1.)I do not know what dictionary you pulled that from, so I can't confirm you are evening reading that right.
2.)It isn't a non sequitor as it goes directly to your claim
I think that he referring to my referenced above:
1. The Bible is not all true
Just the parts I happen to agree with
2. It is true but not because the Bible says so, it just is.
Here is where we would need corroborating evidence outside the biblical texts of the events in question not just the existence of Christians or opinions of famous people.
3. It is the Bible (duh) it is the inspired word of God of course it is true
Then what is your beef with Lothian.
Edited to correct misspellings
You stated that Lothian made lied about view on the bible when he said "If it is in the bible it must be true".
Actually if you are going to split hairs this finely, DOC has now misquoted Lothian and should retract and apologize. The actually quote was “because…” not “if…” If you are going to be this picky about the precision of wording then you should be careful to apply the same level of scrutiny to your own writings.
However this whole side discussion is irrelevant to the point of the OP. You appear to have selected my reference below as most matching your position.
2. It is true but not because the Bible says so, it just is.
We need corroborating evidence outside the biblical texts of the events in question not just the existence of Christians or opinions of famous people.
If we do not have that outside corroborating evidence then you are back to position 3, which you imply is not what you believe. Here is where we have be trying to get you to provide that supporting information. You provided a lot of things in your oft referenced post 11054. Since they have been addressed at length in the past I will be brief.
5000 New Testament manuscripts:
1. this is irrelevant to whether or not the story is true.
2. how many of these actually date to within a few years of the life of Jesus
3. You also seem limit your comments to the 5000 NT references. But the NT is more than just the Jesus story, what percentage of the 5000 is actually dealing with that and not Revelations.
Sir William Mitchell Ramsay:
1. Opinion of a famous guys does not count as evidence
2. Besides he expressly exclude the magical stuff
40 written sources for the life of Christ (31 Christian + 9 non-Christian)
1. You have mixed referenced to Christians in this list as equivalent to Christ
2. There are suspected forgeries in this list
3. You have not cited any as actual witnesses of the events beyond the recording of a man crucified that fits the name (and a common one at that)
4. This is not evidence that the story is true
5. Do any of these non-Christian sources make any referenced to miracles?
Christianity had spread all the way to Rome by peaceful means and Nero blamed the Christians in Rome for the Roman fire in 64 ad.-- 31 years after the death of Christ.
1. Evidence of the existence of Christians is not evidence that all the NT is true.
2. Peaceful expansion has no bearing on the truth of the bible
Jews have been converted to Christianity because of Isaiah Chapter 53 and at least one writer has claimed there are 25 fulfilled prophesies in that one chapter.
1. Conversions are irrelevant to the truth, people change religions all the time.
2. Others have pointed out that the passages in Isaiah have been taken out of context and twisted to fit the fable or visa versa
Most archaeologists believe Jesus' 1st century tomb is most probably directly under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
1. No references cited suspect that this is a skewed sampling that is limited to at least Christian Archeologist if not an even smaller subset.
2. Irrelevant to the truth in the NT.
3. A unmarked tomb was ‘rediscovered’ 200-300 years after the resurrection and accurately attributed to Jesus having been there 3 nights. How did they determine this?
Thomas Arnold's statement
1. Opinion of a famous guy does not count as evidence.
2. Besides it is obviously hyperbole
The Moral Argument,
1. this is not evidence it is a philosophical argument
2. It is a bad one that fails on several points
The Cosmological Argument,
1. this is not evidence it is a philosophical argument
2. It is a bad one that fails on several points
Martyrs
1. Irrelevant, only evidence of conviction/belief
2. Special pleading, my martyrs count but yours don’t.
Simon Greenleaf
1. Opinion of a famous guy does not count as evidence.
2. Relies on Special Pleading and his argument can equally be applied to other religions
The Oral Torah is more important than written the Written Torah.
1. What? Why is this even here?
2. This undermines you point.
Dr. Hugh Ross claims
1. Opinion of a famous guy does not count as evidence.
DOC, We are still waiting for the evidence you have promised. We understand that the above arguments have allowed you to conclude that the bible is true. However when thoroughly examined under the harsh light of logic there are insubstantial as actual evidence of the resurrection.
If you want to reduce the level of harassment you are getting you are going to have to put fourth something new and a little more grounded in logic. Otherwise you are likely to continue to get more of the same.
