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

[NavyPack]

I know this has been attempted previously, but it looks like this thread is cyclical anyway....

DOC,
Please provide your absolute, best, strongest, individual piece of evidence. Is that a terrible imposition? We could discus in detail, and I make the following pledge. If this best evidence demonstrates the divinity of jesus, and can withstand the scrutiny of the forumites, I will convert to your flavor of xtianity, proclaiming both jesus's and your redemptive power.

Conversely, if this best evidence fails to withstand skeptical scrutiny, you will never use it again as evidence for why we know the n.t. writers told the truth.

That's a pretty good risk/reward for you, no?

If you are here to win souls for your deity, how could you pass this deal up?

 

[Waterman]

Actually the number of posts I have made (over 2000) is something for people to think about.

Why? You are dogged and persistent in your position despite being repeated being shown to be in error in your reasoning. That you repeated use logical fallacies in the mistaken idea that they are supporting your position. As Lothian pointed out your post count is inflated by the ones he pointed out and many of your posts are repeats of the previous ones or cut and paste jobs from other sources. Also note that of the remaining posts in the thread the vast majority of those disagree with you. So if this is a numbers game you are loosing at least 4 to 1 (it would be around 6 to 1 but I’m estimating that at a generous 25% of this thread is side discussions and humor.

Could a Scientologist legitimately defend their religion against 250 skeptics in a 351 page thread with 14,000 posts in it.

I disagree that your defense has been legitimate, you repeatedly use logical fallacies in support of your position and only rarely revise your position when shown to be in error. You often repeat the arguments that have been challenged by others but you fail to defend further. Using your tactics any person with a strong belief no matter how silly it is could chose to defend it in this manner. All it is takes is dogged determination and unwillingness to admit that you are wrong.

How about a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or Jew.

Sure they could if they choose to. They have just as good an argument and data as you do.

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 351.

So what? This irrelevant to what is the actual truth. I have seen another thread where a UFO believer argued just as adamantly regarding that a blimp was more unlikely than a alien space craft for pages and pages. I also disagree with your ‘cold facts’ statement. A significant portion of your arguments boils down to unfounded opinions and are not actually facts in support of your arguments. You actually do bring in a few fact but they have little to do with the supporting your position.

Whether you agree with me or not, one has to seriously consider the fact that I have so much information to support my claims.

Information is not equal to evidence. The information you have provided does not support your claim that the new testament is true unless you accept that irrelevant facts, quotes and misquotes of famous people, opinions of famous people, untruths, tradition, fallacious arguments, speculation and conjecture are evidence? Are they?

Where are the followers of other religions supporting their beliefs with cold historical data against hundreds of skeptics as I have done?

Irrelevant, Maybe they have better things to do with their time? Perhaps feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, praying, instead of getting the head handed them on a platter every time they get on line.

People who ask me why is your religion any different then all the rest, really have to think about that. And the members of other religions should think about that also.

I’ll give you a clue… every religion thinks that they are the right ones and everyone else is doing it wrong. The statement above could be said by any believer of any religion and it would ring true for them. They all think that they have the truth.

Christianity does have a lot of evidence to support it and I think I have shown that in my over 2000 posts. And I believe there is even more evidence out there that will come out slowly but surely if people are patient.

Well if there is so much, WHERE IS IT? It has been pointed out to you time and again that so far what you have posted does not fit into the category of ‘evidence’ as discussed in one of my prior posts.

 

[Paulhoff]

Actually the number of posts I have made (over 2000) is something for people to think about. Could a Scientologist legitimately defend their religion against 250 skeptics in a 351 page thread with 14,000 posts in it. How about a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or Jew.

You haven't defended your so-called idea of a god.

Also you should know that Buddhism has no god.

Paul

 

[Elizabeth I]

He and every one else needs to find the purpose God put them on this planet for. You won't have peace in your life until you do.

And here we see the spiritual arrogance of the true believer. You have no idea whether the people responding to your clueless "argument" are at peace or not.

(...and, for that matter, you are assuming the truth of a god in your statement. First we need to find out IF there is a god, THEN we can go about finding out what its purpose for our lives is.)

 

[joobz]

And here we see the spiritual arrogance of the true believer. You have no idea whether the people responding to your clueless "argument" are at peace or not.

(...and, for that matter, you are assuming the truth of a god in your statement. First we need to find out IF there is a god, THEN we can go about finding out what its purpose for our lives is.)

No reason to get upset. Just think of the kind of sadness one must have in order to believe as DOC does. If it brings him comfort to think others are less than him, so be it.

 

[carlitos]

In that case I will repost the replies you got last time you did this.

I think that my response was the most appropriate, if not the most eloquent.

 

[Belz...]

Well the New Testament (centered around the life of Christ) has over 5000 manuscripts in existence and Caesar's supposed book Gallic Wars (which was never illegal to own) has 10. Also I've personally seen the testimony of probably at least 75 people on the positive life changing affect of Christ on their life and have never seen any about the affect of Caesar on their lives. Also the book centered around the life of Christ is the greatest selling book in history by most accounts. Additionally the religion based around the life of Christ has endured for 2000 years and is the largest religion in the world. I know of know religion based on Caesar's life. So my answer is just Jesus.

What does any of this have to do with it ?

 

[Belz...]

Actually I took philosophy 101

Well, that explains it, then.

 

[Belz...]

He and every one else needs to find the purpose God put them on this planet for.

Apparently god has no use for billions upon billions of people, then.

You won't have peace in your life until you do.

Rhetoric.

 

[Elizabeth I]

No reason to get upset. Just think of the kind of sadness one must have in order to believe as DOC does. If it brings him comfort to think others are less than him, so be it.

Sorry - intellectual dishonesty makes me want to scream. <<takes a deep breath and goes off to read a "Bigfoot" thread>>

 

[Wolrab]

Could a Scientologist legitimately defend their religion against 250 skeptics in a 351 page thread with 14,000 posts in it. How about a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or Jew.

Anyone claiming anything can if they just recycle the same 20 or so (non) arguments and ignore when they are shot down. The only difference is persistence. Most would either abandon the thread, ignore the thread while starting another equally stupid one, or actually learn something and change their ways.

Just because you keep repeating the exact same things doesn't mean they will magically be right some day. What is that saying about doing the same thing and expecting a different result?

 

[Wolrab]

I also took Philosophy 101. It was a survey course. the only way not to get an A was to drop out.

 

[joobz]

Sorry - intellectual dishonesty makes me want to scream. <<takes a deep breath and goes off to read a "Bigfoot" thread>>

I agree. But look at his method of argument. He hasn't been intellectually honest in over 2 years. He has resorted to projecting suffering on others as a means of argument. That's pathetic and doesn't deserve anything more consideration.

I will continue to point out the flaws in his argument, but - as I would treat a mewling child- I will not get angry.

 

[Hokulele]

Actually the number of posts I have made (over 2000) is something for people to think about. Could a Scientologist legitimately defend their religion against 250 skeptics in a 351 page thread with 14,000 posts in it. How about a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or Jew.

That thingy over by your Shift key is called a question mark. Does your keyboard not have one?

And DOC, you aren't anything special. Doronshadmi thinks he/she is redefining math and philosophy over in the "Deeper than Primes" thread that has been going on for ages. Rramjet thinks he/she has been offering irrefutable proof of UFO's in more than one thread that has been going on for ages. Pigheadedness is only evidence of pigheadedness, not of truth.

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 351.

Maybe because followers of those religions are as pigheaded as Christians.

Seriously though, you are missing one of the big differences between the religions listed, which is the concept of the "Great Commission". Most of the religions you listed generally do not practice evangelism, which appears to be the only reason you post to this forum. Most Jews and Buddhists could not possibly care less if other people believe differently from them. "Live and let live" could be the motto of either of these religions, so to have a follower babble on and on about the "evidence" for the truth of their religion would actually be evidence that they are out of the mainstream for their professed belief-system.

Regarding Scientology, fredcarr, I think that's his screen nick, has been here for years defending Scientology. You do not see him as much as there are far fewer threads on Scientology than on Christianity (which, before you say anything, is not evidence that Christianity is truer than Scientology, just that it is more popular). By your standards, fredcarr is evidence that Scientology is more true than Christianity because he has been here defending his beliefs longer than you have, and you seem to believe that the longer something has been around, the more likely it is to be true.

And last, but certainly not least, Islam does get its share of attention, but there are far fewer Muslims on this board, and many of them do not speak English as their first language.

To be honest, your sad attempts at debate often seem more like they are attempts to convince yourself that Christianity is true, not to convince others.

 

[zooterkin]

Sorry - intellectual dishonesty makes me want to scream.

Are you suggesting DOC is intellectual?

 

[Lucian]

*Snork*

Bwahahahahahahahaha!

That, by the way, is my considered and professional response to you post, DOC.

It seems we should add "defend" to the list of words DOC does not really understand.
It joins "evidence", "fallacy" and "logic".

Also "legitimately," "fact ('cold' or otherwise)," "data," "historical" and "information."

 

[Toke]

He and every one else needs to find the purpose God put them on this planet for. You won't have peace in your life until you do.

That would pose a bit of a practical problem.
The last millennium have brought some serious changes in countries with monasteries, so raiding them for slaves and loot would meet both stiff resistance and revenge.
(And the slave markets have closed)

 

[carlitos]

Indeed. In fact, the Danish version of the bible I found says "servant" in Luke 12, when the original Greek used "slave."

 

[six7s]

For the most part I can't talk to non-believers in here in spiritual terms so I talk in numbers and facts that the average person can understand.

No

You tell lies masquerading as facts

You can talk about fallacies until you're blue in the face

If you would prefer no further mention of fallacies, stop making them

but the average everyday person will look at the facts I mentioned

You mean your lies, right?

and I know it will make them wonder why this man named Jesus in a small far off Roman province caused everything I mentioned.

No

You might hope that they wonder

Odds are that anyone reading your nonsense will - at best - wonder IF your tales of your messiah are anything other than delusional myths

...anyone who has read all the other information I've given in my 2000 posts in this thread knows that they are not the only reasons I believe in Christianity.

Little if anything in your 2000+ posts is 'information'... most of it is nothing other than circular (il)logic... something you, as an A-grade graduate, should recognise

You might be need/want to believe in baseless woo... that is your right

However, you started this thread claiming you had 'evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth'... anyone capable of tying their own shoelaces who has read even a fraction of the 2000+ posts that you have made in this thread knows you wouldn't recognise credible evidence if it bit you on the arse

 

[six7s]

And I might have wrongly given the impression (in the post above) that the facts I mentioned were the "only" reason I believe in Christianity -- in that case they would be a fallacy if they were the "only" reason. But anyone who has read all the other information I've given in my 2000 posts in this thread knows that they are not the only reasons I believe in Christianity.

You don't know what fallacy means, do you?

I am sure he uses the same dictionary for looking up "fallacy" that he uses for the definition of "evidence".

Which explains how he got an "A" in "logic".

Maybe the marks were awarded by someone using QWERTY...

And why would DOC bother with a dictionary when he has all the knowledge he needs in one title?

Revelation 1:8

⁸I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

A, B, C, D, E, FAIL... It's all the same in woo-speak