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

Status
Not open for further replies.
DOC said:
Well, when I wrote the 1st post it was a spur of the moment thing. If I would have known this thread was going to become what it has I would have spent much more time on it. And remember I was trying to condense a 22 page chapter into 1 post. Geisler gives much more detail than I did concerning the 5 reasons I mentioned in the 1st post.
Click to expand...
Please feel free to read the 22 pages again and exlain how Geisler's number one reason "The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves" proves anything other than the fact that the version of the stories put together many generations after the events follow the traditional story format of having people won over to the side of rightousness. I would be particually interested in how this provides proof that jesus was resurected.
 
wollery said:
Try reading the link.

The word evolved from the ancient Latin universus, through the middle Latin universitatem (universitas in the nominative case), through Old French universitei, to modern French université, to modern English university. The etymolygy is clear, unambiguous, and well understood.

Turek was wrong, and Geisler was wrong not to check. It's Geisler's name on the book, it's his responsibility to see that it's factually correct.
Click to expand...

I disagree, nowhere does it divide the word up, not once. You can't show me where it says uni + (versus or diversity). There is no proof he was wrong.
 
DOC said:
I disagree, nowhere does it divide the word up, not once. You can't show me where it says uni + (versus or diversity). There is no proof he was wrong
Click to expand...
Exactly. The only place you can find anyone claiming that it was formed that way is by Geisler. There is no evidence to support it .

BTW. The fact that Geisler presents this claim like the other claims in the book is not evidence. c.v. Geislers inane reason no 9, in the OP.
 
Lothian said:
Please feel free to read the 22 pages again and exlain how Geisler's number one reason "The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves" proves anything other than the fact that the version of the stories put together many generations after the events follow the traditional story format of having people won over to the side of rightousness. I would be particually interested in how this provides proof that jesus was resurected.
Click to expand...

The first reason is not claiming to provide proof that jesus was resurected. It is only claiming that it leads to the likelihood the NT writers were telling the truth to write embarrassing things about themselves when they didn't have to.
 
DOC said:
I disagree, nowhere does it divide the word up, not once. You can't show me where it says uni + (versus or diversity). There is no proof he was wrong.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=university
university
c.1300, "institution of higher learning," also "body of persons constituting a university," from Anglo-Fr. université, O.Fr. universitei (13c.), from M.L. universitatem (nom. universitas), in L.L. "corporation, society," from L., "the whole, aggregate," from universus "whole, entire" (see universe).
Click to expand...

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=universe

universe
1589, "the whole world, cosmos," from O.Fr. univers (12c.), from L. universum "the universe," noun use of neut. of adj. universus "all together," lit. "turned into one," from unus "one" (see one) + versus, pp. of vertere "to turn" (see versus).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Lothian said:
Exactly. The only place you can find anyone claiming that it was formed that way is by Geisler. There is no evidence to support it
Click to expand...
Well then joobz should have said there is no evidence to support it and not that it is wrong -- Not finding any evidence doesn't mean there isn't any.
 
DOC said:
The first reason is not claiming to provide proof that jesus was resurected. It is only claiming that it leads to the likelihood the NT writers were telling the truth to write embarrassing things about themselves when they didn't have to.
Click to expand...
If we are not looking at evidence rather likelihood; the fact that they writers included supernatural aspects makes it far less likely that they told the truth.
 
DOC said:
The first reason is not claiming to provide proof that jesus was resurected. It is only claiming that it leads to the likelihood the NT writers were telling the truth to write embarrassing things about themselves when they didn't have to.
Click to expand...

The apostles did not write the gospels.
 
universe
1589, "the whole world, cosmos," from O.Fr. univers (12c.), from L. universum "the universe," noun use of neut. of adj. universus "all together," lit. "turned into one," from unus "one" (see one) + versus, pp. of vertere "to turn" (see versus).
Click to expand...

Although not exactly what Turek said, it is similar. I interpret that as many being turned into one. From taking many diverse subjects you become one well rounded educated person.
 
dafydd said:
The apostles did not write the gospels.
Click to expand...
That's your opinion -- I've already given evidence that two (Matthew and John) did write their gospels.

And the other 2 (Mark and Luke) were companions of the apostles (Paul and Peter).
 
DOC said:
Although not exactly what Turek said, it is similar. I interpret that as many being turned into one. From taking many diverse subjects you become one well rounded educated person.
Click to expand...


That's a reach, to put it mildly.

Is there no limit you won't go to in order to avoid admitting your heroes erred?
 
DOC said:
That's your opinion -- I've already given evidence that two (Matthew and John) did write their gospels.

And the other 2 (Mark and Luke) were companions of the apostles (Paul and Peter).
Click to expand...
You are confusing giving evidence with claiming. Your claims have been rebutted countless times. The weight of evidence is massively against your claims and the vast majority of biblical scholars are against you.

You also have the problem that should you be right and Matthew and John did know which way round a pen was held and managed to write their own version of events there is no evidence that the versions we see today match the originals.
 
DOC said:
I disagree, nowhere does it divide the word up, not once. You can't show me where it says uni + (versus or diversity). There is no proof he was wrong.
Click to expand...
DOC, re read the chapter that makes the claim. Turek/GEisler clearly claim that the word university stems from the charter of what a university is supposed to be (Finding unity in diversity). AND THIS IS WRONG. There isn't any ambiguity about it.

Further, you completely ignore the point that "Versus' doesn't even mean diversity. SO even IF you were right, Turek would STILL be wrong.

And this point just illustrates clearly that Geisler has no problem publishing lies false information if it supports his world view.
 
DOC said:
Well then joobz should have said there is no evidence to support it and not that it is wrong -- Not finding any evidence doesn't mean there isn't any.
Click to expand...
He is wrong. totally and completely. There is no ambiguity. There is no evidence to support his argument and all EXISTING evidence CONTRADICTS it.


DOC, I know you hate to admit it, but you are wrong to support GEisler/Turek and I am right.
 
DOC said:
Although not exactly what Turek said, it is similar. I interpret that as many being turned into one. From taking many diverse subjects you become one well rounded educated person.
Click to expand...
And you interpret wrongly. Turek clearly used the point to criticize modern universities for not "living up to finding unity in diversity". HE even went so far as to call modern universities as pluraversities. But this is utter nonsense, because it makes no sense to call "universitas magistrorum et scholarium" "pluraversity magistrorum et scholarium"
 
DOC said:
That's your opinion -- I've already given evidence that two (Matthew and John) did write their gospels.

And the other 2 (Mark and Luke) were companions of the apostles (Paul and Peter).
Click to expand...

1.) You did not. Indeed, very clear evidence was given that naming the gospels as written by specific apostles didn't occur until 150 years after Jesus died.
2.) Being companions of apostles doesn't make them written by apostles. So your second point is evidence against the gospels being written by apostles..
 
Lothian said:
Geisler is a star.

Star: comes from a combination of 'Stupid' and 'Liar'
Click to expand...

:D


Although not exactly what Turek said, it is similar. I interpret that as many being turned into one. From taking many diverse subjects you become one well rounded educated person.
Click to expand...

Wow, is this what your religion teaches you? To be intellectually dishonest at every possible turn?

I know it's scary for you, but try this: Go into the bathroom. Lock the door behind you. Look into the mirror and whisper (you don't need to say it loudly), "I was wrong." Do this every day until you can say it in a normal conversational voice. Then come and post it here.

Truly, no one will point and laugh and ridicule you for admitting you were wrong. If you read carefully, you will see that all the grief you are getting is for not admitting your mistake. You might be amazed at the respect you would get from taking that one simple, small action.
 
Elizabeth I said:
I know it's scary for you, but try this: Go into the bathroom. Lock the door behind you. Look into the mirror and whisper (you don't need to say it loudly), "I was wrong." Do this every day until you can say it in a normal conversational voice. Then come and post it here.

Truly, no one will point and laugh and ridicule you for admitting you were wrong. If you read carefully, you will see that all the grief you are getting is for not admitting your mistake. You might be amazed at the respect you would get from taking that one simple, small action.
Click to expand...

Indeed. If you like, DOC, I'll give you an easy one to start with:

DOC said:
You can't show me where it says uni + (versus or diversity).
Click to expand...







I've been trying to communicate with DOC via pictures, since he seems to have trouble understanding words, but that didn't seem to work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom