• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
The astronomers of Babylon reported in writing that Alexander was at the gates, and had sent a message that he would not raze the city. This was jotted down along with their usual nightly observations, which pins the date down precisely.

But so what? The history of Egypt shows a dynasty change, from Egyptian to Greek, at that time. (It was from that Greek dynasty that the last pharaoh, Cleopatra, descended. She died in 30 C.E. - just about the time of Christ death. Except that she is recorded in contemporary Roman records, quite prominently -- she lived in Rome for a time, and gave birth to Caesar's son.)

So it's clear that SOME Greek conqueror, whether named Alexander or some other name, conquered Egypt. What's in a name?

Also, Alexander the great claimed to be a god. But he died just the same, in his early thirties, just like Jesus.

(Did anyone ever see them together?)

The matter of the existence of Jesus is not important. Some Jewish claimants to the role of Messiah lived and died around that time.

What is important to the claims his followers make is the resurrection. Without proof of the resurrection, Jesus was just another Jewish Messiah wannabee. That he lived does not prove he is a god.

Prove the resurrection. That's the challenge.

Over to you, Doc.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Not really because skeptics are complaining that the NT writers can't be believed because they wrote decades after Christ's death.

I have shown that almost all of our info about Alexander the Great (who did very extraordinary things) comes from historians who lived over 400 years after his death.

This shows us that 400 year old historical evidence can be very important in our educational system. And thus this fact decreases the value of the skeptics argument that the writings about Christ were decades after his life. And if we have decreased the value of the skeptic argument against the truthfulness of the NT it is only common sense that we have helped the argument for its truthfulness.
Click to expand...

I posted a response to this in #7721 on 11/7
You seem to be missing a major point. There are many people here that are willing to accept that there was a historical Jesus. Though they are unwiling to accept the super powers. If the claims were that ALexander the Great carried the elephants over the mountains or caused an avalanche to part around army through his superpower then everyone here would be all over that.

It is you that is applying a different standard, you are trying to equate the accepting the existance of AtG as equivalent to the existance of Jesus AND his super powers. It is NOT the same.
Click to expand...

To apply your logic here about the NT and Jesus, that to accept that AtG existed based on the historical evidence is to accept that every word written about him is true. No one here takes that position. Did AtG exist sure there are multiple lines of corroborating evidence. Did he do some extraordinary things, apparently so as he is mentioned in history. Is everything reported about him true? Well I would not believe that he had any super human powers. Besides that it is highly unlikely that all of the remainder is true, legends grow with time and retellings, it is easy to embellish for the sake of a good tale.

The folks here are applying the same reasoning to Jesus. However there is less corroborating evidence and super powers that conflict with what we know about the world around us.
 
babbits said:
Prove the resurrection. That's the challenge.

Over to you, Doc.
Click to expand...

That is a good one. Have we had a discussion on the Resurrection? It stands after all at the heart of Christianity's claims, and its a complex and fascinating issue. I'd certainly be up for it if Doc is busy. :)

cj x
 
cj.23 said:
That is a good one. Have we had a discussion on the Resurrection? It stands after all at the heart of Christianity's claims, and its a complex and fascinating issue. I'd certainly be up for it if Doc is busy. :)

cj x
Click to expand...
Don't let us stop you. We have had the discussion a few times with Doc, whose argument if I understand the nuances correctly is;

We know the resurrection happened exactly how it is described in the non conflicting bible accounts because it is written in the bible and a number of American presidents were Christian and the bible tells us that people of the time believed the story and we don't have a copy of Alexander the Great's original autobiography and the bible is true on so many mundane things so therefore it is true on the supernatural and Josephus mentioned Christians so therefore we know for 100% certainty that Jesus rose from the dead exactly as described in the bible. Oh did I mention that it is in the bible.

Feel free to add any evidence of your own.
 
Last edited:
cj.23 said:
That is a good one. Have we had a discussion on the Resurrection? It stands after all at the heart of Christianity's claims, and its a complex and fascinating issue. I'd certainly be up for it if Doc is busy. :)

cj x
Click to expand...
I look forward to it but would really suggest you start a new thread. This thread is long dead and is nothing more than fertilizer for DOC scorn. No amount of intelligent debate will ever resurrected this thread.
 
Lothian said:
Don't let us stop you. We have had the discussion a few times with Doc, whose argument if I understand the nuances correctly is;

We know the resurrection happened exactly how it is described in the non conflicting bible accounts because it is written in the bible and a number of American presidents were Christian and the bible tells us that people of the time believed the story and we don't have a copy of Alexander the Great's original autobiography and the bible is true on so many mundane things so therefore it is true on the supernatural and Josephus mentioned Christians so therefore we know for 100% certainty that Jesus rose from the dead exactly as described in the bible. Oh did I mention that it is in the bible.

Feel free to add any evidence of your own.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that Jefferson, who didn't believe the supernatural parts of the bible, thought Jesus was a good teacher of morals, therefore the supernatural parts of the bible must be true.
 
paximperium said:
I look forward to it but would really suggest you start a new thread. This thread is long dead and is nothing more than fertilizer for DOC scorn. No amount of intelligent debate will ever resurrected this thread.
Click to expand...


We did alright with the less-intelligent parts for a while though.

I'd favour a new thread too, and wouldn't mind some serious discussion about the real history of what we might call 'biblical times'. I'll even behave myself.

cj???
 
cj.23 said:
Um, did Randi ever pull that nonsense video on Nazareth not existing? It was embarrassing. :(

cj x
Click to expand...

It did exist. But it was far from the city it was claimed to be in the gospels.
A graveyard and perhaps a half dozen houses at best is all it was in the beginning of the first century.
Randi gives a good example of how myths got started.
 
DOC said:
Not really because skeptics are complaining that the NT writers can't be believed because they wrote decades after Christ's death.
Click to expand...

You could try harder to misrepresent the actual argument but I'm not sure how you could pull it off. The argument about the NT writers putting pen to parchment decades after the events in question is that they could not have remembered the exact words that everyone spoke and that this fact significantly lessens the extremely remote chance that any of the gospel writers were eye-witnesses of the events they related (there are many arguments that nail down this issue). I don't know of anyone who argues that history cannot be written years after the fact.

But no one argues that Thucydides recreations of speeches in his work were word for word correct regarding what was actually said as the war unfolded; and we know that he was a contemporary and even an actor in the Peloponnesian War. We do not know this for the gospel writers; yet, some Christians argue that what we have received are the actual words of Yeshua.

All ancient histories are subject to intense interpretation.

I have shown that almost all of our info about Alexander the Great (who did very extraordinary things) comes from historians who lived over 400 years after his death.

This shows us that 400 year old historical evidence can be very important in our educational system. And thus this fact decreases the value of the skeptics argument that the writings about Christ were decades after his life. And if we have decreased the value of the skeptic argument against the truthfulness of the NT it is only common sense that we have helped the argument for its truthfulness.
Click to expand...

Even older than 400 year old historical evidence is important to our educational system, so what is your point? None of this makes the events recorded in the gospels any less suspect. We do not question the content solely based on the fact that the gospels were written decades afterward; again, that is evidence that eye-witnesses did not write this info (amongst all the other arguments against eye-witness testimony).

Your entire approach has been a collosal waste of time, I'm afraid.
 
cj.23 said:
That is a good one. Have we had a discussion on the Resurrection? It stands after all at the heart of Christianity's claims, and its a complex and fascinating issue. I'd certainly be up for it if Doc is busy. :)

cj x
Click to expand...


Yes please do start a new thread. That would be a great topic, and it is always a pleasure discussing things with you.
 
Herump, herump, tap, tap, is this thing on, excuse me but why would an apostle of the son of god, writing one of the books inspired if not down right written (if you’re a Pentecostal) by god, need to copy anything!!!!!!!!!!?????????????

Doc, the word for your argument is FAIL!!
 
 
Last edited:
 
 
 
 
Apparently you don’t hold the writers of the bible to a high standard DOC. This is a book that a so-called all powerful, all knowing god has inspired and one would think with that behind the book there would not be so many loopholes and inconstancies in it. Also it wouldn't need people to defend it all the time.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Last edited:
Inspired by a god who had no idea his creation was not a flat Earth and no idea about stars, for he created the Earth before the sun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom