Have you read any of the posts in this thread about former skeptic Sir William M. Ramsay and his claim after 15 years of research in biblical lands that gospel writer Luke was one of the world's great historians (regarding facts that can be proven by historical and archaeological means)?
Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.
- Thread starter DOC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bible evidence new testament
- Status
paximperium
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 30, 2008
- Messages
- 10,696
Lothian
should be banned
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
But Sir William M. Ramsay's assertion is based on historical evidence. For example let's look at some of Luke's writings.
From the article "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist"
by Frank Turek Chapter 10
Luke accurately records:
1. the natural crossing between correctly named ports (Acts 13:4-5)
2. the proper port (Perga) along the direct destination of a ship crossing from Cyprus (13:13)
3. the proper location of Lycaonia (14:6)
4. the unusual but correct declension of the name Lystra (14:6)
5. the correct language spoken in LystraCLycaonian (14:11)
6. two gods known to be so associatedCZeus and Hermes (14:12)
7. the proper port, Attalia, which returning travelers would use (14:25)
8. the correct order of approach to Derbe and then Lystra from the Cilician Gates (16:1; cf. 15:41)
9. the proper form of the name Troas (16:8)
10. the place of a conspicuous sailors' landmark, Samothrace (16:11)
11. the proper description of Philippi as a Roman colony (16:12)
12. the right location for the river (Gangites) near Philippi (16:13)
13. the proper association of Thyatira as a center of dyeing (16:14)
14. correct designations for the magistrates of the colony (16:22)
15. the proper locations (Amphipolis and Apollonia) where travelers would spend successive nights on this journey (17:1)
16. the presence of a synagogue in Thessalonica (17:1)
17. the proper term (Apolitarchs') used of the magistrates there (17:6)
18. the correct implication that sea travel is the most convenient way of reaching Athens, with the favoring east winds of summer sailing (17:14-15)
19. the abundant presence of images in Athens (17:16)
20. the reference to a synagogue in Athens (17:17)
There are 64 more such detailed facts written by Luke on this link, scroll down about a quarter of the way to see them.
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=51643
Last edited:
Lothian
should be banned
I am glad we agree that Ramsay only found evidence of the mundane background locations and names and no evidence whatsoever for the supernatural parts of the Jesus fable.
Rather than apologist propaganda shall we dig out Ramsay's own words yet again
"The surrounding facts are matter of history, and can be discussed and proved by historical evidence. The essential facts of the narrative are not susceptible of discussion on historical principles, and do not condescend to be tested by historical evidence. "
"We know that Luke was right in the external facts, because the records have disclosed the whole system of the census ; but as to the inner facts, the birth and the divine nature of Jesus, there can (as said above) be no historical reasoning, for those are a matter of faith, of intuition, and of the individual human being's experience and inner life."
"The truth of the historical surroundings in which Luke's narrative places the birth of Jesus does not prove that the supreme facts, which give human and divine value to the birth, are true- It may be that " the first enrolment " really took place. Yet this does not prove that Mary was the mother of Christ."
"No man can make historical investigation and historical proof take the place of faith"
"We know that Luke was right in the external facts, because the records have disclosed the whole system of the census ; but as to the inner facts, the birth and the divine nature of Jesus, there can (as said above) be no historical reasoning, for those are a matter of faith, of intuition, and of the individual human being's experience and inner life."
"The truth of the historical surroundings in which Luke's narrative places the birth of Jesus does not prove that the supreme facts, which give human and divine value to the birth, are true- It may be that " the first enrolment " really took place. Yet this does not prove that Mary was the mother of Christ."
"No man can make historical investigation and historical proof take the place of faith"
Last edited:
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
Acts 13:4,5 King James Version
4 So, being sent out by the Holy Spirit, they went down to Seleucia, and from there they sailed to Cyprus.
5 And when they arrived in Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews. They also had John as their assistant.
5 And when they arrived in Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews. They also had John as their assistant.
So, young Luke has accurately recorded . . . a straight line. Halle-bloody-lujah!!! And why exactly is this 'the natural crossing place?
It's all just as pathetic, DOC, but I can do all of it if you like.
Do you really want to continue embarrassing yourself like this?
Last edited:
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
Acts 13:13-52 (King James Version)
13Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga in Pamphylia: and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem.
Birnam is a village near Dunkeld, Scotland, the location of Great Birnam Wood. Dunsinane Hill is near the village of Collace in Perthshire, Scotland.
Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 3 (William Shakespeare)
I will not be afraid of death and bane,
Till Birnam forest come to Dunsinane.
Till Birnam forest come to Dunsinane.
Macbeth is a history book?
Mojo
Mostly harmless
It can't be a proper history book (in the context of this thread) because, while it was indeed written long after the events it supposedly records, there is independent evidence that Macbeth existed and was King of Scotland.
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
It can't be a proper history book (in the context of this thread) because, while it was indeed written long after the events it supposedly records, there is independent evidence that Macbeth existed and was King of Scotland.
Wow. This history stuff is really hard.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
What does any of this have to do with whether the supernatural parts of the bible, which Ramsay explicitly excluded from his claims of historicity, were true?
Have you read any of the many, many posts where this was pointed out to you? Have you also no shame whatsoever about repeatedly quoting comments about a particular field of knowledge which are over 150 years out of date?
Last edited:
Helen
Implicitly explicit
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
Yes, but how many works of fiction have 30 actually present day or recent history historical people (many famous and powerful) in them (like the NT did -- verified by secular sources or archaeology). Nowadays they can sue the pants off you if you tell falsehoods about them, but at that time they or their relatives would simply deny the story hurting the authors credibility, or possibly if they had power like the Herodian line maybe put you in prison or worse if you told falsehoods about them.
Last edited:
- Status