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

[amb]

Jeebus. 351 pages and counting. And still not a single shred of evidence can be produced that the gospelers were telling the truth.

Could it be that the whole thing is nothing but myth? Me thinks so.

 

[DOC]

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. 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. Whether you agree with me or not, one has to seriously consider the fact that I have so much information to support my claims. Where are the followers of other religions supporting their beliefs with cold historical data against hundreds of skeptics as I have done? 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...

DOC,
Please identify the 3 logical fallacies in your idiotic post

Many of your derogatory post have no explanations, now you want me to explain your posts for you before you explain them??

 

[joobz]

Many of your derogatory post have no explanations, now you want me to explain your posts for you??

That may be true. But it doesn't change that your post was loaded with logical fallacies.

If you don't like it when people point it out, then you should stop making them.

 

[DOC]

Are you going to bring any 'cold facts' that are relevant to the OP to this thread?

Post 13104 would be a good place to look.

 

[DOC]

That may be true. But it doesn't change that your post was loaded with logical fallacies

Which post points out any fallacies in my below statement?


Posted by DOC
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. 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. Whether you agree with me or not, one has to seriously consider the fact that I have so much information to support my claims. Where are the followers of other religions supporting their beliefs with cold historical data against hundreds of skeptics as I have done? 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...

 

[Waterman]

DOC,
Please identify the 3 logical fallacies in your idiotic post

Many of your derogatory post have no explanations, now you want me to explain your posts for you before you explain them??

DOC,
It is clear that you have misread this post. Pax was clearly asking YOU to use your training in logic to identify the Logical Fallacies in YOUR post not his. While his words were inflammatory his point still stands. There are a number of logical fallacies in YOUR post. Can you identify them? Will you identify them?

 

[zooterkin]

Post 13104 would be a good place to look.

Really, DOC, spend some time learning how to post links, and quote properly.

You mean this post? No, no relevant facts there, it's all been dealt with several times, as you'd know if you'd been following this thread.

 

[Waterman]

Post 13104 would be a good place to look.

Ooh ooh can I play this game too. See my post 11480 that would be a good place to start with responses. (Note that post 13104 is a rehash of stuff previously posted by DOC.)

 

[Sideroxylon]

Which post points out any fallacies in my below statement?


Posted by DOC
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. 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. Whether you agree with me or not, one has to seriously consider the fact that I have so much information to support my claims. Where are the followers of other religions supporting their beliefs with cold historical data against hundreds of skeptics as I have done? 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...

Backed up with numbers like that, it’s clear you are blazing a new trail in apologetics, laying the unceasing onslaught of objections low with the sword of rational argument. Bravo!

 

[zooterkin]

Edited by LibraryLady: 

Edited for civility

my bolding


You tell us to "ask historians" and in the same breath, quote the works of "biblical scholars" at us. Are you for real DOC, or just a parody of an apologist?

Biblical scholars provide evidence for the veracity of the blble?!?eleven?!?

Edited by LibraryLady: 

Edited for civility

Edited by LibraryLady: 

Edited for civility

Pharaoh, belated congratulations on what is (now) your 1000th post in this thread. Please award yourself a medal. Have you left us?

 

[joobz]

Which post points out any fallacies in my below statement?

Hokulele's post did an excellent job explaining why your appeal to numbers and was wholly irrelevant.

I suggest reading it and explain why she is wrong.

Posted by DOC
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. 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. Whether you agree with me or not, one has to seriously consider the fact that I have so much information to support my claims. Where are the followers of other religions supporting their beliefs with cold historical data against hundreds of skeptics as I have done? 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...

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.




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.

 

[amb]

Which post points out any fallacies in my below statement?


Posted by DOC
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. 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. Whether you agree with me or not, one has to seriously consider the fact that I have so much information to support my claims. Where are the followers of other religions supporting their beliefs with cold historical data against hundreds of skeptics as I have done? 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...

So, what you are saying is that christianity is the only right religion. All others are wrong.
A muslim could say the same thing. So could a buddhist, hindu, you name it.
The church of the " flying spaghetti monster " could also argue that it's the true church. As could the Jedi religion.

 

[Akhenaten]

Pharaoh, belated congratulations on what is (now) your 1000th post in this thread. Please award yourself a medal. Have you left us?

Thanks mate. I did, in fact award myself a gong, but the picture was removed for being uncivil and the post moved to AAH.

 

[amb]

Pardon for showing my ignorance. But what is the AAH thread?

 

[paximperium]

Strange how DOC missed Hokulele's post...

 

[RoboTimbo]

Pardon for showing my ignorance. But what is the AAH thread?

It's one of the sub fora where naughty posts go. Click on Forum Index at the top left of the page, then Forum Index again. You'll see it on the list of fora. You have a couple of posts in there yourself.

 

[Akhenaten]

Pardon for showing my ignorance. But what is the AAH thread?

Abandon All Hope.

It's the forum's Naughty Corner.

 

[joobz]

Strange how DOC missed Hokulele's post...

Text aversion.

DOC doesn't like too many words.

 

[Hokulele]

Post 13104 would be a good place to look.

Already done.

So then you knew about all of these facts I brought in before you started to read the thread?

All of these "facts", most of which have been refuted, don't even support your premise. But just for fun, here we go:

Sir William Mitchell Ramsay calling gospel writer Luke a great historian,

Discussed here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5093485#post5093485

Oxford professor Thomas Arnold's statement regarding the evidence of Christ and the Resurrection.

Discussed here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2659155#post2659155

The Moral Argument,

Although there are bits and bobs of discussion about this, the best summary of this in all its forms is here:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-arguments-god/

The Cosmological Argument,

Discussed (ad nauseum) here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4984792#post4984792

the fact that there is over 5000 New Testament manuscripts in existence compared to 7 for Plato and 20 for famous Roman Historian Tacitus.

Discussed here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5042421#post5042421

The fact that there are 41 written sources for the life of Christ (31 Christian + 9 non-Christian) compared to 10 written sources (9 non-Christian + 1 Christian) for the life of Tiberius Caesar, the emperor during the life of Christ.

Discussion on the 9 non-Christian sources for the life of Christ (ignoring the 31 Christian sources as it is using the NT as evidence for the NT, yellow flag, 15 yard penalty, repeat 3rd down):

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3279037#post3279037

Ignoring the bit about Caesar as being a meaningless tu quoque.

Christianity had spread all the way to Rome by peaceful means and Nero blamed the Christians in Rome for the Roman fire in 64 ad.-- 31 years after the death of Christ.

Well, this is the closest thing to being a fact (at least the bit about Nero). Of course, most of the credit can go to Paul who, as we all know, never met Jesus in person. At best, he had some sort of visionary experience. I would say this point is more evidence that Paul was convincing than what he believed had any basis in truth. Of course, many people have tried to use the spread of Christianity as an argument of its truth, but that rarely ends well, as can be seen here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94853&page=3

Jews have been converted to Christianity because of Isaiah Chapter 53 and at least one writer has claimed there are 25 fulfilled prophesies in that one chapter.

Refuted here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4705438#post4705438

And here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4708185#post4708185

And here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4720381#post4720381

Most archaeologists believe Jesus' 1st century tomb is most probably directly under the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

Partially discussed here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=5124142#post5124142

More discussion here, with much more detail about any archeological support of any biblical story:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4997467#post4997467

11 apostles suffered a martyrs death in spite of the fact it was recorded they acted cowardly and uncertain before the resurrection.

Discussed here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4664470#post4664470

And a big reason some of these get repeated is that they are needed to give a complete response to some skeptics who keep asking the same questions or bring up the same points.

The same questions are repeated because these arguments have all been refuted, and just like a Weeble, they keep coming back up again.

And most interestingly, none of these "facts" have much to do with the "evidence" laid out in the OP. Of course, those were dealt with pretty much on page 1.

Next!

 

[Akhenaten]

Show off.