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

[DOC]

I might add "Godless" by Ann Coulter,

And now we know why your arguments are filled with lies and pure stupidity.

Recommending a book is not an argument. And recommending a book by an author of several national best sellers does not make the recommender's arguments filled with lies and pure stupidity. You are one angry bitter person. I would see someone about that and I'm not saying that in a condescending way. I'm saying that for your own health, and maybe the health of those who come in contact with you.

And if isn't wasn't for Coulter's book Godless there would be a lot of people on this site who would have never heard of atheistic Princeton professor Peter Singer. He is the one Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal protested against. I could go on and on about the troubling Peter Singer but that's another thread. Coulter was the one from whom I first heard about Peter Singer.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

So you don't believe in miracles but you can read the minds of the 180 posters in here. Statements like yours show a very angry bitter person.

Pot, meet kettle

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Recommending a book is not an argument. And recommending a book by an author of several national best sellers does not make the recommender's arguments filled with lies and pure stupidity. You are one angry bitter person. I would see someone about that and I'm not saying that in a condescending way. I'm saying that for your own health, and maybe the health of those who come in contact with you.

Recommending a book in a thread discussing evidence is an argument, Doc.

As for best sellers, Dan Brown is a best seller - but that doesn't mean his books are either factual or well written (in fact, they're decidedly neither).

And if isn't wasn't for Coulter's book Godless there would be a lot of people on this site who would have never heard of atheistic Princeton professor Peter Singer. He is the one Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal protested against. I could go on and on about the troubling Peter Singer but that's another thread. Coulter was the one from whom I first heard about Peter Singer.

You give yourself too much credit, Doc...

 

[DOC]

Both of those authors are dyed in the wool theists fundamentalist, therefore have no credibility.

So in your opinion only an author who is an atheist can have credibility?

 

[wollery]

So you don't believe in miracles but you can read the minds of the 180 posters in here. Statements like yours show a very angry bitter person.

I'd lay odds that the vast majority agree with him.

 

[wollery]

So in your opinion only an author who is an atheist can have credibility?

When it comes to discussing such subject matter I'd think a moderate theist, or preferably a deist, is most likely to offer a totally unbiased opinion.

Fundamentalist Christians are pretty much, by definition, biased on the subject of biblical matters.

 

[pakeha]

Uh oh. Haven't we been here before?

Pharaoh's discernment awes this foolish pakeha.
My only excuse is that I was utterly bedazzled by the founder of Harvard Law School's black body paint in the historical document you posted.

 

[Garrette]

For a credible book you might start with one in which the author does not misrepresent her sources. I dissected much of "Godless" for my sister and her family who fawned over it. When I showed her that reference after reference after reference didn't really say what Coulter claimed they said, her response was along the lines of "I see your point, but I still like her."

Coulter may not be an idiot or liar, but she plays the role convincingly in her books.

 

[Paulhoff]

Riddle me this Batman, what is the need of the 10 Commandments at any Courthouse (or any government building), when at least half have nothing to do with laws.

I am the Lord your God
You shall have no other gods before me
You shall not make for yourself an idol
You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God
Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy


Paul

 

[zooterkin]

Recommending a book is not an argument. And recommending a book by an author of several national best sellers does not make the recommender's arguments filled with lies and pure stupidity. You are one angry bitter person. I would see someone about that and I'm not saying that in a condescending way. I'm saying that for your own health, and maybe the health of those who come in contact with you.

And if isn't wasn't for Coulter's book Godless there would be a lot of people on this site who would have never heard of atheistic Princeton professor Peter Singer. He is the one Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal protested against. I could go on and on about the troubling Peter Singer but that's another thread. Coulter was the one from whom I first heard about Peter Singer.

Is this Ann Coulter someone I should have heard of, DOC?

 

[joobz]

Long winded perhaps but not snarky, it is a statement of fact. It is no accomplishment to draw the obvious observation that the Jesus followers failed in their faith given they needed the re assurance of seeing that Jesus was still around after they watched him perish. But as I added as another scenario also based on no factual evidence:

If it's such an obvious statement than you should have a logical solution why I (or anyone) should give any thought to the Jesus story as anything other than a story?

As you said, Messiah's and doom sayers were a dime a dozen during Jesus' time. Why is his story any more real than the others? It's like trying to say that The Green lantern is real but all other superheros are merely stories.

I simply see no accolade in one guess over another,

All is relative? Are you a nihilist who believes there is no truth?

especially when a scenario as I presented would come to you as a opposing position to your own thought direction,

actually I couldn't (in your first post) even gauge what your positionw as. I tried, but all I saw was you complaining with a "Waterman's ideas aren't original.." comment. You maybe had a point, but it was mired in rambling asides. Much like this sentence that I'm dissecting.

or perhaps that is the only thought that Waterman had on the subject, the most obvious one to suit his position

I don't really care what his/her other thoughts are as they were not part of his post. I see no reason to assume more depth or less depth. Why do you associate so much from a simple post?

Crown him make him king of your logic stream if you like, but I must say as I will.

Are you jealous of waterman? Is that why you continue to be snarky?

 

[Elizabeth I]

Is this Ann Coulter someone I should have heard of, DOC?

If you haven't, count your blessings.

 

[Simon39759]

Yes it could be read that way, but I was responding to the comment that the ten commandments is no big thing. How long would a society last if civilization inherited the direct opposite to the ten commandments as the basis for their moral compass....not too long. Society is based on trust and fidelity, and these are the things we betray when we break the seven social commandments of the ten.

Yes, but that is the point.
Any society will have the equivalent of these 7 commandments and, if one imagine a society that did not, chance is that it would not survive for long.

And, once again, that does not change the fact that the first three are pretty unnecessary.

Simon as I posed the question those are the ones that came to my mind as well, but on furter thought I had to get nit picky as most of the other stuff we get up to is covered in the seven.

Yes, the seven are wide enough to cover a lot of situations.
Yet, they leave important parts out. I believe that was Hoku's point..

And if isn't wasn't for Coulter's book Godless there would be a lot of people on this site who would have never heard of atheistic Princeton professor Peter Singer. He is the one Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal protested against. I could go on and on about the troubling Peter Singer but that's another thread. Coulter was the one from whom I first heard about Peter Singer.

But the problem is that you bring Coulter uncritically. Coulter is infamous for her reputation of bias and dishonesty. Accusations that were levelled from all sides, including from fellow conservatives. She has no credibility.

In that case, you were shown how she only brings Singer by misrepresenting what he said to the point of bordering libel.
It is not an argument, per se, but it does illustrate your propensy to use biased and faulty sources when they serve your preconceptions. A bit like the white-supremacist websites you used to link. I have no problem giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you linked the first sites you could find that seemed to agree with you, but you failed to check who were the authors of the website and if they had a potential to lie for their agenda.

 

[pakeha]

I'd never heard of the lady and amongst a great deal of information in her Wikipedia entry I found this:

...In October 2007, while being interviewed by Donny Deutsch on the CNBC show The Big Idea, Coulter stated that Christians consider themselves "perfected jews" and that it would be better if everyone was a Christian.[59] Deutsch had asked that if her dreams came true, what would this world look like, and she responded that "It would look like New York City during the Republican National Convention. In fact, that's what I think heaven is going to look like." When Deutsch continued to press her on the statement, she explained that people at the convention were happy, tolerant, and Christian. Deutsch then asked her if she believed everyone should be a Christian, and Coulter replied "Yes". ...

 

[Hokulele]

Good grief, not this argument from popularity again. In that case, let's look at some numbers regarding Ehrman's New York Times bestselling book. As of today's Amazon sales rankings, we can compare the success of Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus and Timothy Jones' Misquoting Truth.

Ehrman: #20,136

Jones: #122,263

Using DOC's logic, Ehrman is six times more correct than Jones, so he wins and that is evidence that the bible contains errors. Yay!

DOC, care to rethink the use of one of your favorite fallacies?

 

[joobz]

Good grief, not this argument from popularity again. In that case, let's look at some numbers regarding Ehrman's New York Times bestselling book. As of today's Amazon sales rankings, we can compare the success of Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus and Timothy Jones' Misquoting Truth.

Ehrman: #20,136

Jones: #122,263

Using DOC's logic, Ehrman is six times more correct than Jones, so he wins and that is evidence that the bible contains errors. Yay!

DOC, care to rethink the use of one of your favorite fallacies?

Obviously, appeal to numbers isn't a fallacy when it's a lie for jesus.

 

[Simon39759]

Obviously, appeal to numbers isn't a fallacy when it's a lie for jesus.

Well; everybody knows of the asterisk after the commandment against false witnesses.
It explain all the occasions in which it is allowed... For Jesus (of course) or to protect your church; or for a political view that you think is the one Jesus would vote for; or for marketting purpose; or for tax fraud; or when you are talking to a non-Christian; or the wrong kind of Christian; or if it help selling your book and/or work at Fox News and/or do talk radio.
(exceptions to be added as needed)

 

[paximperium]

So you don't believe in miracles but you can read the minds of the 180 posters in here. Statements like yours show a very angry bitter person.

Recommending a book is not an argument. And recommending a book by an author of several national best sellers does not make the recommender's arguments filled with lies and pure stupidity. You are one angry bitter person. I would see someone about that and I'm not saying that in a condescending way. I'm saying that for your own health, and maybe the health of those who come in contact with you.

Your pathetic patronizing ad hominem is most amusing. Sorry, you read garbage and no one cares about your lies. That is a fact. You're pretty bitter about that simple truth.

And if isn't wasn't for Coulter's book Godless there would be a lot of people on this site who would have never heard of atheistic Princeton professor Peter Singer. He is the one Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal protested against. I could go on and on about the troubling Peter Singer but that's another thread. Coulter was the one from whom I first heard about Peter Singer.

Coulter is a scumbag but a pretty smart one. She sells books to people like you have read her lies and garbage and actually believe it. That;s the reason she makes soooo much money while idiots buy her books. Yes, DOC, your arguments are filled with the sad little nonsense that she peddles and sadly you actually believe her.

I like Singer, I actually knew him way before you even mentioned him. In fact I actually showed that your statements about him are actual strawman and lies by posting actual essays he wrote, not quotes from Coulter or "someone said Singer said this" blah blah blah. But then I actually READ his books so your sad little strawman and ignorant lies about him are about as convincing as your so-called claims about the Bible...which you haven't even finished reading. You heard about him but know absolutely nothing about him.

Your arguments are as amusing as your comments about everything else you've done which is basically regurgitated nonsense and garbage you heard from someone else....kind of like your "knowledge" of the Bible.

 

[paximperium]

Is this Ann Coulter someone I should have heard of, DOC?

She's the Kevin Trudeau of the religious Far-right of America.

She sells lies, conspiracy theorists and strokes the fears of a certain kind of ignorant conservative to be able to sell her books and wares. She knows exactly what she doing since she hits all the major talking points and picks out random factoids about the left and atheist etc and purposefully misquotes them.

 

[six7s]

You may "add" but no one gives a rat's ass as to your recommendations.

So you don't believe in miracles but you can read the minds of the 180 posters in here. Statements like yours show a very angry bitter person.

So you do believe in miracles and you can't read the responses of anyone who debunks your woo. Statements like yours show an extremely deluded person that suggest there is a serious bug in your spam-bot.