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

[Hokulele]

You're just jealous of my mad copy 'n paste skillz.

 

[Belz...]

Text aversion.

DOC doesn't like too many words.

Of course not. Otherwise he wouldn't make so many posts for himself to count. And then he couldn't use that number as an "argument".

 

[DOC]

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.

I don't see any threads "Evidence for Why" Islam, hindu, and the flying spaghetti monster is true.

 

[Akhenaten]

I don't see any threads "Evidence for Why" Islam, buddism, hindu, and the flying spaghetti monster is true.

That has nothing to do with the topic of this thread, does it, DOC?

Does this mean that you are conceding that there is no evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth?


About time.

 

[DOC]

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

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

Discussed here:

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

Quote:
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

Quote:
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/

Quote:
The Cosmological Argument,

Discussed (ad nauseum) here:

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

Quote:
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

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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

Quote:
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

Quote:
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

Quote:
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

Quote:
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...

As I stated once before, it seems your definition of "refute" mostly means "to discuss" something.

 

[carlitos]

 

[amb]

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.

Sorry. I still can't find it. I told you I'm ignorant.

 

[Akhenaten]

As I stated once before it seems your definition of "refute" is "to discuss".

In the case of the rubbish that you produce as evidence, DOC, discussion and refutation are one and the same thing.

Your arguments, for want of a more accurate term to describe the material you present here, are completely without merit, and even the most cursory discussion of them leads almost instantly to their refutation.

Can you cite even one participant in this thread who thinks that this is not the case?

 

[Akhenaten]

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.

Sorry. I still can't find it. I told you I'm ignorant.

Abandon All Hope. <---- Click here, Cobber

It's the forum's Naughty Corner.

 

[joobz]

As I stated once before, it seems your definition of "refute" mostly means "to discuss" something.

Another zero information post.

 

[amb]

​

I found that. I couldn't find any of my posts there. I'm supposed to have a couple.

 

[paximperium]

As I stated once before, it seems your definition of "refute" mostly means "to discuss" something.

" Many of your derogatory post have no explanations,..."

 

[Akhenaten]

I found that. I couldn't find any of my posts there. I'm supposed to have a couple.

Bottled Water (split from: Welcome thread)

Astral War​

On the open-ended JREF Forum Naughtiness Scale, you're a .0003, or 'Goody Two-shoes'.

I don't think you're even trying.

 

[RoboTimbo]

I found that. I couldn't find any of my posts there. I'm supposed to have a couple.

Once you get to AAH, towards the top right will be a link "Search this Forum". Click on that for the drop down, then click on Advanced Search. You can type your nick (or anyone's) in the "Search by User Name" field to find your naughty posts.

If you don't have any posts in there, you just aren't trying hard enough.*

What do you think of the "evidence"** that DOC has shared with us?***











* This opinion is not shared by JREF moderators.

** Anecdotes, circular logic, fallacies, falsehoods.

*** To keep this post on topic and avoid the naughty corner.

 

[Hokulele]

As I stated once before, it seems your definition of "refute" mostly means "to discuss" something.

You do understand that refuting something involves more than just saying, "Nuh uh!", yes? By referring to those threads or sections of threads as discussions, I am informing the people who actually bother to follow the links (i.e., not you) that there may be several posts, pages, or pages of posts involved in the refutation.

If, during said discussion, all of your points are smashed into flinders, they can be considered to be refuted.

As long as you keep spamming your inane blithering regarding what you consider to be evidence, I will continue to point out how weak it really is.

 

[kmortis]

* kmortis looks around with a pained expression

Why do I always get stuck doing this?

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,

Refuted 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.

Disproved here:

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

The Moral Argument,

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

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

The Cosmological Argument,

Contested (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.

Rubutted 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.

The counter 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.

Proved false 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 trashed here:

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

More shredding 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.

Trounced 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.

*For the generationally challenged....

 

[Hokulele]

Thank you, kmo. Have a cookie.


No, not that one, the other cookie.

 

[kmortis]

Thank you, kmo. Have a cookie.


No, not that one, the other cookie.

Mmmmm...cookie.

Oh, I think I ate too many.....

 

[Filippo Lippi]

Another zero information post.

Red flag!

 

[Simon39759]

Red flag!

ETA: Praise Pharaoh!