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

Status
Not open for further replies.
DOC said:
Jesus advocated a lesser punishment - let's say 3 lashes to your back.

Personally I would much rather receive Jesus' punishment and be sore for a few days, then get your punishment of being fired from my job and then being turned over to authorities. Especially during that time when the Roman soldiers weren't too compassionate with prisoners.
Click to expand...

Will you let me lay on the lashes DOC?
 
Elizabeth I said:
Hey, I have dibs! I asked first.
Click to expand...

Yes I saw the post referring to it after I posted.

I happily yield to the Royal (and temporal) prerogative.

ETA: Since I'm sure Your Majesty would not want to sully your hands with such work could you dub me your Royal Whipper.
 
Last edited:
Lucian said:
I think it's time one of our resident monarchs dubbed DOC "Ironicles the Logician."
Click to expand...


Ironocles.jpg

Ironicles the Logician​
 
Last edited:
Hokulele said:
If I provide evidence that I did receive an A in Comparative Religion from Harvard, will that affect your beliefs about the bible?
Click to expand...

DOC,
Be real careful now, you really don't want to get into a comparison between your logic skills and Hok's knowledge of religion. (or yours) :D

(And no, I don't know if she have studied it formally.)
 
kurious_kathy said:
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. If you could just decide to accept him and his truth, 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. There truly is only one way to the Father and that is through Christ. How your theology affects your salvation is a whole other issue. The fact is... God's word is true. Jesus said, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but his word never will."

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!
Click to expand...

What's really "Kurious" is why you didn't quote or address the second half of my post. And Kurious why DOC continues to ignore the point it raises too. But it's not surprising really; as I said in that post and the following one, if you actually admit that even the original Christians couldn't agree that the NT was evidence for the Divinity of Jesus, then it can hardly be expected to count as Evidence today.

ME:
That's it DOC, pick the easy posts to respond to . Don't bother to respond to any that actually conclusively demonstrate that there is NO "evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth" (not that you've demonstrated an ability to coherently respond to such posts when you do make such attempts).

You have yet to counter any arguments that demonstrate there was more than one interpretation of the Gospels (by other Christians no less) regarding Jesus' alleged Divinity (or lack of it) BACK IN THE TIME THEY WERE WRITTEN. Perhaps this is because you know that you can't without admitting that would nullify this entire thread.
Click to expand...

ME:
There is evidence that Christian Manuscripts were destroyed under the authority of the first Christian Roman Emperor Constantine at the the Nicene Council which he convened to standardize and codify Christianity in 325 .

But DOC, can't cop to that without totally undermining his arguments, because it would conclusively demonstrate that some Christians did not believe Jesus was God (Arians) and that some others did not take the Bible literally (Gnostics).
Click to expand...

Also Kurious that DOC still wants to bemoan the persecution of a few Early Christians and the destruction of their texts by Pagan Roman Emperors, but not admit to the persecution of Christians and the destruction of their texts by a CHRISTIAN Roman Emperor, not to mention the fact that Christians have been persecuting (and destroying documents of) EACH OTHER, as well as people of other Faiths (or Non-faiths) for roughly 2000 years.

So NO Kathy, there really IS no "evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth." And if you and DOC could just accept the truth of that, you could just take your interpretation of the NT on Faith, like the millions of other Christians that aren't dumb enough to claim that the Bible is actually evidence for the of Divinity of Jesus do.

No one can challenge your right to believe purely as a matter of Faith, it's your feeble attempts to claim that your beliefs are based on Empirical Evidence that most of us object to.

But, I know that won't stop KK or DOC from trying :rolleyes: . In the meantime I'm still waiting for DOC (or KK) to actually address the key points I raised (but I know better than to hold my breath :D ).
 
DOC said:
If I did convince anyone to accept Christ I certainly wouldn't recommend that they mention it in here anymore than I would recommend that someone I convinced to become a boxer to step into the ring with a seasoned fighter in a all out fight. It takes many years of study in a lot of different fields to do what I'm doing. It would be very difficult for a brand new Christian to do it.
Click to expand...

It ain't that hard. We have Wikipedia now!
 
DOC, you are still thinking small. An Earthbound religion cannot possibly be correct. There is an almost infinite cosmos out there, with possible billions of inhabited planets.
Is this Jeebus of yours universal, or just planetary? If the former, do you realize that he could at this very moment be hanging from a cross in the Sagittarius constellation? :)
 
Last edited:
amb said:
DOC, you are still thinking small. An Earthbound religion cannot possibly be correct. There is an almost infinite cosmos out there, with possible billions of inhabited planets.
Is this Jeebus of yours universal, or just planetary? If the former, do you realize that he could at this very moment be hanging from a cross in the Sagittarius constellation? :)
Click to expand...

Hell, the Jedi "religion" makes more sense than DOCstianity.
 
Akhenaten said:
You know bloody well that I'm one of the brave band who has been able to stomach your drivel well enough to have read every post.

Do you think other readers are unaware of my history with this thread, and that you can effectively cast aspersions about my participation?

Must you lie, even to yourself, about everything?



Now, about that list of people you've convinced with the evidence . . .​
Click to expand...

I've read this entire thread as well, and I don't rcall anyone complaining about the lack of signatures in the NT. In fact, I've never seen that argument anywhere before DOC brought it up.

I'd have to say DOC is flat-out lying about this strawman.
 
DOC said:
If I received an A from Harvard in philosophy 101 would it affect your belief about the bible.
Click to expand...

I would conclude that Harvard had a hopelessly incompetent philosophy teacher when you attended.

Your 1900+ posts speak for themselves on your grasp of logic. You have none.
 
John Jones said:
I've read this entire thread as well, and I don't recall anyone complaining about the lack of signatures in the NT. In fact, I've never seen that argument anywhere before DOC brought it up.

I'd have to say DOC is flat-out lying about this strawman.
Click to expand...



DOC might be referring to our refutation of his claims that the New Testaments were written by the apostles in their titles.

Which is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand (except when DOC tries to claim the authorship as evidence), but then, it is DOC.


As for his most recent droppings in this thread: Too easy. Others have already picked them clean.
 
Rincewind said:
Well that's easy - it's a large, grayish animal with big ears and a long trunk, coming mainly from Africa or India.

So - why is that "relevant"?

:)
Click to expand...


It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.​

The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"


The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, "Ho! what have we here?
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"


The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"


The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he;
" 'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"


The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"


The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"



​


And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long.​

Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,

Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!​

So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,

Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,



And prate about an Elephant





Not one of them has seen.



- John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)​
​





Cool, eh?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom