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

[Akhenaten]

SInce DOC came back, does that mean we have to stop writing "poetry"?

Stop?

Joobz you're hopeless.

Hope springs eternal in the human breast;
Man never Is, but always To be blest:
The soul, uneasy and confin'd from home,
Rests and expatiates in a life to come.

- Alexander Pope​

 

[Akhenaten]

Another no information, attack the messenger post.

I know when I hit something important when I get this response.

Ok. Let us see historical evidence that Christ rose from the dead as described in the N.T.

What? You haven't been able to gleen that from any of DOC master opii? Does he have to re-write all eleventy million posts in this forums? You're just unreasonable.

Not a million just 70 times 7....

How many posts has DOC written about heaven?
Kmortis thinks it's a million times eleven
jooba says "Oh, no way
in that you're wrong to say,
It's really seventy times seven."

Been here for a while, haven't we?

 

[Lucian]

DOC, you've convinced me. The God of elevator's is true and powerful. The shear number of people who ride elevators daily under the faith the the elevator god protects them is proof. The god of the bible is nothing but a weak figment in comparison.

I'm converted!

The LIFT is my raiser, I shall not walk
He maketh me to work in beige offices
He leadeth me to still lobbies.
Yea, though I walk through the center of the hallway of death,
I will fear no stairway, for thou art around me.
Thy door and thy buttons, they comfort me.
Thou transportest me to the presence of my employers.
Thou annointest my ears with Muzak; my bile runneth over.
Surely "Ipanema" and “Misty” shall follow me all the days of my life.
And I will dwell in the house of the LIFT for seven floors.

 

[Akhenaten]

From the Great Hymn to the Aten:

25. and they LIFT up to thee their hands with hymns of praise because thou hast risen.

Behold, the mighty LIFT, which each day raises the Aten to His rightful place.

Follow the LIFT!

 

[amb]

It's a conspiracy. The poets are out to get me!

 

[Akhenaten]

amb verses 'the rest'.

Bummer.

 

[Waterman]

From DOC’s post above

And post 11054 is not Zero evidence in spite of yours, Joobz' and Hok's opinion. I think it hurts the credibility of some skeptics to say post 11054 is Zero evidence. I might understand you saying, well it is some evidence, but it is not enough for me to believe. But to say it is zero evidence shows me some skeptics have a bias in spite of the facts, and are afraid to admit any evidence at all.

Hello DOC, I haven’t posted in a while because you haven’t actually addressed any of my responses to your posts. Between myself, Simon, Hok and others, people have provided counter arguments and explanations for why your post 11054 does not actually qualify as evidence of the point made in the OP, even if some of it is actually true.

See my post #11152

You have yet to provide a cogent or rational counter to the positions posted by other and mainly regurgitating the same claims without modification. However I have to thank you DOC it is your dogged persistence in avoiding actually learning anything that drew me into this discussion and to be a participant instead of a lurker.

 

[Elizabeth I]

LIAR!!!

You know perfectly well (or should, it has been explained to you enough times and you've included it in enough of yours posts) that Ramsay made it very clear that the statement did not apply to supernatural, miraculous, or otherwise fantastical events.

Do you seriously expect us to buy this rubbish, DOC?

Permit me to show you why we laugh at it:

And as I have said, it doesn't even make sense for Islam to be in existence to the extant it is without the Buraq being true (since the Night Journey is one of the main focal points of Islam). So the historical fact that it is in existence to the extant it is, is some historical evidence for the truth of the Buraq.

And as I have said, it doesn't even make sense for Judaism to be in existence to the extant it is without the Noachian Flood being true (since the Flood is one of the main focal points of Judaism). So the historical fact that it is in existence to the extant it is, is some historical evidence for the truth of the Flood.

And as I have said, it doesn't even make sense for Hinduism to be in existence to the extant it is without the Devas being true (since the Devas are one of the most important beliefs of Hinduism). So the historical fact that it is in existence to the extant it is, is some historical evidence for the truth of the Devas.

And as I have said, it doesn't even make sense for Sikhism to be in existence to the extant it is without reincarnation being true (since reincarnation is part of the most fundamental tenet of Hinduism). So the historical fact that it is in existence to the extant it is, is some historical evidence for the truth of the reincarnation.​

Shall I go on, or do you get the picture?

I'm pretty sure I said something very similar to this a few pages back...

Ooh, ooh, ooooh, let me!

[doc]But a thousand hundred kajillion quidnuncnillion Moslems, Buddhists, Sikhs, and Jews haven't been turned away from drugs, quoits and sodomy by their religion like Christianity has done.[/doc]

 

[Moss]

One could get the impression even the god of the New Testament is one hell of an abusive parent.
"I'm not telling you exactly what I want from you. If you don't manage to do it tough luck."

 

[Agatha]

I'm pretty sure I said something very similar to this a few pages back...

My apologies. Clearly it was so good it bore repeating!

I am baffled by DOC's insistence that if we concentrate on translations which use the word servant (or bondservant), this makes God's approval of the ownership, mutilation, beating, rape and even murder of another human being somehow more acceptable than if we look at translations which use the word slave.

 

[dafydd]

My apologies. Clearly it was so good it bore repeating!

I am baffled by DOC's insistence that if we concentrate on translations which use the word servant (or bondservant), this makes God's approval of the ownership, mutilation, beating, rape and even murder of another human being somehow more acceptable than if we look at translations which use the word slave.

Would Doc be happy with ''chattels''?

 

[Toke]

I really don't get this, my last conversation with a priest, in the family over dinner, was about how theology was a very active field.

I take it all was about how to get the bible to fit modern concepts of what is moral. She did not try to argue the morality of slavery or genocide.
(well, and I did not press her)

 

[DOC]

...No, it's not, a matter of opinion.
You can make a list of statements contained in a prophecy and count how many are specific and how many applies to the event you are attempting to fit. You can also tally up how many statements are in direct contradiction with the events that are so-called "prophesied", even a single contradiction should, normally, sink the claim at the text being prophetic...

Then your opinion should kill the idea that Isaiah chapter 53 (that helped convert Jewish lawyer Jay Secular) referred to the nation of Israel and was not a prophecy of Jesus because the chapter says this:

From Gateway -- Isaiah 53 (KJV)

1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

12Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+53&version=KJV


The book cited in post #1 talks of this issue. From memory it says something similar to the paragraph below.

The part bolded above - (he had done no violence) - could not be the nation of Israel, because the nation of the Jews was constantly at war, some of which they started. Also the Old Testament prophets were constantly saying how sinful the nation had become so the statement above that (deceit was not his mouth) would not apply to the nation. Also the statement he made (intercession for the transgressors) would not apply to Israel.

 

[laca]

Then your opinion should kill the idea that Isaiah chapter 53 (that helped convert Jewish lawyer Jay Secular) referred to the nation of Israel and was not a prophecy of Jesus because the chapter says this:

From Gateway -- Isaiah 53 (KJV)

1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

12Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+53&version=KJV


The book cited in post #1 talks of this issue. From memory it says something similar to the paragraph below.

The part bolded above - (he had done no violence) - could not be the nation of Israel, because the nation of the Jews was constantly at war, some of which they started. Also the Old Testament prophets were constantly saying how sinful the nation had become so the statement above that deceit was not his mouth would not apply to the nation. Also the statement he made "intercession for the transgressors" would not apply to Israel.

Yes, exactly. What's your point? That just because some guy got converted because of a bible passage, it must be true? That's a lame argument, even from you.

 

[DOC]

Yes, exactly. What's your point? That just because some guy got converted because of a bible passage, it must be true? That's a lame argument, even from you.

That wasn't my main point in the post, that was just something I mentioned. The main point of the post shows how Isaiah 53 does not refer to the nation of Israel.

 

[amb]

''Who wishes that there was a permanent, unalterable celestial despotism that subjected us to continual surveillance and could convict us of though-crime, and who regarded us as its private property even after we died? How happy we ouhgt to be, at the reflection that there exists not a shred of respectable evidence to support such a horrible hypothesis.''

-Christopher Hitchens-

 

[Akhenaten]

That wasn't my main point in the post, that was just
something I mentioned.

Just another red herring then, DOC? Imagine that.

The main point of the post shows how Isaiah 53 does not refer to the nation of Israel.

So bloody what?

 

[zooterkin]

T
9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

....

The part bolded above - (he had done no violence) - could not be the nation of Israel, because the nation of the Jews was constantly at war, some of which they started.

I also don't think it could apply to someone who did this:

14 In the temple courts he found men selling cattle, sheep and doves, and others sitting at tables exchanging money. 15 So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables.

John 2:14-15

Or, since you seem to have a preference for the KJV

14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:

15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;

 

[Lothian]

Doc,

I will say this again because it is true. A successful prophesy is simply an indication that the prophesier was good as prophesying. It tells us nothing about the subject of the prophesy which needs to be proven by other means.

If you want to claim your verse fits Jesus you would have to prove that it fits him. However doing so conveys nothing special on Jesus.

Imagine that I claim that one day the human manifestation of Zeus will have coffee in starbucks. Zooterkin is drinking coffee in Starbucks and claims to be the son of Zeus. When asked to prove it. Can he simply sip his cappuccino and point to my prophesy?


You need to show evidence that this prophesy fits Jesus.

To start you will have to bring evidence that he was a fugly minger. (2&3)

However I presume it is line 12 which gives you wet dreams. Remember the simple making of a prophesy does not make it true.

Show us evidence that God divided him a portion with the great, and Jesus divided the spoil with the strong; because Jesus poured out his soul unto death: and Jesus was numbered with the transgressors; and Jesus bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

If you can do that I will accept that Isaiah made an accurate prediction. I will not however accept the resurrection.

 

[DOC]

I also don't think it could apply to someone who did this:


John 2:14-15

Or, since you seem to have a preference for the KJV

Righteous anger, yes, but from the verses you mentioned we know of no one who got physically hurt from Christ's actions. Looks like he made a point that the money changers would always remember without being physically hurt.