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

[kmortis]

In which case, I would perfectly justified in saying that Jesus also said "Rock Over London, Rock on Chicago. Blockbuster Video, what a difference!" and no one would be able to contradict it?

.
So, your theory is that Jesus was Wesley Willis?

 

[amb]

In all seriousness, the last words of Jeebus, or any other words for that matter, prove beyond a shadow of doubt, that the whole fantasy is a made up story, something along similar lines to Hubbard's fantasy which probably was written as S/F, but the people who read the tale made it into a con-job, they saw the possibility of cretins joining and paying money for the privilege.

 

[Aepervius]

What this thread remind me of :

http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20080514.gif

 

[amb]

What this thread remind me of :

http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20080514.gif

Boy, aint that the truth?

 

[Craig4]

One thing is for sure. The gospels were written by anonymous authors. So, it's 150% that they certainly were not writing the truth.

That and there's the whole violation of Conservation of Matter thing, it's not just a good idea, it's the law. The loaves and fishes thing just can't happen.

 

[amb]

But that's the point the gospelers were trying to make. That this man-god Jeebus could break the laws of nature. Therefore a miracle worker. If such a thing had actually occurred,
the whole known world would have heard about it by word of mouth, and we should've had many other sources for the tale. It's only in the discredited gospels, therefore, myth.

 

[DOC]

DOC, after you cited AboveTopSecret.com, and StormFront.com, why should anyone follow your links?

If the information I posted is false say why, otherwise it's a ad hom.

 

[Akhenaten]

If the information I posted is false say why, otherwise it's a ad hom.

Why.

Anything else you need help with?

 

[DOC]

Not only that, he doesn't seem to know that "gave up the ghost" is an idiom meaning "died" and in this case "gave up" has no connotation of a deliberate action.

Then why is one of the definitions to stop trying which is a deliberate action:

From: The Free Dictionary


give up the ghost
1. to die My great-grandfather gave up the ghost a week after moving into a nursing home.
2. to stop operating He had not been to town since spring because his car had given up the ghost.
3. to stop trying She'd been trying to break into acting for ten years without success and was just about to give up the ghost.

And if you don't like my explanation I gave a link to another explanation regarding the issue.

 

[DOC]

he doesn't even seem to know that "last" means "nothing else afterward."

Why do you say this, explain?

 

[Akhenaten]

Not only that, he doesn't seem to know that "gave up the ghost" is an idiom meaning "died" and in this case "gave up" has no connotation of a deliberate action.

Then why is one of the definitions to stop trying which is a deliberate action:

From: The Free Dictionary


give up the ghost
1. to die My great-grandfather gave up the ghost a week after moving into a nursing home.
2. to stop operating He had not been to town since spring because his car had given up the ghost.
3. to stop trying She'd been trying to break into acting for ten years without success and was just about to give up the ghost.

Is this nonsense meant to draw attention away from the fact that you can't answer the simple question "What were Jesus' last words?"

It's not working.

And if you don't like my explanation I gave a link to another explanation regarding the issue.

Which post? You should know by now that when you make claims like this people are going to make you provide a link to a specific post.

I think you lose credibility when you make posts like this.

 

[DOC]

On a different note this wording tells us that Jesus' spirit never did die on the cross because he was giving it to God (the father), only his body died (which was then resurrected later).

I can't even stop laughing long enough to write a proper refutation. I hope Lothian manages better.

This comment means nothing without an explanation.

Edited by LashL: 

Edited to correct quote tag and attribution.

 

[Akhenaten]

Why do you say this, explain?

Who the hell do you think you are to be making demands like this?

How about answering a few of the the dozens of questions you've been asked yourself instead of this childish nonsense of insisting that people explain perfectly simple words and phrases to you?

 

[DOC]

DOC, how can you expect to be taken seriously when you can't even be bothered to properly present your own case?

So when I take the time to find a link that gives a good logical explanation, you don't challenge the explanation in the link but you complain that it's not my own explanation?

 

[Akhenaten]

On a different note this wording tells us that Jesus' spirit never did die on the cross because he was giving it to God (the father), only his body died (which was then resurrected later).

I can't even stop laughing long enough to write a proper refutation. I hope Lothian manages better.

This comment means nothing without an explanation.

Misquoting people yet again, DOC? Those are not Lucian's words.

This happens far too often, DOC. Whether it's mendacity or incompetence, it raises a whole sea of red flags.

 

[Akhenaten]

DOC, how can you expect to be taken seriously when you can't even be bothered to properly present your own case?

So when I take the time to find a link that gives a good logical explanation, you don't challenge the explanation in the link but you complain that it's not my own explanation?

So no such thing, DOC.

My question asked what I meant it to ask. Posting links to dubious/discredited sources is NOT properly presenting YOUR case. People are entitled to think, after you've done the same thing for years that you don't, in fact, have a case to present.

 

[Akhenaten]

Is that it, DOC? A four-day sabbatical and that pathetic little attempt at handwaving and misquoting people is all you have to show for it?

Pitiful, just pitiful.

 

[Akhenaten]

Teh List​

Resurrection Question #1

Matthew 12:40

For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.​

​

See the problem here, DOC?

Jesus is alleged, in the passage above, to have said that he was going to be buried (presumed dead) for three days and three nights and yet the story as it eventuated has him being done in and buried on Friday afternoon and then up and about again on Sunday morning - one day and two nights.

What is YOUR explanation for this discrepancy, DOC?​

Resurrection Question #2

Matthew 28:2-5

²And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat on it. ³His countenance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. ⁴And the guards shook for fear of him, and became like dead men. ⁵But the angel answered and said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified.​

Mark 16:5

And entering the tomb, they saw a young man clothed in a long white robe sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed.​

Luke 24:4

And it happened, as they were greatly perplexed about this, that behold, two men stood by them in shining garments.​

John 20:11,12

¹¹But Mary stood outside by the tomb weeping, and as she wept she stooped down and looked into the tomb. ¹²And she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.​

​

Oh dear!

• Matthew - "the angel"
  
  
• Mark - "a young man"
  
  
• Luke - "two men"
  
  
• John - "two angels"

What is YOUR explanation for these discrepancies, DOC?​

Resurrection Question #3

Matthew 28:5

And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.​

Mark 16:6

And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.​

Luke 24:5

And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?​

John 20:13

And they saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my LORD, and I know not where they have laid him.​

​

Well, there was obviously some cribbing going on in the case of 'Matthew' and 'Mark', but the other two are way off. So what did the various young men/angels in the sketch at the tomb have to say?

At least on the Benny Hill Show everyone was working off the same script.

What is YOUR explanation for these discrepancies, DOC?​

Resurrection Question #4

Matthew 28:1,2

¹In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. ²And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.​

Mark 16:3,4

³And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? ⁴And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.​

Luke 24:2

And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.​

John 20:1

The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.​

​

Let's ignore the references to the dark/dawn thing, the confusion about the day of the week and the Benny Hill-esque cast of characters for now, and just look at the elephant in the room.

Three of these inspired-by-God, eye-witnessing, famous-historianing disciples describe everyone arriving and they're all, like, "Hey! Check it out! The door is open already!"

But Matthew (who enjoys shaking things up a bit as we earlier saw in his rollicking 27:51) has an Angel of teh Lawd™ showing up after the womenfolk, producing an earthquake which everyone else fails to notice and then doing the stone rolling thing.

What is YOUR explanation for this discrepancy, DOC?​

Don't try and claim that you've already answered ANY of these questions, DOC. Your posts are out there for everyone to see, after all.

 

[DOC]

DOC, I agree with you totally. The New Testament accounts consist of a number of stories.

And one of those stories/accounts was written by a great historian (Luke) regarding non-supernatural events (at least according to Sir William M. Mitchell.)

Whether any particular story in a gospel is true or false has no influence on the veracity of other stories.

You can say this about any stories/accounts on any subject, so what.

But when you have several independent stories/accounts saying basically the same thing regarding the major events, that is historical evidence. And the more independent stories/accounts you have basically saying the same thing the better when it comes to history especially when there are people dying and going to jail for those stories/accounts.

You are right, whether or not there are contradicting accounts of Jesus' last words it tells us nothing about whether he was resurrected.

Strawman,

The New Testament Writers Including Embarrassing Details About Themselves tells us nothing about whether he was resurrected

The New Testament Writers Including Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings of Jesus tells us nothing about whether he was resurrected.

The NT Writers Leaving in Very Demanding Sayings of Jesus tells us nothing about whether he was resurrected.

The New Testament Writers Describing Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple, Unembellished Accounts tells us nothing about whether he was resurrected.

You have the right to your opinion.

Each and every miracle needs supporting evidence outside the bible. Ramsay made clear that no such evidence exists and the only way it can be accepted is through faith. Thank Aten, you are starting to seeing the light.

I've said you need faith all along, just like atheists need faith to say God doesn't exist without proof. But Christians don't have blind faith because there is a lot of historical evidence out there regarding Christianity as I've presented in this thread.

 

[zooterkin]

Then why is one of the definitions to stop trying which is a deliberate action:

From: The Free Dictionary


give up the ghost
1. to die My great-grandfather gave up the ghost a week after moving into a nursing home.
2. to stop operating He had not been to town since spring because his car had given up the ghost.
3. to stop trying She'd been trying to break into acting for ten years without success and was just about to give up the ghost.

And if you don't like my explanation I gave a link to another explanation regarding the issue.

Clueless as ever.


The original meaning of the phrase is as used in the bible, meaning to die. The metaphorical uses came much later (19th century, according to this link). Since we're talking about the bible, we know which meaning is meant.