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

[Cleon]

Cleon? You are in Atlanta? Are you a member of the Atlanta Skeptics? I was there for their Skepticamp a few weeks ago...

And I think you were there last year, too. We've met.

(I gave the talk on Archaeology and the Book of Mormon)

 

[DOC]

Whenever DOC makes a post starting with "So then...", you can always be sure that it will be a textbook example of failure in reading comprehension.

Another post with no examples -- why don't you provide some other than the issue we are talking about, and explain how those other examples show a lack of reading comprehension.

 

[Akhenaten]

Another post with no examples -- why don't you provide some other than the issue we are talking about, and explain how those other examples show a lack of reading comprehension.

Don't be so ridiculous, DOC. Show some integrity, answer the direct questions you've been asked repeatedly and stop trying to weasel your way out of the corner you've painted yourself into with your lies.

 

[Simon39759]

And I think you were there last year, too. We've met.

(I gave the talk on Archaeology and the Book of Mormon)

Ha! That'd have been my guess, purely based on your familiarity with Judaism and the Talmud...

He; nice to put, albeit belatedly, a face on the posts (I greatly enjoyed your talk, by the way) and nice to see you EX-TER-MI-NATing a Doc(tor), well, his posts, at least...

 

[joobz]

Another post with no examples -- why don't you provide some other than the issue we are talking about, and explain how those other examples show a lack of reading comprehension.

Another post with no examples. Why don't you provide some other than the issue we are taling about, and explain how those other examples show a lack of no examples.

 

[paximperium]

Another post with no examples -- why don't you provide some other than the issue we are talking about, and explain how those other examples show a lack of reading comprehension.

What about the Talmud again, DOC-boy?

 

[Hokulele]

Another post with no examples -- why don't you provide some other than the issue we are talking about, and explain how those other examples show a lack of reading comprehension.

There was a classic example in the post I quoted. Demonstrate that you did comprehend Cleon's post if you want to prove me wrong.

 

[DOC]

..."Oral Tradition" in the Talmudic sense - rabbinic interpretation of Torah - and "oral tradition" in the sense you are using it, that of history passed through generations, are completely different concepts...

I'm not talking about "generations" in this instance, I'm talking about oral tradition less than 17 years old with regard to the oral tradition that Paul passed on to the Corinthians. 50 A.D. is 17 years from the crucifixion in 33 A.D.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6033221#post6033221

And if I get the time I will show that that oral tradition was much less than 17 years old when Paul received it. And gospel writer Luke tells us in Acts that Paul actually met with the main apostle Peter, and other disciples for 2 weeks.

In fact, the historicity of the Talmud is considered to be rather irrelevant, even among the ultra-Orthodox...

Do you have a source for this.

 

[DOC]

There was a classic example in the post I quoted. Demonstrate that you did comprehend Cleon's post if you want to prove me wrong.

You implied that this was a regular occurrence but then you don't provide examples when asked. Back it up or you should retract the statement.

 

[Lucian]

I'm not talking about "generations" in this instance, I'm talking about oral tradition less than 17 years old with regard to the oral tradition that Paul passed on to the Corinthians. 50 A.D. is 17 years from the crucifixion in 33 A.D.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6033221#post6033221

And if I get the time I will show that that oral tradition was much less than 17 years old when Paul received it. And gospel writer Luke tells us in Acts that Paul actually met with the main apostle Peter, and other disciples for 2 weeks.

An oral tradition that was less than 17 years old? Pah, that's not oral tradition: that's just gossip.

 

[Akhenaten]

You implied that this was a regular occurrence but then you don't provide examples when asked.

No implication necessary, DOC. Everyone who reads this thread is aware that you either fail to comprehend everything you read here or you just pretend to. There's no objective difference, in either case.

Back it up or you should retract the statement.

Or what?

 

[Hokulele]

What the heck, I am just marking time until I can clock off at work. Here ya go, DOC!

From the American Heritage Dictionary:

cult -
A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.

In anthropology, an organization for the conduct of ritual, magical, or other religious observances.
​

I believe that Christianity's foundation meets these definitions. Someone correct my logic here, but:

1 - Christianity was originally a sect of Judaism.
2 – It was considered extreme to the Jews, and practices false teachings, such that they killed its leader.
3 – The followers were often forced to practice in hidden locations, using secret signs.
4 – Their leader rose up quickly, taught that there was no way to Heaven but through him, and built a loyal following based on his own charisma.
5 – The practice of Christianity developed rituals which, in some flavors, still contain professed magical occurrences.

Did I miss anything?

It seems that all religions likely start this way to one degree or another. At what point does any given cult cease to be considered as a cult and then become a religion?

So I would assume you would believe that all Jews should stop calling themselves and thinking of themselves as Jews because that term implies they came out of the cult of Judaism.

Makes sense. The thread discusses the New Testament. You have given no evidence of its veracity so it gets filed under fiction.

So then you imply that it makes sense for the New Testament writers (if they had made up the stories) to portray the disciples of Christ as dim-witted, uncaring, and cowards.

Well, racists always believe they are right and completely justified in their ideology.

So then you must believe in an absolute morality outside of individual reasoning because I get the impression that if Germany and Japan and Italy had won the war and taken over the world you would still believe the Holocaust was evil.

That would be incorrect. The concept of plagiarism existed long before Matthew's time. Plato, in fact, was accused of plagiarizing Philolaus' book on Pythagoras without appropriate attribution. This is set forth in Pythagoras: His Life, Teaching, and Influence (p. 114), by Christopher Reidwig (Cornell University Press 2005). (That book, unlike Matthew, cites its primary sources.)

Obviously, the English word "plagiarism" did not exist in the first centuries C.E., but the concept did, since it existed in the 4th century B.C.E., when Plato lived. The word used in the accusation was "timeographein", which, I understand means "to write like Timaeus" (and it was not a compliment).

So even if Matthew would not be accused of "plagiarism" he should have been accused of "Marcographein", which amounts to the same thing.

So then you agree the eyewitness and apostle Matthew wrote the book of Matthew. You just think the eyewitness Matthew copied parts of another book. What parts did he copy and from whom?

Who died again? Where is the evidence that this "dying" even occured?

So then you're saying this article "List of Christian Martyrs" in Wiki is false:

Hmm. So if someone you find credible in other areas tells you something far-fetched, you are more likely to believe them vs. a homeless man. At least you are honest. Personally, no matter who it is, if they tell me that they saw an alien, it doesn't change my alien belief-o-meter up a notch unless they show me proof.

So then when Steven Hawkings says the existence of aliens is almost a certainty and rational to believe that has no affect on your belief in aliens.

And this is just from this thread.

 

[Akhenaten]

In fact, the historicity of the Talmud is considered to be rather irrelevant, even among the ultra-Orthodox...

Do you have a source for this.

It's certainly irrelevant in terms of evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.

Need a source for that, do ya DOC?

 

[RoboTimbo]

You implied that this was a regular occurrence but then you don't provide examples when asked. Back it up or you should retract the statement.

Wouldn't it be nice if you paid attention to the examples you ask for.

No,

ETA

And if someone thinks I have made logical fallacies then list the post numbers of those alleged fallacies rather than rambling on
without examples. Whenever you see someone ramble on about me and they don't give a quote of mine or a post # that should send up a red flag.

Here's one that appears to be a logical fallacy:

No, but it increases the probability of it being true depending on how much one values the opinion of the president of India. If Barack Obama went on TV and said he saw an alien at Camp David, that would increase the probability in my mind that aliens exist. If a transient on a street corner told me he saw an alien last night it probably wouldn't increase the probability that aliens exist for me.

I bolded the salient part for you. Do you agree or disagree that this is a logical fallacy?

How many religions do you know that have spread rapidly and peacefully in a brutal militarily occupied land where many of the followers (including its leader) were killed (without traveling to some deserted place like the Mormons), and how many religions do you know have respected Phd's in astrophysics claim publicly for years that the religion has about 2000 fulfilled prophecies to the letter, no mistakes.

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

And how many religions do you know that have a person like Benny Hinn that can travel to a foreign country (like India) of a different religion and draw a million people.

DOC, would you agree or disagree that this is an example of special pleading, which is a logical fallacy?

Sorry, no video cameras or recording devices at the time, so we have to go by the reported history of people like Luke... And go by the known history of the rapid expansion of Christianity during the brutal Roman regime. As one writer J P Moreland basically put it, something very big was going on for 10,000 Jews to come to Christianity within 5 weeks of the Resurrection.

DOC, here seems to be an example of appeal to popularity. Can you refute that without me having to define refute for you?

Sorry, no video cameras or recording devices at the time, so we have to go by the reported history of people like Luke... And go by the known history of the rapid expansion of Christianity during the brutal Roman regime. As one writer J P Moreland basically put it, something very big was going on for 10,000 Jews to come to Christianity within 5 weeks of the Resurrection.

DOC, here seems to be an example of appeal to popularity. Can you refute that without me having to define refute for you?

 

[paximperium]

I was quoted by Hokulele...I'm blushing.

 

[Cleon]

I'm not talking about "generations" in this instance, I'm talking about oral tradition less than 17 years old with regard to the oral tradition that Paul passed on to the Corinthians. 50 A.D. is 17 years from the crucifixion in 33 A.D.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.p...21#post6033221

And if I get the time I will show that that oral tradition was much less than 17 years old when Paul received it. And gospel writer Luke tells us in Acts that Paul actually met with the main apostle Peter, and other disciples for 2 weeks.

Wonderful. Completely irrelevant to anything I posted, but bully for you.

Do you have a source for this.

Are you unable to find the question mark on your keyboard for some reason?

And yes - the source is me. A childhood spent in Jewish education and Torah study. Of course, you're not really interested in a source - you just use that as a deflection tactic.

Oh, and by the way - the fact that you have to ask for a source is a pretty clear admission that you have zero knowledge of the Talmud, what it is, and how it plays a role in Jewish culture.

 

[DOC]

In fact, the historicity of the Talmud is considered to be rather irrelevant, even among the ultra-Orthodox...

Do you have a source for this?

...And yes - the source is me. A childhood spent in Jewish education and Torah study. Of course, you're not really interested in a source - you just use that as a deflection tactic.

Oh, and by the way - the fact that you have to ask for a source is a pretty clear admission that you have zero knowledge of the Talmud, what it is, and how it plays a role in Jewish culture.

So it would seem your source is your oral learning experience and education rather than something written down.

 

[paximperium]

One more example of DOC's failure to comprehend or likely pretend to.

No implication necessary, DOC. Everyone who reads this thread is aware that you either fail to comprehend everything you read here or you just pretend to. There's no objective difference, in either case.

Do you have a source for this?

So it would seem your source is your oral learning experience and education rather than something written down.

 

[paximperium]

So DOC.
Do you consider Logical Fallacies to be a valid argument?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation

 

[zooterkin]

Do you have a source for this?

Can I just congratulate you on finding the question mark on your keyboard? Now all you have to do is find some sensible questions to tack it on the end of.