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

Status
Not open for further replies.
DOC said:
Yes, I know, it's all love your enemy, love your neighbor, Jesus' fault.
Click to expand...

You seem to be missing the point. No one had said that every single sentiment in the bible is bad or evil (however I understand that it may seem that way to you). The bible is filled with many wonderful sentiments and ideas. However it is also filled with much that vile, detestable and completely insane. The augments against you seem to be largely based on your contention that it is all ‘true’ verses those that think you have to pick and choose. But in fact you pick and choose too, you just don’t see it. When was the last time you participated in a stoning?

Just because someone has some good idea and cobbles together some other good ideas from other traditions and teaches them to others that hey it might be nice if we did things this way, doesn’t mean that it HAS to be divinely inspired.
 
DOC said:
From the article what is a Primary Source:

primary source: A primary source is a document, speech, or other sort of evidence written, created or otherwise produced during the time under study.

http://www.knowledgecenter.unr.edu/instruction/help/primary.html

Much of the time under study in this thread is the period that the New Testament was written- the years before 100 A.D.. So we have 31 primary sources from the New Testament and several primary sources from Josephus who mentions Christ twice, John the Baptist, and James the Just {the first bishop of Jerusalem}.]
Click to expand...

No, at best, you have writings based on reports of the primary sources. You have NONE of these documents in their original forms. At worst, you have people who lived long after the fact writing down what they heard. NONE of these can be shown to have been written AT THE TIME Jesus supposedly lived. The two Josephus mentions are highly suspect. The closest date for your NT sources is still thirty or more years after Christ's death. At best. Hence, NONE of them is a primary source.

DOC said:
This is much better than Alexander the Great (who conquered much of the known world) where most of what we know about him was written by historians over 400 years after his death.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v23/n21/james-davidson/bonkers-about-boys
Click to expand...

Completely irrelevant.
 
pakeha said:
...DOC has had over 200 pages to present this evidence and has failed to do so. Everything posted up has been debunked and more than once.
Isn't it time to move on, DOC?
Click to expand...

Another general opinion trying to discredit my 1400 posts in 2 sentences. My posts our out there. One day people will let the posts stand for themselves without continually offering general opinions about them.

If I list at least 3 things that haven't been debunked will you agree apologize since you said everything has been debunked?
 
Last edited:
I will apologize if you will give definitions of circular reasoning, hearsay, and special pleading and refer to three of your posts as an example of each.
 
I hate to be a douche and quote myself, but how can I not?

NavyPack said:
Add another longtime lurker who has consumed the totality of this monstrosity.

Nowhere in this random collection of thoughts, have you managed to maintain any affinity for, nor acquaintance with; congruity of position, validity of logic, consistency of word definitions, and reality in the general.

Every single post of your opinions and promised evidence has been thoroughly disputed, then refuted, ad nausem.

It would be expected that the volume of adversarial posts would be a challenge to anyone with the temerity to promise what you did in the title of this thread. However, you fail/refuse to realize the fundamental difference between your "refutations", and those provided by the rest of the forum.

How many purposefully unanswered questions remain on your side of the ledger? You undisputedly decide to respond to only the weakest fragments of any response, doubly so if it diverts attention from a subject you are losing ground on.

Do you dare challenge the forumites to produce a list of queries you have dodged/flat out ignored?

If your position is founded in reality, the logic you use to support one argument should be applicable to any reasonable alternative scenarios. (i.e. martyr's of other religions, skepticism towards other religious texts, etc.)

Yours are obviously not.

To any rational or honest person reading this thread, your lack of integrity and intellectual honesty has been laid bare.
Click to expand...



I really do apologize for repeating myself, but it seems to be the accepted means of communication in this conversation.

You really did end up daring. I under/over-estimated you once again.

I've read this entire damned thread out of morbid curiosity, (and once you start, you can't stop), but I now appreciate how invaluable your quixotic quest has become for an entire internet-generation of budding skeptics. To learn the levels of vapidity and willful ingnorance an opponent will stoop to, when they have abandoned the ability to admit the absurdity of their postition when faced w/ abundant contra-evidence, is invaluable.

Poe's law can be envoked, but really, in a functional sense, doc has been a wonderful scratching post, allowing us to hone, then distill our arguments.
 
DOC said:
Another general opinion trying to discredit my 1400 posts in 2 sentences. My posts our out there. One day people will let the posts stand for themselves without continually offering general opinions about them.
Click to expand...


Why do you persist with this nonsense, DOC? Continual references to the number of your posts in this failure of a thread do you no credit whatsoever.

Your posts are indeed out there. Way out there. Edge of the galaxy out there. Why do you gloat about this? It's a crying shame and a huge embarrassment, and you crow about it?

Since it appears that you consider the opinions so far expressed to be too general, please allow me to try and be a little more specific. The posts of yours that are without substance, reason, logic, or evidence are the ones between #1 and #8346.


DOC said:
If I list at least 3 things that haven't been debunked will you agree apologize since you said everything has been debunked?
Click to expand...


Go ahead. I haven't reported one of your derails for ages.
 
DOC, this is a forum. If you want to post without having to deal with the burden of contrary opinions, get a blog.
 
DOC said:
Another general opinion trying to discredit my 1400 posts in 2 sentences.
Click to expand...
Sad thing is is that it's all that's needed to discredit your 1400 posts.

DOC said:
If I list at least 3 things that haven't been debunked will you agree apologize since you said everything has been debunked?
Click to expand...
Are you really boasting that out of your 1400 posts, you have only 3 claims that haven't been debunked?
 
NavyPack said:
I really do apologize for repeating myself
Click to expand...
No need! :)

NavyPack said:
I've read this entire damned thread
Click to expand...
Anyone who has suffered like that is bound to repeat a few things...

Like 'Ga'

;)

Welcome aboard NavyPack! Alas, more often than not, we are becalmed... and whenever there is even the slightest sign of some fresh air, the skipper has a habit of lashing the wheel hard to port
 
Niggle said:
Completely irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Curiously, this would likely be my response if DOC ever did post some 'evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth'... I mean... so what if they had been sincere... they would still be regarded as NUTS!
 
DOC said:
Of course this is wrong. Believe it or not I do have access to a dictionary.
Click to expand...

This most certainly explains your problem. You got the whole internet at your fingertips and no access to a dictionary? Wow Doc, it's hard to be more incomprehensible than that.
 
DOC said:
Originally Posted by pakeha
...DOC has had over 200 pages to present this evidence and has failed to do so. Everything posted up has been debunked and more than once.
Isn't it time to move on, DOC?
Click to expand...
Another general opinion trying to discredit my 1400 posts in 2 sentences. My posts our out there. One day people will let the posts stand for themselves without continually offering general opinions about them.

If I list at least 3 things that haven't been debunked will you agree apologize since you said everything has been debunked?
Click to expand...

I confess.
I laughed aloud when I read this post of DOC's just now.

Fellow posters' responses have been great thus far- I certainly couldn't better them.
I confess to being confused by DOC wanting us to be preached at without a demur. Hardly reasonable on a skeptics' forum, I'd have thought.

Anyway.
I'm at a loss, myself, to imagine what DOC will come up with and almost interested enough to want to know what hasn't been debunked and long ago at that.
It seems odd DOC would wait so long (200+ pages) before asserting this, since it seems pretty clear the OP was debunked on page one.
Do I 'sense' a derail attempt in this attempt to get an 'apology' from someone in the forum?

Since DOC has never accepted that neither hearsay nor American presidents' opinions nor martyrs lists constitute evidence the NT writers were telling the truth, I think the 'challenge' is basically a preacher's trick to wow the faithful from the pulpit.

Still.
Bring on the list, DOC! Make me laugh again.
 
The posts that haven't been debunked are the ones where he's posted a count of the number of posts he's made in the thread.
 
DOC said:
One day people will let the posts stand for themselves without continually offering general opinions about them.
Click to expand...
Don't take this all so personally, DOC

Crtical thinkers don't hate the wooists... Sound familair?

Anyhoo...

Have a look at some other threads - maybe ones that you haven't participated in - and you'll find that the debunking pretty much comes to a screeching halt whenever there is a break in the delusional, illogical, fallacious, blundering, fantastical, deceptive, ignorant, specious, lying, weird, unsound, baseless, fraudulent, deceitful, nonsensical, mythical belief-based woo

Have you ever had a Kit Kat?



:)​
 
DOC said:
If I list at least 3 things that haven't been debunked will you agree apologize since you said everything has been debunked?
Click to expand...
Would this be 3 pieces of evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth or would it be 3 off-topic statements like the beliefs of presidents, writings of 19th century historians or the Roman hearsay you keep bring in to this thread?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom