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

[Agatha]

Is there a reason why you are avoiding Waterman's posts regarding your citation of Greenleaf, DOC?

 

[joobz]

I nominate joobz as the part of Dulcinea, mostly due to the fact that DOC likes to slur his honor.

I feel dirty.


ETA: I'm going to have to wash off my honor now.

 

[zooterkin]

Can I play the windmill?

Sadly, it's closed, but you'd have had to stay very still, and might have got cold...

 

[zooterkin]

It is not intended as an insult against your post to call it an insult. Only that the post can be considered an insult.

Well, yes, I can see how my post could have been read as an insult, but I just wanted to clarify it wasn't intended as such.

For the sake of argument, I was being generous to DOC regarding post classification. Calling your post an insult doesn't change the point I was making, that DOC intentionally skipped over several substantive posts and made himself look foolish in the process.

Sure, standard MO.

 

[kmortis]

I can mint some medals.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=286&pictureid=1794
​

mmmmm...minty medals.

 

[Akhenaten]

mmmmm...minty medals.

I'll leave one on everybody's pillow.


'cept the apologist. They're lousy tippers.

 

[X]

I'll be the donkey...

Dapple gets stolen. I suspect it represents "logic". (Lisa did it)

As for me, I'll be Rozinante. The rather pathetic creature that is, in a certain someone's eyes, the finest steed around.

Sort of like the "evidence" we keep seeing.

 

[Waterman]

HEY! Stop that. You're the straight man, I'm the comedic relief. Says so right here in our contract....

"And the party of the first part", that's you, "shall cede all attempts, futile or otherwise, of humor to the party of the second part", that's me, "who will then suck on a per..." well, you ge the idea. I'm the humorist, you're the setup. Get it? Good.

So that is why I woke up the other day in a fog with that ink pen taped to my finger. I will do my best to honor that contract dubious though it may be.

 

[kmortis]

So that is why I woke up the other day in a fog with that ink pen taped to my finger. I will do my best to honor that contract dubious though it may be.

/me whistles innocently to himself.

 

[DOC]

Mine was the ninth prior to this one.

I did not insult you I again reminded you that I had rebutted your use of Greenleaf as supporting the OP. You have yet to respond to that. If you want people to engage you in discussion you have to participate in it as well instead of complaining about all the sniping.

I'll respond at my leisure, I do have a life and other activities outside of this system.

 

[DOC]

Oh, by the way, someone mentioned archaeology and the bible. For anyone interested, former skeptic Ralph Muncaster has 41 pages devoted to that subject (pages 237 - 278) in his 605 page book titled "Examine the Evidence". He talks of both New and Old Testament facts backed up by archaeology, and mentions many towns in the bible verified by archaeology and such thing as synagogues, inscriptions, etc.

 

[Akhenaten]

I'll respond at my leisure, I do have a life and other activities outside of this system.

In other words, you've been called out on something for about the tenth time and rather than admit that you have no kind of answer, you suddenly remember that you have something else to do.

Does it bother you that this does nothing but reinforce the perception of dishonesty that pervades all of your posts.

By the way, DOC, what the hell is this 'system' that you mention from time to time?

<vague, non sequitur drivel>

Is this pathetic nonsense the best you can do?

Why don't you just quit now before you embarrass yourself even further?

 

[amb]

Oh, by the way, someone mentioned archaeology and the bible. For anyone interested, former skeptic Ralph Muncaster has 41 pages devoted to that subject (pages 237 - 278) in his 605 page book titled "Examine the Evidence". He talks of both New and Old Testament facts backed up by archaeology, and mentions many towns in the bible verified by archaeology and such thing as synagogues, inscriptions, etc.

To counter that, I have in front of me this.......The Bible Unearthed by Israel Finkelstein who is a director of the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archeology at Tel Aviv University, and Neil Asher Silberman director of historical interpretation for Ename Center for public Archeology and Heritage Presentation in Beligium and is a contributing editor to Archeology magazine.
And they say that practically the whole O/T is built on legends and myths.
There is no evidence for the Exodus for example, or for the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites. The O/T reflects the world of later authors rather than actual historical facts.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I'll be the donkey...

Sorry, taken already

<-------

 

[Waterman]

I'll respond at my leisure, I do have a life and other activities outside of this system.

As do I, which is why I take care to try to make most of my posts on point and try to avoid diversions from the topic at hand. <Don Quixoti diversion aside> I merely raised the point because your words and your actions did not seem to be in agreement.

 

[joobz]

Evidence

SpeaKing of evidence, did you plan presenting any?
Let me show you,
Evidence that jesus was immoral. He condoned the beating of slaves. As described in matthew 19.

 

[DOC]

In other words, you've been called out on something for about the tenth time and rather than admit that you have no kind of answer, you suddenly remember that you have something else to do.

Actually I haven't even read Waterman's post yet, I'll try when I get the time.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Actually I haven't even read Waterman's post yet, I'll try when I get the time.

Well, this explains a lot.

 

[Waterman]

Oh, by the way, someone mentioned archaeology and the bible. For anyone interested, former skeptic Ralph Muncaster has 41 pages devoted to that subject (pages 237 - 278) in his 605 page book titled "Examine the Evidence". He talks of both New and Old Testament facts backed up by archaeology, and mentions many towns in the bible verified by archaeology and such thing as synagogues, inscriptions, etc.

I think that might have been you, but I may be wrong. I will repeat myself, no claims that the bible gets nothing right. The authors of the bible were generally familiar with the geography, weather and political climate of the region as well as the local lore and legends. That does not mean that the authors weren’t recording oral traditions, legends or myth that were set in their own surroundings.

I am sure that a lot of Greek and Roman stories also include references to places that actually existed and can be found archeologically (wow that is really a word according to the spell checker). However that is not considered by me to be evidence that those myths accurately represent reality.

And yet again , you have only presented the opinion of another authority without providing any evidence. This is argument from authority and is a logical fallacy.

What evidence did he consider.

What was his reasoning to arrive at his conclusion.

I hope the things that he considered were better than Geisler’s list of facts in reference to Luke or John. The ones that I was able to see on the internet were pretty lame and primarily indicated that the author was familiar with the local geography, weather and political climate of the region.

 

[joobz]

Actually I haven't even read Waterman's post yet, I'll try when I get the time.

So,when you said:

What a waste of time the last 15 or so posts were.

you lied?

Interesting...

Of course, multiple people informed you of the posts worth reading, but you choose not to. Instead, you waste your valuable time by posting nonsense.