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

[Belz...]

There is plently of evidence that Jesus is the Messiah and that the New Testament is true.

Ah! Excellent. So please provide some.

Jesus not only fullfilled hundreds of prophecies

According to the bible (the claimant), which is not evidence.

he has indeed risen from the dead.

How would you know this ?

If you could just decide to accept him and his truth

Ah, so you don't actually "know". You just "accept" it as true.

See, that's not "evidence", Kathy. That's faith. The two are not interchangeable.

then your spiritual eyes would be open too, just like Doc and me, and thousands of others who know God the Father through his Son.

How about the millions of muslims who KNOW better ? Or Buddhists ? Or any member of other religions ? Should we give them equal weight ?

The fact is... God's word is true.

That's an easy thing to say, but not to prove, apparently. I wish you could detach yourself from your preconceived beliefs and look at this objectively, but these last few years have shown us that you can't.

The evidence is that he does indeed dwell within his people. Just because you don't see him doesn't mean he isn't there!

Isn't that the same argument used with Santa Claus ?

 

[DOC]

Any proof that Roman emperors ordered the destruction of Christian manuscripts?

I have never heard that before.

from Wiki on Diolcletian:

On February 23, 303, Diocletian ordered that the newly built church at Nicomedia be razed. He demanded that its scriptures be burned, and seized its precious stores for the treasury.[156] The next day, Diocletian's first "Edict against the Christians" was published.[157] The edict ordered the destruction of Christian scriptures and places of worship across the Empire, and prohibited Christians from assembling for worship.[158] Before the end of February, a fire destroyed part of the imperial palace.[159] Galerius convinced Diocletian that the culprits were Christians, conspirators who had plotted with the eunuchs of the palace. An investigation was commissioned, but no responsible party was found. Executions followed anyway, and the palace eunuchs Dorotheus and Gorgonius were executed. One individual, Peter, was stripped, raised high, and scourged. Salt and vinegar were poured in his wounds, and he was slowly boiled over an open flame. The executions continued until at least April 24, 303, when six individuals, including the bishop Anthimus, were decapitated.[160]


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

Yes, the world we live in now could be a much scarier place if it wasn't for Christianity. It has been said there might not even be a Western Civilization if not for Christianity.

 

[DOC]

Any proof that Roman emperors ordered the destruction of Christian manuscripts?

I have never heard that before.

I imagine Nero wasn't too keen on Christian manuscripts also:

From Wiki's article: Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire

By implicating the Christians for this massive act of arson, Nero successfully capitalized on the already-existing public suspicion of this religious sect and, it could be argued, exacerbated the hostilities held toward them throughout the Roman Empire.[citation needed] Forms of execution used by the Romans included burning in the tunica molesta,[18] systematic murder, crucifixion, and the feeding of Christians to lions and other wild beasts. Tacitus' Annals XV.44 record: "...a vast multitude, were convicted, not so much of the crime of incendiarism as of hatred of the human race. And in their deaths they were made the subjects of sport; for they were wrapped in the hides of wild beasts and torn to pieces by dogs, or nailed to crosses, or set on fire, and when day declined, were burned to serve for nocturnal lights."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire#Under_Nero

The above URL gives much of the history of Christian Persection in the Roman Empire by several Emperors.

Islam initially grew by the use of the sword on others, whereas Christianity initially grew during a time when others used the sword on it.

 

[zooterkin]

It has been said there might not even be a Western Civilization if not for Christianity.

Many things have been said, that doesn't make them true. I can think of 1900 examples...

I take it that you discount the Ancient Greeks and Romans as civilisations, then?

Clearly, since our current civilisation has Christianity entwined in its development, then it wouldn't be the same if Christianity had not gained popularity. That's a pretty meaningless point. If you are arguing that there would be no civilisation in the West without Christianity, then you need to make a better case than 'it has been said', given the pre-existing, non-Christian civilisations, and the non-Christian civilisations in other parts of the world. Further, if you are insinuating that Christianity's being part of Western civilisation is evidence of the NT being true, you'll again have to actually make a case for that rather than merely implying it. Other civilisations have existed, and still exist, which are not based on Christianity; are their religions also true?

 

[zooterkin]

The above URL gives much of the history of Christian Persection in the Roman Empire by several Emperors.

Islam initially grew by the use of the sword on others, whereas Christianity initially grew during a time when others used the sword on it.

How does any of that prove the truth of the NT?

 

[Wolrab]

How does any of that prove the truth of the NT?

Well, you see, Islam conquered and looted thus raising the standard of living of many of it's followers while Christianity gave the underclass (who were allowed to be beaten) afterlife IOUs so they were able to fatten the church coffers while not doing a damn thing to lessen the plight of it's followers. Proof positive. Of what, I have not a clue.

 

[amb]

soon this thread is longer than the New Testament

With just as much B/S. from DOC.

 

[joobz]

from Wiki on Diolcletian:

On February 23, 303, Diocletian ordered that the newly built church at Nicomedia be razed. He demanded that its scriptures be burned, and seized its precious stores for the treasury.[156] The next day, Diocletian's first "Edict against the Christians" was published.[157] The edict ordered the destruction of Christian scriptures and places of worship across the Empire, and prohibited Christians from assembling for worship.

One must wonder how many of those texts contradict Jesus as being the son of god?
Or how many of those texts show Jesus further extrapolating on his "pro-beating servants/slaves" view?

Yes, the world we live in now could be a much scarier place if it wasn't for Christianity. It has been said there might not even be a Western Civilization if not for Christianity.

The world COULD be much scarier. But it could also have been a lot more peaceful too. I find it extremely interesting that the defining features of western civilization (e.g., separation of church and state, representative democracy, free market capitalism) are all features that go against Christian tradition.

1.) Jesus condoned monarchies
2.) Christianity supported the GOD-KING-COUNTRY concept
3.) Christianity is more in line with communism than with democracy.

 

[Cainkane1]

from Wiki on Diolcletian:

On February 23, 303, Diocletian ordered that the newly built church at Nicomedia be razed. He demanded that its scriptures be burned, and seized its precious stores for the treasury.[156] The next day, Diocletian's first "Edict against the Christians" was published.[157] The edict ordered the destruction of Christian scriptures and places of worship across the Empire, and prohibited Christians from assembling for worship.[158] Before the end of February, a fire destroyed part of the imperial palace.[159] Galerius convinced Diocletian that the culprits were Christians, conspirators who had plotted with the eunuchs of the palace. An investigation was commissioned, but no responsible party was found. Executions followed anyway, and the palace eunuchs Dorotheus and Gorgonius were executed. One individual, Peter, was stripped, raised high, and scourged. Salt and vinegar were poured in his wounds, and he was slowly boiled over an open flame. The executions continued until at least April 24, 303, when six individuals, including the bishop Anthimus, were decapitated.[160]


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

Yes, the world we live in now could be a much scarier place if it wasn't for Christianity. It has been said there might not even be a Western Civilization if not for Christianity.

Diocletian did things like that then and later on xcians did things like that to other people.

 

[DC]

With just as much B/S. from DOC.

no, the new testament doesnt contain any of DOC's BS
its filled with BS from other authors

 

[Paulhoff]

There is plently of evidence that Jesus is the Messiah and that the New Testament is true. Jesus not only fullfilled hundreds of prophecies, he has indeed risen from the dead.

Wendy Darling, of Peter Pan fame, indeed had risen from the dead too, it is written, it must be true.

Jesus did not fulfill the prophecies of being the messiah.

The messiah will bring about the political and spiritual redemption of the Jewish people by bringing us back to Israel restoring Jerusalem (Isaiah 11:11-12; Jeremiah 23:8; 30:3; Hosea 3:4-5). He will establish a government in Israel that will be the center of all world government, both for Jews and gentiles (Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1). He will rebuild the Temple and re-establish its worship (Jeremiah 33:18). He will restore the religious court system of Israel and establish Jewish law as the law of the land (Jeremiah 33:15).

Of course people like you love to quote the bible, but only those parts that you like, that fit your wants and needs. The rest you just poo-poo when it doesn't agree with you.

Paul

 

[kmortis]

from Wiki on Diolcletian:

On February 23, 303, Diocletian ordered that the newly built church at Nicomedia be razed. He demanded that its scriptures be burned, and seized its precious stores for the treasury.[156] The next day, Diocletian's first "Edict against the Christians" was published.[157] The edict ordered the destruction of Christian scriptures and places of worship across the Empire, and prohibited Christians from assembling for worship.[158] Before the end of February, a fire destroyed part of the imperial palace.[159] Galerius convinced Diocletian that the culprits were Christians, conspirators who had plotted with the eunuchs of the palace. An investigation was commissioned, but no responsible party was found. Executions followed anyway, and the palace eunuchs Dorotheus and Gorgonius were executed. One individual, Peter, was stripped, raised high, and scourged. Salt and vinegar were poured in his wounds, and he was slowly boiled over an open flame. The executions continued until at least April 24, 303, when six individuals, including the bishop Anthimus, were decapitated.[160]


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

Yes, the world we live in now could be a much scarier place if it wasn't for Christianity. It has been said there might not even be a Western Civilization if not for Christianity.

Still waiting to see evidence that the destruction of Christian artifacts make the NT any more true. The Taliban just recently destroyed two large statues of the buddha, does that make Buddhism true?

And no, the world may or may not "be a much scarier place if it wasn't for Christianity", but we do know that knoledge was suppressed by Christians during the early middle ages, just after the fall of the Roman Empire and up until just before the Rennaisance. During that period most advances were from the Hindu Indians and the Muslim Arabs. It wasn't until some of the Christian Europoeans started listening to the Indians and Arabs that the Europeans started to dig their way out of the mess they'd put themselves in.

ETA: Here's a pithy picture that illustrates my point.

/ETA


Besides, none of that has to do with how we know (or realistically, don't know) that the authors of the NT told the truth.

I imagine Nero wasn't too keen on Christian manuscripts also:

From Wiki's article: Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire

By implicating the Christians for this massive act of arson, Nero successfully capitalized on the already-existing public suspicion of this religious sect and, it could be argued, exacerbated the hostilities held toward them throughout the Roman Empire.[citation needed] Forms of execution used by the Romans included burning in the tunica molesta,[18] systematic murder, crucifixion, and the feeding of Christians to lions and other wild beasts. Tacitus' Annals XV.44 record: "...a vast multitude, were convicted, not so much of the crime of incendiarism as of hatred of the human race. And in their deaths they were made the subjects of sport; for they were wrapped in the hides of wild beasts and torn to pieces by dogs, or nailed to crosses, or set on fire, and when day declined, were burned to serve for nocturnal lights."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire#Under_Nero

The above URL gives much of the history of Christian Persection in the Roman Empire by several Emperors.

Islam initially grew by the use of the sword on others, whereas Christianity initially grew during a time when others used the sword on it.

Yeah...cause Christianity NEVER used the sword. [cough]Norway[/cough] [cough]Crusades[/cough] Sorry, there's a cold going around over here.

Oh, and Islam did not initially grow by the sword, it grew through trade. Mohmmad may have been a pervert, but he was a trader first.

And none of this has to do with wether or not the NT authors told the truth. So they are both no evidence posts. Naughty, naughty DOC.

 

[Alice Shortcake]

Ah, Kurious Kathy is back! We thought you'd been raptured, KK! I wonder if Doc will take the slightest notice of your posts, because I can't help noticing that other believers tend you ignore you completely. It's almost as if they find you embarrassing, or perhaps they don't think a woman's opinion is worth anything. But if you have any EVIDENCE that the authors of the New Testament authors told the truth (bearing in mind the fact that your evidence must come from sources other than the New Testament itself, please put us all out of our misery and present it.

For example, the New Testament tells us that Jesus wasn't the only person to be raised from the dead - what about those mysterious zombies, the reanimated corpses of "those who slept", who also made a comeback from the Great Beyond at the time of Jesus' supposed death? Don't you think it's odd that not a single historian noticed this remarkable event?

Come on, KK! We're waiting!

 

[DOC]

How does any of that prove the truth of the NT?

The title of this thread has the word "evidence" not "proof".

 

[Akhenaten]

The title of this thread has the word "evidence" not "proof".

Since you don't have any of either, it's a moot point, isn't it DOC?

Otherwise you'd have been able to produce that list of people you've been able to convince, wouldn't you?

 

[joobz]

The title of this thread has the word "evidence" not "proof".

And Dolous means slave and not Servant, but in either case, Jesus thinks it's completely ok to beat a dolous (even for rules they didn't know about).

 

[DOC]

Please reread the verse. The part I am referring to is the part where the servant (slave) gets beat for unkowningly going against his master's will.

So it would be your policy to let the servant off scott free for beating several men and woman because he didn't know it was wrong rather than giving him a lesser punishment.

And giving a lesser punishment for a crime you didn't know was wrong happens all the time in our modern society. If I carry a gun in my car to Mexico, I could get a year in jail whether I knew it was wrong or not.

If I go through a school zone 35 miles an hour and run over a child, and the speed limit is 15 mph, I'm going to be punished severely even if I tell the judge I didn't know it was a school zone. But I will probably be punished less then someone who says, "yea, I knew the speed limit was 15".

 

[carlitos]

Let's try this again...

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 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.

Here is my post that you ignored, DOC. Do you have the time or inclination to answer it? You can ignore the bunny rabbit with the pancake on its head, but the other parts seem pertinent to your case here.

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 few lashes and be sore for a few days, kind of like a sunburn.

What you have posted here is so ignorant as to be obscene. Please go rent Roots, or maybe "Passion of the Christ" and count to 10 or whatever number would be "few" lashes (10 is probably fine, honestly). Hit pause. Inspect "sunburn" on the back of Kunta Kinte or Jesus or whatever movie you have. Boy oh boy, I see why they call you guys "apologists." Shame on you.

Have you ever heard of the term "in context". You totally ignore the brutal behavior of the servant immediately preceding Christ's statement. Why would he go through all the trouble of such a brutal story if he didn't mean it was for severe wrongdoing.

I keep asking about the second slave, and you keep bringing up the first. Why? This sentence stands on its own, after the first example:

...the one who knows nothing and does what deserves whipping will be beaten with few strokes.​

And in the last part of your statement you ignore that Christ said the servant would be punished to a lesser degree.

No God-dammit, it says he would be whipped with few strokes. That's what I keep asking you about. Jesus says it's ok to whip a mis-behaving slave, even if the guy doesn't know why. Jesus is a masochist? Cruel? What?

This happens all the time. 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. IF you carry a firearm into a state park and didn't know it was illegal to do so, and then get a citation, you are being punished even though you didn't know it was wrong. But if you do it a second time (and thus knew it was wrong) your punishment will probably be worse.

Which of the above deserves lashes with a whip, DOC? Have you seen the examples posted of what a few lashes can do?

Please answer this question honestly:

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.

I noticed you didn't list any of the posts I responded to when talking about post numbers so they would appear in context.

But actually the number of posts I have made (over 1900) is something to think about. Could a Scientologist legitimately defend their religion against 250 skeptics in a 326 page thread with 13,000 posts in it. How about a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or Jew. I know of no one in these religions that has defended their religion against hundreds of skeptics with cold facts for 20 pages much less 326.

​

And we also have statues of Zeus and Apollo, does that mean they existed. Having a image on a coin is no more proof that Caesar existed than having an image of a eagle holding 13 arrows in its claw is proof that there has ever been a eagle that has held 13 arrows.

You are completely losing it here. Caesar existed. He was the emperor of this place called "Rome." There is a lot of evidence for this. Your guy Yeshua bin Josef mentioned him in the bible, even.

Positively prove to us you were born in the city you think you were born in, President Obama can't even do that.

Of course I can prove what city I was born in. Where in the hell do you think President Obama was born?

ETA - silly question, but how do you guys know how many posts a given poster has in a thread? I hit "thread tools" but didn't see anything there, nor could I find any thing in the help / how to section. Thanks!


Re-edited to add:

So it would be your policy to let the servant off scott free for beating several men and woman because he didn't know it was wrong rather than giving him a lesser punishment.

The logical fallacy you are employing here is "false dilemma." Who said "scott free?" Oh, that's right. You did. And AGAIN, you are conflating the first slave who beat people with the second slave who just broke some rule he didn't know about. Are you really this thick?

The question in terms you might understand:

Jesus said whipping a slave is OK, even if it's for breaking a rule he didn't know about.
Is this your Christian world view, yes or no?

 

[DOC]

And Dolous means slave and not Servant...

So then you disagree with the website you brought in awhile back that had servant as the second definition. Joobz you want to fudge for your arguments sake. Scientists shouldn't fudge. but be coldly rational.

 

[carlitos]

Pathetic. There is zero controversy about the meaning of this word. None.