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

[DOC]

Most definitely. I've learned a lot from Joobz, Hokulele and a host of other posters.

So then you knew all about these men and facts before I brought them into the threads:

-Harvard legal scholar Simon Greenleaf and his views on legal evidence and the New Testament.

-archaeologist Sir William M. Ramsay and his opinion that gospel writer Luke was one of the world's greatest historians.

-the 1st century tombs that exist under the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and many archaeologists' beliefs that Jesus' actual empty tomb is most probably under it.

-an actual skull shaped boulder exists today on Golgotha (Calvary) (known in the bible as "the place of the skull")

-Oxford historian Thomas Arnold (who wrote the 3 volume "History of Rome") and his belief that Jesus' life and resurrection was proved by more historical evidence than any fact in history up to that point.

- and that the following composite of facts all came from "non-Christian" sources:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4967314#post4967314

 

[dafydd]

Sometimes I get the strangest feeling of deja vu.............

 

[DOC]

That's great, DOC.
Could you post this new information, please?

See post 6401 above,

and also here is 68 pages of new information brought in by Pakeha regarding Simon Greenleaf one of the founders of Harvard Law School and his beliefs regarding the New Testament, the reliability of the NT witnesses, the resurrection, and the rules of evidence.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5175362#post5175362

 

[amb]

Wasn't Luke a physician?

 

[DOC]

Wasn't Luke a physician?

Josephus was a general, and Tacitus was a Roman Senator, before they started to write history. Winston Churchill won a Nobel prize for his history book.

 

[paximperium]

So then you knew all about these men and facts before I brought them into the threads:

-Harvard legal scholar Simon Greenleaf and his views on legal evidence and the New Testament.

-archaeologist Sir William M. Mitchell and his opinion that gospel writer Luke was one of the world's greatest historians.

-the 1st century tombs that exist under the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and many archaeologists' beliefs that Jesus' actual empty tomb is most probably under it.

-an actual skull shaped boulder exists today on Golgotha (Calvary) (known in the bible as "the place of the skull")

-Oxford historian Thomas Arnold (who wrote the 3 volume "History of Rome") and his belief that Jesus' life and resurrection was proved by more historical evidence than any fact in history up to that point.

- and that the following composite of facts all came from "non-Christian" sources:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4967314#post4967314

No did not. I actually heard about them form you in fact but I learned about them from Hokulele, Joobz, the other posters who gave real information and my own research since your post concerning these things were filled with lies, misquotes and completely and utterly false nonsense. So thanks for that.

 

[Akhenaten]

So then you knew all about these men and facts before I brought them into the threads:

-Harvard legal scholar Simon Greenleaf and his views on legal evidence and the New Testament.

"It was IMPOSSIBLE that the apostles could have persisted in affirming the truths they had narrated, had not JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY RISEN FROM THE DEAD . . ."

- Simon Greenleaf, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice, p.29​

-archaeologist Sir William M. Mitchell and his opinion that gospel writer Luke was one of the world's greatest historians.

Who now? This guy?

William M. Mitchell
Director
Hemispherx Biopharma, Inc.
Philadelphia , PA
Sector: Healthcare/Biotechnology

74 Years Old

WILLIAM M. MITCHELL, M.D., Ph.D., 74, has been a Director since July 1998. Dr. Mitchell is a Professor of Pathology at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Dr. Mitchell earned a M.D. from Vanderbilt and a Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins University, where he served as an Intern in Internal Medicine

- Forbes Magazine
​

-the 1st century tombs that exist under the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and many archaeologists' beliefs that Jesus' actual empty tomb is most probably under it.

There are many empty tombs. Here's another, but with more evidence for its existence than yours:

The royal tomb was discovered in the 1890’s. Its relatively late discovery was due to its location, very far removed (about 6 Km.) from the site of Akhetaten, at the end of the Royal Wadi, the entrance to which is situated in an indentation in the cliff between the groups of northerly and southerly private tombs.

The entrance to the royal tomb is at the ground level of a side valley and faces to the east where the Aten rises each day.​

-an actual skull shaped boulder exists today on Golgotha (Calvary) (known in the bible as "the place of the skull")

-Oxford historian Thomas Arnold (who wrote the 3 volume "History of Rome") and his belief that Jesus' life and resurrection was proved by more historical evidence than any fact in history up to that point.

I already did that graphic once in this post. Soz.

- and that the following composite of facts all came from "non-Christian" sources:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4967314#post4967314

You're referring to your own post as a "non-Christian" source. That is a fail.

 

[paximperium]

See post 6401 above,

and also here is 68 pages of new information brought in by Pakeha regarding Simon Greenleaf one of the founders of Harvard Law School and his beliefs regarding the New Testament, the reliability of the NT witnesses, the resurrection, and the rules of evidence.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5175362#post5175362

And it was shown that he was wrong and irrelevant. So anything new or are you just regurgitating garbage again?

 

[amb]

Josephus was a general, and Tacitus was a Roman Senator, before they started to write history. Winston Churchill won a Nobel prize for his history book.

As was Plato! The thing is, we have no idea who this Luke is that is mentioned in the bible. The gospel that bears his name was probably not written by this Luke. None of the gospels are written by the people who's name appears as the authors.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

So then you knew all about these men and facts before I brought them into the threads:

All of this is, in fact, standard apologetics fare. Nothing to go wild about; rather something to *facepalm*.

And anyway, you should speed up (in terms of views and posts) your thread here about the evidence for why we know the NT is true, lest it be overtaken by the thread about the evidence for why we know the holocaust isn't. Just sayin'.

 

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by pakeha
That's great, DOC.
Could you post this new information, please?

See post 6401 above,

and also here is 68 pages of new information brought in by Pakeha regarding Simon Greenleaf one of the founders of Harvard Law School and his beliefs regarding the New Testament, the reliability of the NT witnesses, the resurrection, and the rules of evidence.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5175362#post5175362

Once again, DOC, I'm asking you to post up the new evidence.
Posters here have examined your references and shown repeatedly how intellectually dishonest they are.
Repeatedly.
So citing them yet again sounds like you have no new evidence.


Still, I'll bite. What's the new evidence you have?

 

[KarlG]

See post 6401 above,

and also here is 68 pages of new information brought in by Pakeha regarding Simon Greenleaf one of the founders of Harvard Law School and his beliefs regarding the New Testament, the reliability of the NT witnesses, the resurrection, and the rules of evidence.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5175362#post5175362

These are his beliefs regarding the New Testament, the reliability of the NT witnesses, the resurrection, and the rules of evidence. Why should his beliefs matter? Where are the facts, the *sigh* evidence?

 

[pakeha]

Bravo, KarlG, you read the Greenleaf chapter, something DOC has yet to do.

 

[joobz]

So then you knew all about these men and facts before I brought them into the threads

DOC, don't feel back. I admit you taught me some very important things:

1.) You taught me that Thomas Jefferson thought the bible was a pile of crap
2.) You taught me that Geisler writes books containing laughably bad arguments.
3.) You taught me that Luke made up stories in the bible to better fit a narrative. (e.g., the census story)
4.) You taught me that there is no historical evidence supporting the magical elements of the bible.
5.) You taught me that the arguments used to prove the bible true would prove every fiction story true. Or at the very least, prove other religions true.
6.) You taught me that you'll say "I'm only proving evidence in support of..." rather than say "Prove"

 

[DOC]

that wouldn't be the same Thomas Jefferson who equated the bible to a pile of crap, would it?

Jefferson never said the bible was a pile of crap but he did say this when talking about his book "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth" where he cut out and pasted the teachings of Jesus that agreed with his "personal philosophy" of the non existence of miracles.

Jefferson in a letter to John Adams:

"There will be found remaining the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man. I have performed this operation for my own use, by cutting verse by verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter which is evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill."

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

But his above aversion to miracles (aka supernatural bias) did not keep him from regularly attending church services in the US Capitol Building during his 8 year presidency, and did not stop him from donating money for the building of churches.

 

[pakeha]

Point taken, DOC.
The bible wasn't compared to a load of crap.
It was compared to a dunghill.
Thanks for clearing that up.
So.

Tell us more the new evidence you've found.

added: a nice summary, joobz.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Jefferson never said the bible was a pile of crap but he did say this when talking about his book "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth" where he cut out and pasted the teachings of Jesus that agreed with his "personal philosophy" of the non existence of miracles.

Jefferson in a letter to John Adams:

"There will be found remaining the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man. I have performed this operation for my own use, by cutting verse by verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter which is evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill."

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

But his above aversion to miracles (aka supernatural bias) did not keep him from regularly attending church services in the US Capitol Building during his 8 year presidency, and did not stop him from donating money for the building of churches.

Doc, do you even realize what Jefferson was actually telling Adams?

Here's the very first line of the Wiki page you linked to:

The Jefferson Bible, or The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth as it is formally titled, was Thomas Jefferson's effort to extract the doctrine of Jesus by removing sections of the New Testament containing supernatural aspects as well as perceived misinterpretations he believed had been added by the Four Evangelists.

So, we have Jefferson discussing his own version of the bible that removes all the supernatural (resurrection/miracles/etc). Using Jefferson's version of the bible hurts rather than helps your argument. Obviously, Jefferson felt the NT writers had not told the truth and this is why he was editing his own "more truthful" version.

Again, the question becomes:

Are you willfully ignorant or do you honestly not see the holes in your "logic"?

 

[DOC]

These are his beliefs regarding the New Testament, the reliability of the NT witnesses, the resurrection, and the rules of evidence. Why should his beliefs matter?...

The writings of a man who was one of the founders of Harvard Law school and who wrote a distinguished book on the "rules of evidence" should matter when he talks about the "evidence" in the NT.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

The writings of a man who was one of the founders of Harvard Law school and who wrote a distinguished book on the "rules of evidence" should matter when he talks about the "evidence" in the NT.

Sure, if this was 100 yrs ago, that would be a valid argument. However, new evidence has been discovered that shows Greenleaf's beliefs are based on faulty evidence.

Your argument is akin to maintaining that suspect A is guilty of rape based on eyewitness testimony given 30 years after the fact, even after cross-examination of the eye-witnesses shows the testimonies aren't very well supported and new DNA evidence shows that suspect B is more likely to be guilty.

 

[Niggle]

When people make a post, I have a right to respond to it. If in my response the historical martyrdom of all but one apostle is a reasonable response to that post, I have the right to bring it up. And the historical martyrdom of 11 apostles is not a line it's history.

Funny how none of you complained when slavery was brought up probably over a hundred times, and several times when it had nothing to do with a post. I figure I have about another 50 times to bring up the apostles martyrdom before it equals the amount of times slavery was mentioned.

When a thread goes this long obviously some things are going to be repeated but every so often some new important information comes out. If you can't deal things being repeated then block the thread. You implied that you wished this thread would go away maybe 30 pages ago. Why are you still here? Why haven't you blocked the thread? You've complained about my grammar, my spelling, my punctuation, my repeating things, but you still keep coming back? Why?

Ya know, one definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result each time. If your beknighted list of martyrs didn't convince anyone the first dozen times you brought it up, why are you still bringing it up as "proof"?

People dying for a belief does not make that belief true. Your list of martyrs is EXACTLY THE SAME as the list of people who died in the Heaven's Gate fiasco. People who died because they believed in a religion. Next.

So there's a rock that looks like a skull. Is there archeological evidence that this rock was used as a site of crucifictions? If no, then it's nothing more than a rock that looks like a skull. If yes, it's just a place the Romans used to crucify people. Unless there's an engraved stone from 33 CE that says "Jesus was crucified here," it's still not proof of the Bible, just proof that the people who wrote the Bible knew that the Romans crucified people at that rock, which is on a par with people in this day and age knowing that some prisons contain electric chairs or chambers for administering lethal injections.

You have no evidence. You have a lot of opinions, beliefs, conjecture, false correlations, guesses, and might-have-beens. You obviously can't tell the difference between them. We're (okay, a lot of people who know more about the subject than I do, but you get the idea) trying to show you the difference so you can understand how to evaluate information. You're refusing to learn. Having tantrums at us because we won't play your way isn't going to help you learn.

The "evidence" you've presented so far is unacceptable as evidence for the reasons already stated so many times. If you want this thread to proceed in any useful fashion, discard it and move on. Repeating it over and over is only going to earn you more ridicule (and wrongly so, IMHO, for an educational forum) and make you more frustrated. If you've got anything else, try it. But you'd better actually read it before you put it up, because you should already know that we will.