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

Status
Not open for further replies.
wollery said:
I've done that.

She was a lovely girl, but grinding sausages all day left her a bit short on conversation.
Click to expand...

Did you stain your (fabulously loud) shirt?


ETA: IF so, how could you tell?
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Having about 180 skeptics in a thread, and maybe 2 or 3 Christians could be a reason.
Click to expand...

But...but...you have 1200 posts in this thread alone, Doc. If we're going to compare numbers, fine. But if we're going to base our beliefs on the post count, then given that there are more posts against your position than for it, we must choose to reject your beliefs.


We have more posters against your argument than you have martyrs for your beliefs. That means we win. Numbers don't lie and our numbers are bigger than your numbers.
 
DOC said:
So are you calling Barack Obama who claims to be a devout Christian and to believe in the resurrection an idiot.
Click to expand...

With the assumption that he's not a religious scholar - this is absolute classic Appeal to Authority logical fallacy. And yes, about this specific point, he just might be, so what?
 
six7s said:
Originally Posted by DOC
I still haven't answered all the posts concerning the already given evidence.
Click to expand...

Try this:

Thank you for debunking my woo and showing me, in no uncertain terms, that my beliefs are were founded on nothing more than wishful thinking. I am indebted to your peristent efforts, which have finally opened my eyes to reality to the point where I humbly acknowledge that everything I previously considered to be evidence is, in fact, nonsense​
Click to expand...

Yes.
Still, given DOC's history of presenting evidence, at this point many would probably settle for a post of his which included a link to AiG.
 
DOC said:
I might add "Godless" by Ann Coulter, and "Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus"" by Timothy Jones.
Click to expand...

Both of those authors are dyed in the wool theists fundamentalist, therefore have no credibility.
 
Hokulele said:
I would rather slide down a banister made of razor blades into a vat of lemon juice.
Click to expand...


There is widely availlable and undisputable evidence of this sort of thing happening in biblical times.

The 'Mare of Steel' will be familiar to those of you who have seen the documentary film The Long Ships, featuring the famous historian, Sir Richard Widmark.





Yay! Evidence at last.
 
Last edited:
Evidence, indeed.

The Long Ships is one of my favourite novels.
And so they've made it into an historical document, then?
 
Didn't work your highness. I had no idea Kirk Douglas was knighted. :D
 
pakeha said:
Evidence, indeed.

The Long Ships is one of my favourite novels.
And so they've made it into an historical document, then?
Click to expand...


Indeed, see, the YouTube link above.

But what's this about a novel? It IS an historical document. There is widespread evidence that many people believe it to be the literal truth.
 
Last edited:
Akhenaten said:
Indeed, see, the YouTube link above.

But what's this about a novel? It IS an historical document. There is widespread evidence that many people believe it to be the literal truth.
Click to expand...

Of course you're right, oh Pharaoh.
It's just that in atheist Scandinavia The Long Ships had to be published as a novel, as the quota on publishing The Truth had been met that particular year.
 
Last edited:
Even the apostles required physical proof

DOC said:
...The apostles who lived with Jesus for 3 years would have needed some evidence that Jesus in fact did rise from the dead. The fact that 11 of them were martyred at different times and places and none of them recanted when it could have saved their lives (especially after they demonstrated uncertainty and cowardice pre-Resurrection) shows me that those 11 apostles did in fact witness a Resurrected Christ.

---

So let me get this straight... according to your infromation above even the apostles who lived with 'god incarnate' for 3 years prior to the crucifixtion were uncertain and skeptical about the fact that he was who he said he was. They had direct face to face access and were still not convinced. It took not only the cruxification but the resurrection AND physical proof that he was not only who he said he was but that he has been stabbed with a mortal wound. Geesh you'd have thought that being an eyewitness miracles for 3 years would have been enough for most people.

Now you are here tell me that I should belive in the Jesus of the Bible based on contradictory and obviously alter old book that is around 1700 years old and constructed by a committee (and looks like it too) when even the Bible itself states that the eyewitnesses were doubtful until shown proof? Are we to belive based on less evidence than was provided to the apostles, the 'eyewitnesses' to many of the events, but seemed to be by your own statements still on the fence about this whole 'son of god incarnate' thing?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom