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

[zooterkin]

Unless you happened to own pigs

(Might have guessed you'd be one to mention pigs )

Just curious, but I guess this means that there were more than just Jews living in the area then, as presumably Jews would not have been keeping pigs.

 

[Paulhoff]

Did Sagan own stock in the word Bamboozle?

No, and he didn't own stock in the word "Billion" either.

Paul

 

[Simon39759]

(Might have guessed you'd be one to mention pigs )

Just curious, but I guess this means that there were more than just Jews living in the area then, as presumably Jews would not have been keeping pigs.

Short answer: yes.

Long answer, there were cities in where the population was prominently Greeks, or Greek influenced including the city Gerasa which the early versions of the Gospels refer to, so, in this instance, the Gospel accounts are consistent with known facts.

The location was later changed, apparently under the impetus of Origen, to "the region of the Gergasenes" or 'gadarenes'. We don't know the justification for this change, maybe to bring it in line with local legends...

 

[zooterkin]

Short answer: yes.

Long answer, there were cities in where the population was prominently Greeks, or Greek influenced including the city Gerasa which the early versions of the Gospels refer to, so, in this instance, the Gospel accounts are consistent with known facts.

The location was later changed, apparently under the impetus of Origen, to "the region of the Gergasenes" or 'gadarenes'. We don't know the justification for this change, maybe to bring it in line with local legends...

Thanks, Simon, though I think you've got that backwards, from what the link you give says:

Upon close observation of the earliest and best Greek manuscripts, the Alexandrian texts, the original reading of Matthew is “in the region of the Gadarenes,” and the original text of Mark and Luke is “in the country of the Gerasenes” This explanation however, does not account for the name Gergesa, which never appears in the earliest Greek manuscripts, and must have been a later addition, not in the original autographs. It is therefore necessary to find if there was a change made to the text, introducing Gergesa as the appropriate site of the miracle. The original textual alteration was made during the early third century by the Christian teacher Origen.

 

[Simon39759]

Thanks, Simon, though I think you've got that backwards, from what the link you give says:

That's quite possible, indeed. Thanks for correcting me.

 

[DOC]

...The whole tale is myth. It never happened. The Jesus of history is just a myth...

Then who created the most moral and sublime teachings ever preached to man (at least according to Thomas Jefferson) -- lying fisherman?

 

[DOC]

I am fairly certain there is something about people getting physically hurt reported* in at least one of the non-canonical Gospels. If I am not mistaken it is the Infancy Gospel of Thomas.

Ohhh ... good old Wikipedia to the rescue:

In another episode, a child disperses water that Jesus has collected, Jesus then curses him, which causes the child's body to wither into a corpse, found in the Greek text A, and Latin versions. The Greek text B doesn't mention Jesus cursing the boy, and simply says that the child "went on, and after a little he fell and gave up the ghost," (M.R. James translation). Another child dies when Jesus curses him when he apparently accidentally bumps into him. In the latter case, there are three differing versions recorded the Greek Text A, Greek Text B, and the Latin text. Instead of bumping into Jesus in A, B records that the child throws a stone at Jesus, while the last says the boy punched him.

When Joseph and Mary's neighbors complain, they are miraculously struck blind by Jesus.​

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infancy_Gospel_of_Thomas#Content

Of course, the actual Infancy Gospel can be easily found on the net as well.



* Ask yourself, would they die for a lie??????

In case anyone doesn't know what non-canonical means, it means the Gospel of Thomas is not in the bible.

 

[DOC]

Not half as funny as this thread - the unintentional humour here is quite stunning at times

Name two things in this thread that are funny and why specifically they are funny.

 

[Lothian]

Then who created the most moral and sublime teachings ever preached to man (at least according to Thomas Jefferson) -- lying fisherman?

We don’t know what exactly he was referring to. As you are aware, apart from the support of slavery, Jefferson found little in the bible credible.

But I sure many here are prepared to give your question a shot. You list the individual teachings and we will see if we can find out where they originated and who may have created them.

 

[DOC]

Carl Sagan

Quote:
You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe.

Carl Sagan never read post #11054 in this thread.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Name two things in this thread that are funny and why specifically they are funny.

Here's one:

Carl Sagan never read post #11054 in this thread.

 

[Lothian]

Carl Sagan never read post #11054 in this thread.

Given that post has convinced no one else why do you think it would have convinced Sagan?

 

[John Jones]

Name two things in this thread that are funny and why specifically they are funny.

Any post where you cite the number of posts you've made in this thread.

It's funny because the number of times you post isn't supporting evidence of anything you claim, and because it is surprising to see you implying that it is.

 

[Lothian]

Name two things in this thread that are funny and why specifically they are funny.

It is funny the way you keep rehashing old arguments that have been thoroughly debunked and demanding that people let your posts speak for themselves. It is funny because they do that, just not in the way you intended.

 

[Lothian]

Name two things in this thread that are funny and why specifically they are funny.

Any post where you cite the number of posts you've made in this thread.

It's funny because the number of times you post isn't supporting evidence of anything you claim, and because it is surprising to see you implying that it is.

For those not familar with Doc's habit of doing this I have found one or two examples

I have over 80 posts in this thread.

I don't have the time right now to go through my other 80+ posts.

And I asked you to list only 3 fallacious arguments in my 100 posts in this thread and which post they came from.

List one specific lie contained in my 163 posts and your proof that it is a lie.

But it is my belief God does give enough evidence (some of which I have pointed out in my 160+ posts) to rationally believe in Him,

Huh, haven't you read my 174 posts?

Would it be possible for me to post 200+ times in an evidence thread that has around 90 other posters without giving any evidence

And a lot of the evidence or reasons or whatever you want to call it that I've presented in my 200+ posts have been from the book posted in post #1.

You must have missed my last 215 posts.

And your comment about me not being well read in my faith is a joke that my 27 or so threads with thousands of posts will attest to.

Haven't you read my 259 posts..

I left over 400 posts in that thread.

Your welcome to read my 319 posts.

Your post might confuse someone who haven't read my 319 posts

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'll be happy if people read at least half of my 319 posts in here and they can judge for themselves.

I'll be happy if people with an open mind read at least half of my posts.

My 358 posts are out there for everyone to read and then they can make up their own mind.

Name one post out of my 395 posts in this thread where I lied. Of course you won't be able to.

there is also more evidence within my 400 posts.

Can living things without souls leave thousands of posts on the Randi website.

Sometimes I think you don't realize that my 650+ posts in this thread are out there for everyone to read.

And the evidence is the thousands of posts this soul puts forth the effort to leave.

Name one spambot that has left thousands of posts in the Randi threads?

Can physical living material post thousands of posts on a Randi site?

I've been on this site over 2 years and left over 2800 messages.

[And of course other information is brought out in my 460+ posts.

I believe it and in my 500 or so posts in this thread I given you some reasons why you should believe.

I've given my reasons based on facts in my 560 posts in this thread

My 500 posts in the following thread say otherwise:

My close to 3000 posts about Christianity have to have some substance behind them

Maybe 2 to 3 % at most of my 2900+ posts have to do with those topics

Is it really possible to make 634 posts in an evidence thread like I have in this thread without any evidence.

the good news for me is my #634 posts are out there to read.

And I guess my 650 posts are not enough for some people.

Sometimes I think you don't realize that my 650+ posts in this thread are out there for everyone to read.

Give one lie I have written in my 3000+ posts

If people read my 725 posts they will know mine.

I think I already said enough about Jefferson in my 500 posts in the "Thomas Jefferson's admiration and financial support of Christianity" thread.

Not even one of my 824 posts?

Which of my 844 posts in this thread have been shown to be wrong ?

Is it possible to leave 900 posts in an evidence thread without giving any evidence.

And you will find more in my 900+ posts in this thread.

If you read my 950+ posts in this thread you'll understand why .

my 1000+ posts in this thread are out there and they have little if anything to do with me.

Is it really possible to leave 1100 posts in a thread (like I have in this one) or to have threads like the following 74 page thread on Science if you don't read.

You've have the right to your opinion but my 1100 posts in this thread say otherwise.

Read my 1100 posts in this thread and you will find much evidence

And also my other 1100 posts.

My 1100 posts in this thread are out there

And my 1300 posts (several hundred with information) show that I have a different opinion than you.

Better yet read all 1200 of my posts

Maybe it might of made sense to ask such a question on page 5 or 6, but to ask it on page 199 of this thread is laughable to any unbiased person who has read all 1300 of my posts.

Thank you for your attempt to summarize my close to 1400 posts in 5 lines.

Another general opinion trying to discredit my 1400 posts in 2 sentences.

I've left well over 1400 posts.

If you read my 1400 posts maybe starting with post 7667 (pg. 192) you will find out.

Of course you won't be able to give one lie I've have supposedly made in over 4000 posts I've have made since I have been on the system.

And many of my 1500 posts answer your question about evidence.

Actually I'm dead serious about every one of my 4,414 posts.

And my other 1600 posts has more evidence for people to consider.

I couldn't have made 1600 posts without it.

Have you read my 1600 posts?

My 1600 posts are out there, people have the free will right to think of them as they choose.

My 1600 posts in this 10,000+ post thread are evidence of my honest debate.

The good news is that my close to 1700 posts are out there

So 1700 posts is not enough for you.

 

[Simon39759]

Carl Sagan never read post #11054 in this thread.

One would have to agree, considering he died about 13 years before the post was made.

It is, however, quite arrogant to assume that your poor little post would have made an impact on Sagan.
The man was quite a bit smarter than you or Hugh Ross will ever be (and, unlike Ross, he did put his PhD to some actual use) and he had a whole life to make up is mind...

 

[paximperium]

Wow. DOC can't convince anyone here and he is deluded enough to believe that his nonsense would have convinced Sagan. That is just sad.

 

[Waterman]

Carl Sagan never read post #11054 in this thread.

No he didn't but then he has been dead for a while. However I did read your post 11054 and found it unconvincing. I also responded to that post pointing out that that some of your augments did not in fact support the opening position. Others chimed in on the rest. At present you have not substantially addressed the issues raised by myself and others. I have attempted to engage you in a serious discussion but you won't rise to the challenge. Instead and waste you time on drive by postings that don't further the discussion or rehash old points that have been identified as flawed. Further more you have failed to acknowledge counter argument nor have you defended defend those points with anything but playground retorts.

Still patently waiting for the adult conversation to begin...

 

[Toke]

Wow. DOC can't convince anyone here and he is deluded enough to believe that his nonsense would have convinced Sagan. That is just sad.

I wonder why DOC does not save himself a lot of trouble and simply link to/quote from a major Christian website.

One would think that e.g. the Vatican or Church of England have spent some time looking for proof of the existence of god and the truth of the gospels, and then displays the results prominently.

 

[Hokulele]

Then who created the most moral and sublime teachings ever preached to man (at least according to Thomas Jefferson) -- lying fisherman?

Thomas Jefferson had read all of the teachings ever preached to man in order to make that judgement? All of them? Really?