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

[kmortis]

Bacon!?

Yes. Deep fried, chocolate covered, peanut butter laden bacon.


See DOC, you were going about it all wrong. You have to provide evidence in the form of food stuffs. Especially bacon.

 

[Hokulele]

Wouldn't bacon be a reason for me to support the spread of Judaism? More for me!

 

[Resume]

Will Believe Hooey for Bacon.

 

[kmortis]

Wouldn't bacon be a reason for me to support the spread of Judaism? More for me!

I don't follow you. Jews aren't allowed to eat bacon. It's from a pig.

 

[Hokulele]

I don't follow you. Jews aren't allowed to eat bacon. It's from a pig.

Exactly. More Jews = less competition for the bacony goodness.

 

[RobRoy]

Exactly. More Jews = less competition for the bacony goodness.

Clearly there must be a Satan, because you're working for him. What a vile and evil plot . . . I would like to become your minion.

And for the record, I only came back to this thread because I saw that Hokulele had posted. I couldn't imagine she was having a serious conversation in here, so I had to know.

 

[Mojo]

So Jesus wasn't any more moral than the people of his time. Got it.

Which seems a little weak for the son of a deity, or a deity, or whatever he's alleged to be.

I thought we had established quite some time ago that he was a moral relativist.

 

[kmortis]

I thought we had established quite some time ago that he was an amoral relativist.

Ftfy.

 

[catsmate]

Yes, in post #13104, and I'll bring in some new evidence within 2 weeks.

Will you be providing some evidence for your assertion that:

........Roman historians thought highly of Gospel writer Luke as an historian.

It will then be seventy days since I challenged you to support this ludicrous statement, made by you in post 15661 of this thread.
ETA: my one thousandth post, should I have wasted it on this......

 

[Zanders]

So then you must believe Thomas Jefferson wasted his time when he cut out 900 verses of the NT with a razor, showed each verse translated into 4 different languages, and pasted them all in a book, since you believe nothing Jesus introduced was particularly new.

Oh, that totally proves everything. No argument we could make can ever stand up to that. Thread over.

Anyway, don't forget my link. I really want you to try and refute what it says.

http://www.answering-christianity.com/abdullah_smith/historical_errors_in_the_gospels-3.htm

 

[joobz]

Yes, in post #13104, and I'll bring in some new evidence within 2 weeks.

DOC, you haven't presented any evidence* in 2 years. Do you honestly believe you'll be able to present some in 2 weeks?


*by evidence, I mean logical rational arguments supported by reliable, observable external facts. In other words, what evidence is supposed to mean and not what you wish it to mean.

 

[kmortis]

Here is the first definition of evidence according to answers.com:

"A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment"

The things posted in my first post are helpful in my forming a judgment that the NT writers were telling the truth.

And the more evidence we have that the NT authors were telling the truth, the more likely it is that the Resurrection was true.

What's the matter, joobz, this not an adequate definition for you?

 

[joobz]

What's the matter, joobz, this not an adequate definition for you?

The problem is, even by his own definitions, his evidence is evidence against his position.

Afterall, DOC's Logical fallacies only help support the conclusion that his conclusion is the wrong one.

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

Yes, in post #13104, and I'll bring in some new evidence within 2 weeks.

What??? 2 weeks??? Usually you only make us wait 10 days for New Evidence Crap.

GB

 

[Resume]

Do you know what parts of the nt Jefferson was excising?

Gonna answer this DOC?

 

[kmortis]

What??? 2 weeks??? Usually you only make us wait 10 days for New Evidence Crap.

GB

Inflation's a bitch, man.

 

[Lucian]

What's the matter, joobz, this not an adequate definition for you?

You know what we need? A DOCtionary.

 

[GrandMasterFox]

I find it hilarious that nobody bothered to mention that not only does DOC's god clearly endorses slavery, he also can't make up his mind on how to do it properly.

What are the rules for treating slaves?

These:

2 “If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.

7 “If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. 9 If he selects her for his son, he must grant her the rights of a daughter. 10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights. 11 If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without any payment of money.

Or these?

12 If any of your people—Hebrew men or women—sell themselves to you and serve you six years, in the seventh year you must let them go free. 13 And when you release them, do not send them away empty-handed. 14 Supply them liberally from your flock, your threshing floor and your winepress. Give to them as the LORD your God has blessed you. 15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and the LORD your God redeemed you. That is why I give you this command today.
16 But if your servant says to you, “I do not want to leave you,” because he loves you and your family and is well off with you, 17 then take an awl and push it through his earlobe into the door, and he will become your servant for life. Do the same for your female servant.

And both of these rullings were given supposably by moses in the desert...

Clearly this is a divine text

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

I find it hilarious that nobody bothered to mention that not only does DOC's god clearly endorses slavery, he also can't make up his mind on how to do it properly.

What are the rules for treating slaves?

These:


Or these?


And both of these rullings were given supposably by moses in the desert...

Clearly this is a divine text

Oh, the Moral Relativity of God gets even BETTER than that in the OT as the following excerpt of my previous posts here and at other forums demonstrates (I hope you are paying attention DOC):

1 Samuel 15:2-3:

2 This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.'

Here God orders via Samuel the slaughter of all, including "children and infants." Is this "merciful"?

Not to mention that further on God tells Samuel to admonish Saul for NOT killing all of the livestock and taking it as plunder.

Numbers 31: 17-18:

17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

This is Moses speaking on behalf of God. But, as some have pointed out in prior posts this could just be a description of Bronze Age behaviour not a Prescription by God, right? Right?

Numbers 31:25-35:

25 The LORD said to Moses, 26 "You and Eleazar the priest and the family heads of the community are to count all the people and animals that were captured. 27 Divide the spoils between the soldiers who took part in the battle and the rest of the community. 28 From the soldiers who fought in the battle, set apart as tribute for the LORD one out of every five hundred, whether persons, cattle, donkeys, sheep or goats. 29 Take this tribute from their half share and give it to Eleazar the priest as the LORD's part. 30 From the Israelites' half, select one out of every fifty, whether persons, cattle, donkeys, sheep, goats or other animals. Give them to the Levites, who are responsible for the care of the LORD's tabernacle." 31 So Moses and Eleazar the priest did as the LORD commanded Moses.

32 The plunder remaining from the spoils that the soldiers took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys 35 and 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.

Or not! Apparently God not only approves of the slaughter of all except virgins, but commands dividing them up as spoils of war.

Genocide, Sexual Slavery and Paedophiliac Rape of young girls, as commanded by Yahweh! If God commanded it, surely it must be followed as God's Law.

This is what Slavery of non-Hebrews meant in the OT. Did Jesus contradict His Father Self in the NT DOC? Certainly not in Luke 12:35-48.

And Jesus came to FULFILL OT Law...isn't that right DOC?

Matthew 5:17:

17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Doesn't this give you pause to reconsider the veracity of the NT DOC?

Surely the Peace-loving and Compassionate Jesus would have disavowed the Satanic acts of His Father.

GB

 

[GrandMasterFox]

Oh, the Moral Relativity of God gets even BETTER than that in the OT

Actually I wasn't refering to the morality, but rather the consistency of it.
The slave laws (like most of the stuff in the bible) appears in multiple contradictory versions.