Historian Shelby Foote, who was on the PBS acclaimed series "The Civil War" wrote a 3 volume history book on the Civil War. Do you think he was a witness of the Civil War or knew any witnesses. But he did have one advantage. They had paper and printing presses during the Civil War but they didn't have that during biblical times. We don't even have an existing signature of Julius Caesar.
It has been pointed out to you multiple times that the bureaucracy of the Roman Empire was among the most compulsive record-keeping regimes in the history of the world. While there may be no signatures from Julius Caesar, there are plenty of other records from his reign. So stop with the "we don't have any records from Julius Caesar" crap.
I don't believe anyone ever answered my point as to whether they would rather receive 10 lashes or spend several years in jail.
Personally I rather receive 10 lashes and be sore for a few days, kind of like a sunburn.
Probably because it's got absolutely nothing to do with evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.
Are you hoping that you can derail this thread enough that it will just go away?
Why have you become so fixated on this one tiny and irrelevant point when you've got the whole of the NT to deal with? Is this really the best you've got?
It's pathetic.
O Pharaoh, while what you say is true, I would like to point out that, as with so many things, our OP seems to have no clue as to what is involved in a lashing. I venture to guess that beating with a whip, even only ten strokes, would leave one considerably worse off than "sore kind of like a sunburn." For one thing, whips generally break the skin.
doc, would you like to give me a whip and let me take ten lashes at you and see whether you would rather have that than a sunburn? And that's a
question intended to see if you can think at all, not a threat.
That would be true if God didn't give people free will and they were programmed robots. But since he did give them free will, it would be impossible for Him to know before hand because that would violate the Law of Non-Contradiction and thus be an absurdity. And even if he had the ability to know beforehand he could always choose not to know in this instance.
So your God is not omniscient? Because if He is, He knows everything, even before it happens and there is no such thing as free will, only your illusion of it. If He has to wait until something happens before he knows it, then He's no better than any person on the street, even you. Well, maybe He would be better than you because sometimes you don't seem to know even after something happens.
You should have also highlighted the words "And even if". This implies he can't do it now because it would be an absurdity. But I'm implying that if for some unforseen and implausible way he could then he could always choose not to.
This is not even coherent. Have you been taking lessons from edge?
I'm dead serious, and even the bible supports it by saying God does not remember forgiven sin. He simply could choose not to remember forgiven sin.
ETA
Maybe you can't block things from your memory but God certainly can if he chooses to.
Careful, you're getting into "if God can do anything, can He make a rock so big He can't lift it?" territory. The omnisicient Deity can choose to forget things, thereby rendering Himself no longer omniscient?
