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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hokulele said:
If by "ridicule" you mean "making the subject appear ridiculous", meaningful and intelligent engagement with DOC does the trick quite well.
Click to expand...
1) Bacon.

2) Maybe. But there's nothing wrong with adding fuel to the fire. It's easier to cook the bacon on. And then melt the chocolate to dip the bacon in.
 
kmortis said:
1) Bacon.

2) Maybe. But there's nothing wrong with adding fuel to the fire. It's easier to cook the bacon on. And then melt the chocolate to dip the bacon in.
Click to expand...
It's posts like these that hurt your credibility.


Check your Credibility Score at Freecredibilityreport.com!!!!
 
kmortis said:
Luckily for me, my credibility is encased in adamantine armor. It can't be hurt. Plus, it looks spiffy!
Click to expand...

Ha! I use my magnetic powers to collapse your adamantine armor, crushing your credibility. Your credibility takes 5D6 damage!
 
Helen said:
I don't think you should mention threads like that in threads like this; it might do irreparable damage to the fabric of the universe.
Click to expand...

Personally, it's my dream to see all the woos on the forums in the same thread. Imagine, DOC and GIBHOR arguing scripture with Paul Bethke, edge and David Henson comparing notes on biblical archeology, Limbo explaining the Jungian significance of the iron sun.. Maybe the fabric of the universe would be ripped, but it'd be worth it.
 
DOC said:
Waterman said:
...Sir William Mitchell Ramsay:
1. Opinion of a famous guys does not count as evidence...
Click to expand...

Ramsay is an expert and expert's opinions are evidence in courtrooms.
Click to expand...

I note that you omitted my second point.

2. Besides he expressly omitted the magical stuff.

Yes expert testimony is allowable in a courtroom by experts in the topic under discussion.

Ramsay is a historian and archeologist. He statements may be considered expert testimony only as it applies to history and archeology. I do not believe that he was recognized or trained as a Biblical Scholar. It is a brief extrapolation/rewording to conclude that Ramsay’s opinion was that there was no evidence for the divinity of Jesus nor that he performed miracles. His writings do not support your position.

We can saw that Luke was familiar with the people, practices, geography and weather of that region during the 1st and 2nd century. As to what he witnessed it is reasonably accurate. As to what he recorded as told by others can best be catagorized as hearsay, legend or lore.

Other experts you cited were:

Greenleaf – Lawyer not biblical scholar. His opinion on legal matters could be expert testimony, is opinion on biblical matters is not. A review of the information you provided showed where his argument failed. You have yet to identify any mistakes in my reasoning or a counter argument.

Arnold – Was an scholar and educator and perhaps was schooled in biblical studies. However the quote that you mined for him is so blatantly hyperbole that it is silly to consider that as evidence. It would like citing a flowery worded poem or a song as evidence of the truth that the girls hair was black as night, skin white as snow…

Ross – Astronomer not biblical scholar. His opinion on astronomy could be expert testimony, is opinion on biblical matters is not.
 
joobz said:
Ha! I use my magnetic powers to collapse your adamantine armor, crushing your credibility. Your credibility takes 5D6 damage!
Click to expand...
HA! I double the distance between us, thereby reducing your magnetic powers to one-eighth their origional power. MOUHHAHAHAHA!!!11eleventy! Bow to the AXEOME power of the inverse cube law!
 
DOC said:
Waterman said:
5000 New Testament manuscripts:
1. this is irrelevant to whether or not the story is true...
Click to expand...

It's certainly adds weight to the fact that something big was happening. And there would have been a lot more manuscripts if some of the Roman emperors didn't order the destruction of Christian writings -- not to mention the destruction of the Christians themselves.
Click to expand...

No one denies that something was happening. A splinter sect of Judaism was forming that was apocalyptic preaching the end times, had some radical new twists and had a message of inclusion that people wanted to hear. Why do you claim that numbers of manuscripts increase validity, if I shred a document is it more true? You also have omitted my other points.

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.
 
Helen said:
I don't think you should mention threads like that in threads like this; it might do irreparable damage to the fabric of the universe.
Click to expand...

If the universe could survive me mentioning Jammonius' latest bilge, then it should be able to survive this.

Just be happy they aren't on the same page...
 
DOC said:
Waterman said:
The Oral Torah is more important than written the Written Torah.
1. What? Why is this even here?
Click to expand...

To show just how important oral tradition was at that time of no paper and little public literacy. Few people in here are aware just how important oral tradition was in that culture. How else are you going to pass on history to the vast majority of people who were illiterate at that time. We've just scratched the surface of the subject of oral tradition.
Click to expand...

I don’t disagree with your answer, in a time of great illiteracy oral traditions are an important way of teaching and passing down information that would otherwise be lost.

However I do disagree with your implied meaning that makes the now written bible more accurate or valid. I believe that I read that what the oral tradition allowed Rabbis to adapt and modify the teachings that they learned as times and situations demanded. So the story told in one generation with one meaning could be subtly different in the next and the next and the next until the story evolved into something that the teller 5 or 6 generations back might not recognize except in the broadest sense. The story that may have been semi-historical in effect has become a parable. It is still useful as a teaching tool but not very useful as a historical record. This tradition points to the likelihood that the entire bible should be looked at as parable and we cannot positively claim factual truth regarding any of it without external verification. WHICH WE DON”T HAVE REGARDING THE DIVINITY OF JESUS OR HIS MIRACLES. This does not support your overall position regarding the truth of the NT and actually undermines it.
 
kmortis said:
HA! I double the distance between us, thereby reducing your magnetic powers to one-eighth their origional power. MOUHHAHAHAHA!!!11eleventy! Bow to the AXEOME power of the inverse cube law!
Click to expand...

HA HA! The magnetic field I generated caused an inductive current in the cable I placed underground. Your jump back caused you to step upon the conductor plate connected to this cable, causing you to receive 4D10 electric damage!
 
joobz said:
But Jesus should approve. Afterall, he approved of the beating of servants for going against their master's will.
Click to expand...
And our modern society approves of sending people to jail for several years who beat several men and beat several woman like the servant did in the bible verse. I've asked people in here if they would rather get 10 lashes and be sore for a few days or spend several years in jail. I know of no one who would rather spend several years in jail. That being the case Jesus was actually more lenient regarding the servant than our modern society would have been.
 
DOC said:
What does that have to do with voicing an opinion about oral tradition in biblical times?
Click to expand...

Well, considering you are citing a (supposed) rabbi as an authority on the matter, everything. It shows, conclusively, that even if rabbis were 100% agreed on the reliability of oral tradition during biblical times, they clearly don't agree with your "logic" that somehow this validates the New Testament.

Otherwise, they wouldn't be rabbis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom