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

[Lothian]

Huh -- the few that weren't facts were opinions.

Doc, If you ever want to move on from your 'no information posts' there are some points here awaiting your consideration.

Doc,

This thread is titled "Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth?"

Can you help me with one particular part? Son of God: Virgin birth. What evidence do we have that Mary was a virgin and the Holy spirit was the father of her son?

Seems to me this is a fundamental part of Christianity. If Jesus was just another preacher the whole thing is founded on a lie. There must be some fairly robust evidence somewhere.

The gospel writers obviously weren't there at the birth, so what evidence is there?

Note: I don't care about Stars, Sheppards, Kings, the census, Bethlehem, mangers etc. What evidence is there that his birth was unique in that a Virgin gave birth?

Indeed.

1) Miracles don't exist.
2) Words do.
3) Therefore, words can be more powerful than miracles.

How nice of you to NOT actually counter what I said.



Harry Potter has changed thousands of lives for the better, so what's your point ?



How is that evidence that the words are true ?



Considering that "western civilization" started under Zeus, I seriously doubt that.



I refuse to take such speculation as authoritative. We have no idea what would've happened in that case.

You made several factual statements about the contents of the bible and the literary style found therein (Reasons 1, 2, 3 & 9). However your arguments break down is that you start running off on OPINIONS about what these literary style and elements means. Those are unfounded opinion. Furthermore when the writing is good, exciting and draws the reader in it is evidence of truth when the writing is difficult and boring it is evidence of truth.

Reason 10 as presented has been pointed out time and again and faulty reasoning. Please identify the NON-OPINION based pieces of evidence that I have overlooked.



FACT the detail is included
OPINION it supports truth of Bible.
ERROR this is a reference to a literary style and if you actually read the discussion on the topic it only refers to the probability of truth regarding the embarrassing detail not the entirety of the story.
ERROR this only applies to the authors details about himself, as has been pointed out much of the bible is written by unknown authors after years of oral tradition and are only attributed to certain individuals at a later date. This in itself renders Reason #1 invalid.



FACT the detail is included
OPINION it supports the idea of the truth of Bible.
ERROR this an assessment of the content of the bible and discussing the literary style elements of story telling. The same can be said about Harry Potter, Bilbo Baggins, Hercules and other flawed heroes. It is not an indication of truth.



FACT the sayings are included
OPINION it supports the idea of the truth of Bible.
ERROR Christianity started as a sect of Judaism and comes from a demanding but relatively exclusive tradition. The early Christian teachings were modifying Judaic tradition to open the door to the family of god to non-Jews. It was not the creation of completely new religion, it was the same demanding god of the Jewish traditions but a little more tolerant (but not a lot). It would be more surprising if it DIDN”T include demanding sayings.

4-8 not included in post #1



FACT some of the story telling is boring
OPINION this is an indication of Truth.
ERROR this is a commentary on writing style only and cannot be used an evidence of anything other than a writing style and what that may or may not evoke in the reader.



FACT people do have strong cherished beliefs that they are willing to die for
OPINION this ‘adds weight’ to the belief being true.
ERROR this only is indicative the conviction of the believers (Suicide Bombers, David Koresh, Jim Jones, Heavens Gate) not of the factual truth of their belief.

The reasons listed in Post #1 are almost all fact, and this post has several non-opinionated pieces of evidence in it

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5702420#post5702420

You made several factual statements about the contents of the bible and the literary style found therein (Reasons 1, 2, 3 & 9). However your arguments break down is that you start running off on OPINIONS about what these literary style and elements means. Those are unfounded opinion. Furthermore when the writing is good, exciting and draws the reader in it is evidence of truth when the writing is difficult and boring it is evidence of truth.

Reason 10 as presented has been pointed out time and again and faulty reasoning. Please identify the NON-OPINION based pieces of evidence that I have overlooked.

Reason #1
The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves.
For example some passages portray the disciples as dim-witted, uncaring, and cowards.

FACT the detail is included
OPINION is that they are embarrassing.
OPINION it supports truth of Bible.
ERROR this is a reference to a literary style and if you actually read the discussion on the topic it only refers to the probability of truth regarding the embarrassing detail not the entirety of the story.
ERROR this only applies to the authors details about himself, as has been pointed out much of the bible is written by unknown authors after years of oral tradition and are only attributed to certain individuals at a later date. This in itself renders Reason #1 invalid.

Reason #2
The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings of Jesus.
For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.

FACT the detail is included
OPINION is that they are embarrassing and/or difficult.
OPINION it supports the idea of the truth of Bible.
ERROR this an assessment of the content of the bible and discussing the literary style elements of story telling. The same can be said about Harry Potter, Bilbo Baggins, Hercules and other flawed heroes. It is not an indication of truth.

Reason #3
The NT Writers Left in Very Demanding Sayings of Jesus.
For example: (Matthew 5:28) "I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart".
And (Matt. 5:44-45) "I tell you Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you...

FACT the sayings are included
OPINION is that they are demanding.
OPINION it supports the idea of the truth of Bible.
ERROR Christianity started as a sect of Judaism and comes from a demanding but relatively exclusive tradition. The early Christian teachings were modifying Judaic tradition to open the door to the family of god to non-Jews. It was not the creation of completely new religion, it was the same demanding god of the Jewish traditions but a little more tolerant (but not a lot). It would be more surprising if it DIDN”T include demanding sayings.

4-8 not included in post #1

Reason #9
The New Testament Writers Describe Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple, Unembellished Accounts.
If they made them up it would be likely that they would have used grandiose and extravagant images. The book says the gospels talk about the Resurrection in a matter of fact almost bland way.

FACT some of the story telling is boring
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION is that these miracles have historical basis.
OPINION this is an indication of Truth.
ERROR this is a commentary on writing style only and cannot be used an evidence of anything other than a writing style and what that may or may not evoke in the reader.

Reason #10
The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death

FACT people do have strong cherished beliefs that they are willing to die for
OPINION this ‘adds weight’ to the belief being true.
ERROR this only is indicative the conviction of the believers (Suicide Bombers, David Koresh, Jim Jones, Heavens Gate) not of the factual truth of their belief.

I hope you don't mind, Waterman, but I've added some thoughts to your excellent post.
My additions are in red.

To DOC. Here is where christianity originally started taking over most of Europe. Centuries after your hero was crucified if he ever existed at all.

http://atheism.about.com/od/christi...ristianity/Constantine-Great-Apostle.htm?nl=1

[/QUOTE]

 

[Akhenaten]

Huh -- the few that weren't facts were opinions.

None of them were evidence.

When will you be responding to Waterman, DOC?

 

[Akhenaten]

No, but they did kill thousands a year in human sacrifice:

<snip>

 

[kmortis]

None of them were evidence.

When will you be responding to Waterman, DOC?

Never. Now can we ignore DOC as he's taking valuable rehersal time away from what should be the Blockbuster hit of the Xmas 2011 market?

 

[Hokulele]

No, but they did kill thousands a year in human sacrifice:

Which, of course, completely justifies wiping them off the face of the earth as opposed to teaching them better manners like, you know, "love thy neighbor" and all that.

Ah well, we hadn't seen a tu quoque in a while.

 

[Moss]

says: Diversionary tactics suck.

 

[DOC]

You made several factual statements about the contents of the bible and the literary style found therein (Reasons 1, 2, 3 & 9). However your arguments break down is that you start running off on OPINIONS about what these literary style and elements means. Those are unfounded opinion. Furthermore when the writing is good, exciting and draws the reader in it is evidence of truth when the writing is difficult and boring it is evidence of truth.

Reason 10 as presented has been pointed out time and again and faulty reasoning. Please identify the NON-OPINION based pieces of evidence that I have overlooked.



FACT the detail is included
OPINION it supports truth of Bible.
ERROR this is a reference to a literary style and if you actually read the discussion on the topic it only refers to the probability of truth regarding the embarrassing detail not the entirety of the story.
ERROR this only applies to the authors details about himself, as has been pointed out much of the bible is written by unknown authors after years of oral tradition and are only attributed to certain individuals at a later date. This in itself renders Reason #1 invalid.



FACT the detail is included
OPINION it supports the idea of the truth of Bible.
ERROR this an assessment of the content of the bible and discussing the literary style elements of story telling. The same can be said about Harry Potter, Bilbo Baggins, Hercules and other flawed heroes. It is not an indication of truth.



FACT the sayings are included
OPINION it supports the idea of the truth of Bible.
ERROR Christianity started as a sect of Judaism and comes from a demanding but relatively exclusive tradition. The early Christian teachings were modifying Judaic tradition to open the door to the family of god to non-Jews. It was not the creation of completely new religion, it was the same demanding god of the Jewish traditions but a little more tolerant (but not a lot). It would be more surprising if it DIDN”T include demanding sayings.

4-8 not included in post #1



FACT some of the story telling is boring
OPINION this is an indication of Truth.
ERROR this is a commentary on writing style only and cannot be used an evidence of anything other than a writing style and what that may or may not evoke in the reader.



FACT people do have strong cherished beliefs that they are willing to die for
OPINION this ‘adds weight’ to the belief being true.
ERROR this only is indicative the conviction of the believers (Suicide Bombers, David Koresh, Jim Jones, Heavens Gate) not of the factual truth of their belief.

Actually my descriptions of Geisler's arguments in my post #1 were very short. He goes into greater detail in his 22 page chapter 11.

http://books.google.com/books?id=PC...6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Geisler 10 Reasons&f=false

People can read it and make up their own minds. If you live outside the US you won't be able to read the actual pages of the book on the above website, so you might try this website from one of the authors of the book:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643

 

[Lothian]

Actually my descriptions of Geisler's arguments in my post #1 were very short. He goes into greater detail in his 22 page chapter 11.

http://books.google.com/books?id=PC...6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Geisler 10 Reasons&f=false

People can read it and make up their own minds. If you live outside the US you won't be able to read the actual pages of the book on the above website, so you might try this website from one of the authors of the book:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643

Pathetic.

 

[Hokulele]

Actually my descriptions of Geisler's arguments in my post #1 were very short. He goes into greater detail in his 22 page chapter 11.

And, as was pointed out over a year ago, Geisler's greater detail is a load of poo.

Right. Since I now have a bit of time on my hands, let's take a look at one example of Geisler's oh-so-stellar reasoning. From DOC's OP:

Reason #10

The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death

Ladies and gentlemen, here is Geisler's reasoning to support why this is true and all of the Muslim/Heaven's Gate/kamikaze martyrs do not count.

What does martyrdom prove? Does it prove Islam is true too?

Not at all. There are some similarities, but there's one critical difference between the New Testament martyrs and those of today. One similarity shared by all martyrs is sincerity. Whether you're talking about Christians, Muslims, kamikaze pilots, or suicidal cult followers, everyone agrees that martyrs sincerely believe in their cause. But the critical difference is that the New Testament Christian martyrs had more than sincerity - they had evidence that the Resurrection was true. Why? Because the New Testament Christian martyrs were eyewitnesses of the Resurrected Christ. They knew the Resurrection was true and not a lie because they verified it with their own senses.

Let's see. What was that definition of circular reasoning again?

 

[Waterman]

Actually my descriptions of Geisler's arguments in my post #1 were very short. He goes into greater detail in his 22 page chapter 11.

http://books.google.com/books?id=PC...6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Geisler 10 Reasons&f=false

People can read it and make up their own minds. If you live outside the US you won't be able to read the actual pages of the book on the above website, so you might try this website from one of the authors of the book:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643

I did read the items at your link, and I did make up my own mind. His reasoning has holes so large that you could fly a dragon through them carrying a school bus in each claw.

Since you are unwilling (or unable) to defend Geisler arguments I see this as an indicator that you are not interested in debate, evidence, logic or finding truth. Your arguments are based on emotional postions and faith (by that I mean acceptance without evidence).

 

[joobz]

And, as was pointed out over a year ago, Geisler's greater detail is a load of poo.

Oh, give DOC a break. It's clear he's got a big Ol' Man Crush on Geisler.
But, can you blame him, though? You've seen the Size of the Man's Phallacy.

 

[X]

Oh, give DOC a break. It's clear he's got a big Ol' Man Crush on Geisler.
But, can you blame him, though? You've seen the Size of the Man's Phallacy.

I was going to nominate this for pith.

But Kmortis beat me to it.

 

[carlitos]

I believe that would be Carlitos, who's scheduled to appear as Geisler. Which means we need someone to play Carlitos.

Freddie Prinze Sr. please!

Every time you come back and ignore all the serious posts it says more about your total lack of integrity and trustworthiness than our jokes ever can.

Indeed.

And, as was pointed out over a year ago, Geisler's greater detail is a load of poo.

Indeed.

 

[Akhenaten]

Actually my descriptions of Geisler's arguments in my post #1 were very short. He goes into greater detail in his 22 page chapter 11.

And, as was pointed out over a year ago, Geisler's greater detail is a load of poo.

Right. Since I now have a bit of time on my hands, let's take a look at one example of Geisler's oh-so-stellar reasoning. From DOC's OP:

Reason #10

The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death

Ladies and gentlemen, here is Geisler's reasoning to support why this is true and all of the Muslim/Heaven's Gate/kamikaze martyrs do not count.

What does martyrdom prove? Does it prove Islam is true too?

Not at all. There are some similarities, but there's one critical difference between the New Testament martyrs and those of today. One similarity shared by all martyrs is sincerity. Whether you're talking about Christians, Muslims, kamikaze pilots, or suicidal cult followers, everyone agrees that martyrs sincerely believe in their cause. But the critical difference is that the New Testament Christian martyrs had more than sincerity - they had evidence that the Resurrection was true. Why? Because the New Testament Christian martyrs were eyewitnesses of the Resurrected Christ. They knew the Resurrection was true and not a lie because they verified it with their own senses.

Let's see. What was that definition of circular reasoning again?

 

[Akhenaten]

Actually my . . .

<snip>

. . . posts are a complete waste of space.


Back to rehearsals.

 

[tsig]

. . . posts are a complete waste of space.


Back to rehearsals.

There's no rehearsals for real life.

 

[catsmate]

Dibs on the role of Thomas Jefferson, although I am the wrong gender, ethnicity, and too short.

Close enough for a Syfy production...........

 

[DOC]

Ladies and gentlemen, here is Geisler's reasoning to support why this is true and all of the Muslim/Heaven's Gate/kamikaze martyrs do not count.

Originally Posted by Geisler's book from Ichneumonwasp's link
What does martyrdom prove? Does it prove Islam is true too?

Not at all. There are some similarities, but there's one critical difference between the New Testament martyrs and those of today. One similarity shared by all martyrs is sincerity. Whether you're talking about Christians, Muslims, kamikaze pilots, or suicidal cult followers, everyone agrees that martyrs sincerely believe in their cause. But the critical difference is that the New Testament Christian martyrs had more than sincerity - they had evidence that the Resurrection was true. Why? Because the New Testament Christian martyrs were eyewitnesses of the Resurrected Christ. They knew the Resurrection was true and not a lie because they verified it with their own senses.

Let's see. What was that definition of circular reasoning again?

You falsely imply that the quote was Geisler's total reasoning for the issue whereas he writes another 2 1/2 pages on the topic. And if you believe the NT writers told the truth as I have been giving evidence for throughout this thread (e.g. post 11054 and the links in post 12307) then what he said is perfectly accurate. The apostles were not being martyred because they had faith, they were dying because they had proof. This helps explain the very rapid growth of Christianity "by peaceful means" (as opposed to by military means in Islam) in the very dangerous Roman empire where preaching Christianity could get you killed (not a real good selling point for your religion).

ETA

From the Article "Miracles" by Peter Kreeft

"If Jesus did not really rise from the dead, three questions are unanswerable: Who moved the stone? Who got the body? and Who started the Resurrection myth and why? What profit did the liars get out of their lie?

I will tell you what they got out of it. They got mocked, hated, sneered and jeered at, exiled, deprived of property and reputation and rights, imprisoned, whipped, tortured, clubbed to a pulp, beheaded, crucified, boiled in oil, sawed in pieces, fed to lions, and cut to ribbons by gladiators If the miracle of the Resurrection did not really happen, then an even more incredible miracle happened: twelve Jewish fishermen invented the world's biggest lie for no reason at all and died for it with joy, as did millions of others. This myth, this lie, this elaborate practical joke transformed lives, gave despairing souls a reason to live and selfish souls a reason to die, gave cynics joy and libertines conscience, put martyrs in the hymns and hymns in the martyrs — all for no reason. A fantastic con job, a myth, a joke."

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0021.html

 

[Moss]

So you just repeat his circular reasoning then DOC?
The NT writers told the truth because people martyred themselves because they had proof because the NT writers told the truth?
And Christianity certainly did not only expand by peaceful means. What would you call the Battle of the Milvian Bridge^WP, the massacre of Saxon pagan nobility by Charlemagne in Verden or the Crusades?

 

[joobz]

You falsely imply that the quote was Geisler's total reasoning for the issue whereas he writes another 2 1/2 pages on the topic.

If you believe his other 2.5 pages have something relevant, by all means present it.

And if you believe the NT writers told the truth as I have been giving evidence for throughout this thread (e.g. post 11054 and the links in post 12307) then what he said is perfectly accurate. The apostles were not being martyred because they had faith, they were dying because they had proof.

Perfectly accurate? This is the very definition of "circular reasoning".

This helps explain the very rapid growth of Christianity "by peaceful means" (as opposed to by the sword in Islam) in the very dangerous Roman empire where preaching Christianity could get you killed (not a real good selling point for your religion).

Did you mean to use sarcasm quotes?