this many times in this thread and the archaeology thread. Many scholars including Sir William M. Ramsay, Norman Geisler, and others show how there could have been a census during the time of Jesus.

Now that your named sources have been shown to be wishful thinkers, as been posted up again and again, as you say, in this thread, you now mention 'many others'.
I'd be interested in knowing more about these 'many others'.

And even Pax admits the friend of the Roman emperor Josephus could have got the date of the census wrong or even just made it up to make the scriptures and Christianity look incorrect (this obviously would have made his Roman Emperor friend happy).

DOC, it's been shown over and over again how Josephus found himself in Vespasian's suite en route to Alexandria. Why twist it into a good buddies scenario?

Some skeptics want to believe Josephus was right about a census but was wrong about Moses being in Egypt.

The reasons for this have been posted up repeatedly and it's no problem to post them up again, if you like.

 

[DOC]

These people didn't think the claims were unsubstantiated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_martyrs

Fantastic.
Argumentum ad populum.

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cach...rgumentum+ad+populum&cd=6&hl=es&ct=clnk&gl=es

There is a difference between a lot of people just believing something is true and a lot of people in different areas and at different times who knew the same leader (personally) laying down their life for the same belief. And the apostles could have saved their lives if they just denied Christ and yet none did (after the Resurrection). And this is different from Heaven's Gate and Jonestown because Christ wasn't present to pressure or influence them, they could of just walked away after Christ died. Whereas the leaders of the those other 2 were present when the followers died and the followers deaths didn't happen at different times and in different locations.

And the apostles were different from Muslim martyrs also and I'll say why when I get the time.

 

[Lothian]

We've already been over all this many times in this thread and the archaeology thread. Many scholars including Sir William M. Ramsay, Norman Geisler, and others show how there could have been a census during the time of Jesus.

Do you know what Ramsay said and how he reached his conclusion? His logic is that we know there were censuses and why would Luke lie? Hardly a convincing argument. However it is worth looking at his words again because there are topical to the thread.

"We know that Luke was right in the external facts, because the records have disclosed the whole system of the census ; but as to the inner facts, the birth and the divine nature of Jesus, there can (as said above) be no historical reasoning, for those are a matter of faith, of intuition, and of the individual human being's experience and inner life."


So yet again Ramsay makes his recurring point. There is no evidence the New Testament writers told the truth.

 

[zooterkin]

We've already been over all this many times in this thread and the archaeology thread.

Indeed we have, however one of us seems to have a very short memory, and keeps putting forward "evidence" that has been comprehensively rebutted.

Many scholars including Sir William M. Ramsay, Norman Geisler, and others show how there could have been a census during the time of Jesus.

"Could have been" is not evidence. Even if there had been a census, do you have any evidence that people being counted were ever made to return to some ancestral village rather their home?

Some skeptics want to believe Josephus was right about a census but was wrong about Moses being in Egypt.

Again, your choice of words is peculiar. They don't want to believe. It's a matter of weighing the evidence; Josephus talking about something that happened within living memory of people around him is completely different, and more likely to be based on truth, than him retelling the thousand year old stories about Moses. If you can't see that, then it's not surprising you have difficulty with more difficult concepts.