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

[DOC]

You see DOC, this is why members here can't take you seriously. You know that author is a theist, and fundamentalist one at that. What do you expect such a one to write? Of course his only defense is to attack people like Ehrman.

Being a theist has nothing to do with it if you are presenting logical arguments. I've read some of

Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" (Paperback) by Timothy Paul Jones (Author)

He presents logical arguments in presenting his case. Read the book and then show me something he says that doesn't make sense.

 

[DC]

i dont know, somehow DOC is very convincing.

i think he is right.

 

[zooterkin]

I've already discussed this in this thread. There are several explanations. One could be simply the original Mark was used so much by early Christians that the last few pages were lost or damaged. Heck, I even have had books where the last few pages came off, and those books were made with modern equipment, not papyrus. That is just one of several explanations.

Ah, yes, the "the dog ate my homework" explanation.

But there were other gospels around, and many evangelists, and the oral tradition -- which I already presented evidence was more important than the written word at that time.

Again with that word 'evidence'. You presented a link to someone whose opinion was that the oral tradition was important. That doesn't make it more reliable than written evidence.

And most of the 11 of 12 apostles were dying martyr's deaths even before Mark was written.

Strange he didn't mention them, then.

Not everything in life is cut and dry.

cut and dried.

A lot of the problems are caused by skeptics trying to transport our modern industrial society and culture back to that ancient paperless society where the oral tradition was very important in passing information to the next generation.

What are you talking about? Skeptics building time machines? If anyone has shown a lack of understanding about how society worked around the first century, it's been you.

 

[zooterkin]

i dont know, somehow DOC is very convincing.

i think he is right.

Hah, April Fool yourself, it's after midday where both you and I are.

 

[zooterkin]

Being a theist has nothing to do with it if you are presenting logical arguments.

I think you should limit yourself to talking about things which you have experience of.

 

[DC]

Hah, April Fool yourself, it's after midday where both you and I are.

Burn in hell, come back once you can disprove God !

 

[Darat]

I've been catching up on this thread and I don't think any reasonable person could now claim that DOC hasn't provided quite incontrovertible evidence that the authors of the New Testament "told the truth" (especially the references from the Jewish scholar Pilar Lofo). Might as well close this thread?

Posted By: Darat

 

[amb]

He will only start a fresh one. Once again showing why the N/T writers told the truth with not so much as a shred of real to goodness evidence.

 

[zooterkin]

He will only start a fresh one. Once again showing why the N/T writers told the truth with not so much as a shred of real to goodness evidence.

Why would he need to, when, as Darat says, he's proved his case?

 

[Cactus Wren]

Yea, yea. Dream on!

Honest! I'll go in tomorrow if I can, and if it's still there I'll take a picture.

 

[Waterman]

Being a theist has nothing to do with it if you are presenting logical arguments. I've read some of

Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" (Paperback) by Timothy Paul Jones (Author)

He presents logical arguments in presenting his case. Read the book and then show me something he says that doesn't make sense.

Excellent, we need something new, would you please sum up this logical arguement that he presents? I hope that you will take the exposure to logic and logical fallacies to heart when framing your post.

 

[Damien Evans]

I've been catching up on this thread and I don't think any reasonable person could now claim that DOC hasn't provided quite incontrovertible evidence that the authors of the New Testament "told the truth" (especially the references from the Jewish scholar Pilar Lofo). Might as well close this thread?

Posted By: Darat

 

[Lothian]

Being a theist has nothing to do with it if you are presenting logical arguments. I've read some of

Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" (Paperback) by Timothy Paul Jones (Author)

He presents logical arguments in presenting his case. Read the book and then show me something he says that doesn't make sense.

If you have read it you can tell us which particular logical argument you found most convincing.

 

[kmortis]

I've been catching up on this thread and I don't think any reasonable person could now claim that DOC hasn't provided quite incontrovertible evidence that the authors of the New Testament "told the truth" (especially the references from the Jewish scholar Pilar Lofo). Might as well close this thread?

Posted By: Darat

Seriously? This is the best you can do, Darat? Oh, how the mighty have fallen. At one time, your April Fool's japes were the envy of joksters everywhere...well, ok, they could bring a smile to the most humorless those of us who can take a joke were watching Monty Python and already laughing. At least they weren't this transparent.

<sigh> you really should leave the comedy to us professionals, you could pull a muscle or something.

 

[Lothian]

I've already discussed this in this thread. There are several explanations. One could be simply the original Mark was used so much by early Christians that the last few pages were lost or damaged. Heck, I even have had books where the last few pages came off, and those books were made with modern equipment, not papyrus. That is just one of several explanations. But there were other gospels around, and many evangelists, and the oral tradition -- which I already presented evidence was more important than the written word at that time.

And most of the 11 of 12 apostles were dying martyr's deaths even before Mark was written. Not everything in life is cut and dry. A lot of the problems are caused by skeptics trying to transport our modern industrial society and culture back to that ancient paperless society where the oral tradition was very important in passing information to the next generation.

Doc there are not several explanations as to Moss's question which was "Which ending of Mark do you think is the original and Why?"

 

[kmortis]

Being a theist has nothing to do with it if you are presenting logical arguments. I've read some of

Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" (Paperback) by Timothy Paul Jones (Author)

He presents logical arguments in presenting his case. Read the book and then show me something he says that doesn't make sense.

You are absolutly correct. If he was presenting logical arguments then his status as a theist wouldn't enter in to it. However, he only presents his theological beliefs as counter-arguments to Erhman's scholarly research.

Bart Erhman: There are numerous errors either by accident or intentional, in the Biblical text. Here's why I say this....
T.P. Jones: No, G_d said that He was presenting us with the whole Truth!
Other Biblical scholar: Yes Bart, but did you consider this interpretation of the data?

If you cannot see the difference between those paraphrasing statments, then you really should re-think your tenure here.

 

[RoboTimbo]

I've been catching up on this thread and I don't think any reasonable person could now claim that DOC hasn't provided quite incontrovertible evidence that the authors of the New Testament "told the truth" (especially the references from the Jewish scholar Pilar Lofo). Might as well close this thread?

Posted By: Darat

Not before I admit that DOC's evidence has swayed me into becoming a Christian (again)!

 

[catsmate]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/Meerkat_in_SF_zoo_f.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Suricata.jpg
Can you really feel insulted when you are compared to that?

What about the meerkats? How do the poor creatures react to the comparison? This could be an insult to the whole brave Orlov family and all those who fought in the Meerkat-Mongoose war of 1728. Not to mention the survivors of the furry terror of 1921.......
(http://www.comparethemeerkat.com/meet-team)

 

[dafydd]

Burn in hell, come back once you can disprove God !

It's up you to prove him,if we have to disprove the existence of Zeus,Krishna.Vishnu,Odin,Amon-Ra,etc.(list cropped due to lack of space) then we would have time for little else.

 

[paximperium]

I've already discussed this in this thread. There are several explanations. One could be simply the original Mark was used so much by early Christians that the last few pages were lost or damaged. Heck, I even have had books where the last few pages came off, and those books were made with modern equipment, not papyrus. That is just one of several explanations. But there were other gospels around, and many evangelists, and the oral tradition -- which I already presented evidence was more important than the written word at that time.

And most of the 11 of 12 apostles were dying martyr's deaths even before Mark was written. Not everything in life is cut and dry. A lot of the problems are caused by skeptics trying to transport our modern industrial society and culture back to that ancient paperless society where the oral tradition was very important in passing information to the next generation.

For an April Fool's joke, your joke post is not very funny or even that original. You've used that joke before.