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

[DOC]

DOC, you haven't "legitimately defended" a single thing.
All you've done is tossed out fallacy after fallacy, while proving that you have absolutely no concept of why they are fallacies.

In short, the only thing your posts provide evidence of is your woefull lack of critical thinking skills.

By the logic in your post above:

- Jammonius has provided evidence that no airplane hit the twin towers on 9/11. After all, he thinks he's been succesfully defending his position for dozens of pages.

- Michael Mozina has provided evidence that the sun has a solid surface (mostly made of iron). After all, him and his acolyte think they've been succesfully defending that position for dozens of pages.

I could go on, but why bother?

You're not going to understant my point. Not until you learn about logic.

And, frankly, given the "grasp" (if such a term can be applied) of logic you've shown thus far, I don't for one instant believe you've taken a course on the subject. I think that is just another lie.

Your no example opinion has been noted.

 

[Akhenaten]

Your no example opinion has been noted.

By whom. DOC? You?

Having made this 'note' whom do you hope to share it with?

Do you not realise that absolutely nobody believes a word you say?

You have no credibility. None. Can you point out a single post in this entire fiasco of a thread that supports your position?

 

[Paulhoff]

Funny how all the things in everyday life that have come about because of science, but they just can't get evolution right, it is just so funny.

Paul

 

[DOC]

With 1900 posts, you should be able to show just one that has evidence that the NT writers told the truth. Which one is it?

Post #11054

Here is information from it, along with some minor additions.

There are over 5000 New Testament manuscripts in existence compared to 7 manuscripts for Plato and 20 for famous Roman Historian Tacitus.

Respected archaeologist Sir William Mitchell Ramsay called gospel writer Luke a great historian with regard to facts that can be proven by historical and archaeological evidence.

The fact that there are about 40 written sources for the life of Christ (31 Christian + 9 non-Christian) compared to 10 written sources (9 non-Christian + 1 Christian) for the life of Tiberius Caesar, the Roman emperor during the life of Christ.

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.

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.

Most archaeologists {who study the biblical era} believe Jesus' 1st century tomb is most probably directly under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

Oxford professor Thomas Arnold's statement regarding the evidence of Christ's life and the Resurrection and how he considered those topics to have more historical evidence than any other fact in history up to that point.

The Moral Argument

The Cosmological Argument

The Teleological Argument

11 apostles suffered a martyrs death in spite of the fact it was recorded they acted cowardly and uncertain before the resurrection.

Simon Greenleaf, a founder of Harvard Law School, said the 4 Gospel accounts could be admitted in a court as evidence, and that divergent accounts are normal for eyewitnesses.

A Rabbi stated that the Oral Torah {and thus oral tradition evidence} is "more important" than the Written Torah. This statement is important because oral tradition evidence was also important in early Christianity (in that era of no paper and little public literacy).

http://www.aish.com/jl/48943186.html

PhD. in astrophysics Dr. Hugh Ross claims there are about 2000 fulfilled prophecies in the Bible.

http://www.reasons.org/fulfilled-prophecy-evidence-reliability-bible

 

[Paulhoff]

Post #11054

Here is information from it:

There are over 5000 New Testament manuscripts in existence compared to 7 manuscripts for Plato and 20 for famous Roman Historian Tacitus.....

Plato wasn't trying to be called a so-called god.

And we can't help that the Library of Alexandria was distoryed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria

Paul

 

[Akhenaten]

Post #11054

<debunked drivel>

Every scrap of that drivel has been effectively debunked numerous times, DOC, and you know it.

Now, can you point out a single other poster in this thread who supports your position?

Referencing one of your own posts in your usual dishonest manner will of course simply add to your failure, so feel free to do so.

 

[DOC]

Every scrap of that drivel has been effectively debunked numerous times, DOC, and you know it.

What are you talking about, none of them have been debunked. Responding to a point is not debunking a point, you are invited to show how each point made in post 13104 has been debunked.

 

[carlitos]

So DOC, you are starting over, rather than respond to my last point on doulous, etc., and the various other points that have been made responding to you in the past few days?

 

[Akhenaten]

What are you talking about, none of them have been debunked. Responding to a point is not debunking a point, you are invited to show how each point made in post 13104 has been debunked.

Here, deal with this:

I think that he is referring to my referenced above:


Edited to correct misspellings



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.

And then get back to present time and answer Carlitos

So DOC, you are starting over, rather than respond to my last point on doulous, etc., and the various other points that have been made responding to you in the past few days?

And then produce a single person who believes any of your garbage.

 

[X]

So DOC, you are starting over, rather than respond to my last point on doulous, etc., and the various other points that have been made responding to you in the past few days?

Oh, he'll come back around to it.
He'll give it a few days, until he figures everyone's forgotten the smackdown.
Then it'll be back.

It's sort of a pattern of his.




As for my earlier "no example" post:

DOC, you are the only one in this thread (and possibly on these forums) who does not know to what I refer.
The only one.
Why should I pander to your oft-demonstrated inability to understand logic and reason?
I am not going to hand this stuff to you on a plate. You'll just deny it and learn nothing. You have every other time.

So, if you want to know what I speak of, you have some work to do.
First: learn something about logical fallacies.
Second: emotionally separate yourself from your arguments.
Third: re-read your posts, and the responses to them, from a dispassionate outside-party viewpoint.

Then, and only then, will you know what I was referring to.

In the meantime (or if you refuse to do these things), then wallow in your self-imposed muckhole of ignorance with my blessings. I will not help someone who won't help themselves.


When I showed my sister how to put her spare tire on (she had a flat), I made her do it. The next time she had a flat, she didn't need to wait for me to get there, or spend money on a tow truck.

 

[joobz]

What are you talking about, none of them have been debunked. Responding to a point is not debunking a point, you are invited to show how each point made in post 13104 has been debunked.

DOC, there is no better anti christian arguement than posts like this. Like your pro_beating servants argument, It is so detached from reality, so anti-logic that one only needs to read this thread to see first hand whathe dangers religion poses to a human mind.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Post #11054

<spam snippage>

The top of page 324. And 11,000+ other posts in this thread.

Your post 11054 has been thoroughly debunked for the bunk that it is. As a master logician who received an 'A', you of all people should realize it. As I'm sure you do.

How would you feel about a video debate?

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

What are you talking about, none of them have been debunked. Responding to a point is not debunking a point, you are invited to show how each point made in post 13104 has been debunked.

DOC, I honestly can't say that every point you've ever made on this thread has been "debunked" in and of itself.

But the fact is, there is NO Empirical Evidence that can prove the existence of a particular Hebrew Deity. Therefore there is NO Empirical Evidence that Jesus "Christ" was the Earthly Vessel of that particular Hebrew Deity. Therefore there is NO Empirical Evidence that the writers and editors of the Gospels (whoever they might have been) were telling whatever "Truth" that YOU interpreted the Gospels to mean.

Even in the decades after Jesus allegedly lived, there were at least 3 main interpretations of the Gospels and other texts expunged from the Bible, including an interpretation that excluded Jesus' Divinity (as espoused by Arius and his followers until the Nicene Conference).

Ergo, no matter how you slice it, EVERY argument you have made to further the thesis "Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth" is invalidated. That's LOGIC for you.

Now Empiricism isn't the "Be-all and End-all" of Reality (depending on the definition of Reality), But Empiricism is what counts when one goes about claiming that they can "Prove" something. And DOC, that's something you clearly have no leg to stand on.

You should have called this thread "All the lame reasons I personally believe the NT writers told the truth as I personally interpret the NT."

That would be accurate, and perhaps once so clearly stated you would see your claim as the tautology it is, and finally realize that you can't prove anything with circular reasoning.

GB

 

[Filippo Lippi]

I too would love to see a list of the forum members who have been convinced by DOC's "evidences" which are out there in his 1900 posts in this thread.

 

[amb]

Over 2000 years ago, a very superstitious people were promised eternal life. They were also promised that the god of the Jews was about to intervene on their behalf, to overthrow the Roman yolk, that the son of man, a messiah was to usher in this kingdom of god within the believers lifetime.
If I had such a product to sell, and the people believed it would happen soon just as foretold, I would be a millionaire.

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

Over 2000 years ago, a very superstitious people were promised eternal life. They were also promised that the god of the Jews was about to intervene on their behalf, to overthrow the Roman yolk, that the son of man, a messiah was to usher in this kingdom of god within the believers lifetime.
If I had such a product to sell, and the people believed it would happen soon just as foretold, I would be a millionaire.

And many people are INDEED making Millions off of people's gullibility TODAY. We're obviously in the wrong business.

GB

 

[Akhenaten]

I too would love to see a list of the forum members who have been convinced by DOC's "evidences" which are out there in his 1900 posts in this thread.

So how about it then, DOC?

After all this time and all these posts, you must have some pretty impressive results to publish to show how successful your undeniable evidence and unassailable logic have been.

Perhaps you could present a list of all your 'converts' and show which particular piece of evidence it was that convinced each one of the truth of your message.

 

[AdinDraco]

So how about it then, DOC?

After all this time and all these posts, you must have some pretty impressive results to publish to show how successful your undeniable evidence and unassailable logic have been.

Perhaps you could present a list of all your 'converts' and show which particular piece of evidence it was that convinced each one of the truth of your message.

Um, was it this thread or the 'Evidence of God' thread where a poster said that they were unsure until reading the apologists posts...and it swayed them in the opposite direction. So I don't know if it was doc or one of the other 3 or 4 regulars but one of them at least have on record at least 1 deconversion.

 

[zooterkin]

If you have promiscuous sex and you didn't know it was wrong and you get a disease, you are being punished even though you didn't know it was wrong.

Sorry, DOC, no. That comment is just awash with assumptions and woolly thinking.

Who is doing the punishing? If you are suggesting it is God, then why is it not the case that everyone who engages in promiscuous sex (however you care to define that) is 'punished'? How does he choose who gets 'punished', and which disease they should catch? Why is having sex wrong in the first place?

You might as well say that someone who goes to Africa but doesn't take precautions against malaria, and gets infected, is being punished. What are they doing that is wrong? It's a health issue, not a moral issue. Now, it may be that some of a society's morals arise as a way of averting potential health hazards, but that, including how effective they are and when they should change due to advances in scientific understanding and medicine, is an entirely different discussion.

 

[Akhenaten]

Um, was it this thread or the 'Evidence of God' thread where a poster said that they were unsure until reading the apologists posts...and it swayed them in the opposite direction. So I don't know if it was doc or one of the other 3 or 4 regulars but one of them at least have on record at least 1 deconversion.

DOC, I know that this might make you feel bad, but I think that you should know. This thread, more than anything else, caused me to lose my faith in God. I'm not kidding, and I'm not lying. If you PM me, I can point you to a years-long history of posts elsewhere where I self-identify as Christian. I'm going to stop doing that now, mostly because of you. I just thought that you should know.