Merged Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth - (Part 2)

[Elizabeth I]

Really?

You're incapable of Googling things yourself?

I'm not inclined to spoonfeed anyone who isn't willing to follow issues to ground.

It's more a matter of, they're your points, so it's up to you to support them. Would you write a paper and instead of listing your sources, just say, "I had a bunch of sources. If you're interested, go look them up yourself"?

While this may not be a scholarly venue, the principle is similar.

 

[OCaptain]

It's more a matter of, they're your points, so it's up to you to support them. Would you write a paper and instead of listing your sources, just say, "I had a bunch of sources. If you're interested, go look them up yourself"?

While this may not be a scholarly venue, the principle is similar.

Not really. It's not as though there's some question these scholars or the list exist.

I'm simply sharing information. It exists, whether you believe in it or not.

 

[Olowkow]

I googled The Biblical Studies listserve and the first of 55,000 hits was this thread! That tells me something.

I am reminded of Monty Python's "Ann Elk" routine about her theory of the brontosaurus. Why not just copy and paste a link to your site?

 

[carlitos]

What do you think of redaction criticism?

I ask because I was reading a recent exchange on the biblical studies yahoo listserve in which both redaction criticism and Q were roundly ridiculed by a good number of the scholars on-hand.

Are you familiar with the list ?

I guess not then....no constructive reply from you.

Normally, I ignore rude posts because they're not worth my time, but yours was just the right combination of rudeness, ignorance and snark that it just rubbed me the wrong way. You went above and beyond in highlighting part of my message in order to make a joke, and yet you offered nothing of substance.

I knew immediately that you knew nothing of the list I referred to, or else you wouldn't have been so dismissive. The Biblical Studies listserve is made up primarily of scholars from around the globe, including a great number of biblical minimalists, and those of the Copenhagen School. The minds on the list are greater than mine and yours combined. Even though there is a great deal of disagreement on it, there is also a great deal of respect and civility.

Before posting my reply, I read you recent post history and it seems like that is par for the course for you. In the future, I will simply consider the source and ignore such posts.

Hi OCaptain. You still haven't linked or typed any "list" of the members of any listserve for anyone here to comment on. You certainly haven't presented any of their "redaction criticism" for any of us to react to. Remember, we can't read it here unless you post it here.

Also, in case you are unaware, this thread is a continuation. If you want to read the original 20,000+ posts, you can do so here. If you read that, you might understand why some folks have lost patience with DOC.

Really?

You're incapable of Googling things yourself?

I'm not inclined to spoonfeed anyone who isn't willing to follow issues to ground.

That's your response to my completely snark-free post that asked about the list you keep mentioning? Really? And you normally ignore "rude" posts? Wow.

 

[zooterkin]

I googled The Biblical Studies listserve and the first of 55,000 hits was this thread! That tells me something.

I am reminded of Monty Python's "Ann Elk" routine about her theory of the brontosaurus. Why not just copy and paste a link to your site?

To be fair, you left out 'yahoo'. If you include it, the first link is this. That still doesn't mean it's not up to OCaptain to link to some examples of what he's talking about.

ETA: All the more so since you have to join the group to read any of the messages there, it seems.

 

[Olowkow]

To be fair, you left out 'yahoo'. If you include it, the first link is this. ...../quote]

Well, not for me. My first hit on Yahoo.com is this.

 

[zooterkin]

To be fair, you left out 'yahoo'. If you include it, the first link is this. .....

Well, not for me. My first hit on Yahoo.com is this.

No, not searching on yahoo.com, I mean searching for "biblical studies yahoo listserve" on Google.

 

[think analytically]

I have never appealed to authority in the way of "an expert believes this, thus it's true" but rather "all experts believe this, and that would need to be confronted". I have also said what the evidence is, and expanded on this for multiple points. Is there anything specific you would want evidence for?

This is Part 2 of the JREF Series, "Threads that will not die". All these posts have been split from an earlier thread that go too big for the servers to handle. If you have a spare week, and are under a psychologist's care, you can read the first part of this thread here. We now take you to Evidences Part 2: Attack of the Killer Evidences, already in progress.

Posted By: kmortis

I think with any theoretical and subjective matter one can find and match an interpretation and thus correlation between phenomena. To this end, it is not scientific and claiming that any historical documents state the truth or present future predictions is not reliable in an epistemological because one can find truth is any discourse of narrative if they want to. The issues here is more of a philosophical and psychological one than of pure science in the traditional sense.

 

[Olowkow]

No, not searching on yahoo.com, I mean searching for "biblical studies yahoo listserve" on Google.

OK, thanks, I'm working on my second cappuccino, so my reading comprehension is still a bit fuzzy.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Not really. It's not as though there's some question these scholars or the list exist.

I'm simply sharing information. It exists, whether you believe in it or not.

It appears that you are not sharing information. You are merely sharing your assertion that such information exists. If you have a point you want to make with that information, give a quote and a link. It's not really a difficult concept.

 

[welshdean]

Despite his/her protestations, still nothing from Ocaptain. Bloody fundies.

 

[dafydd]

And just to address part of your self-indulgent lecture, it seems clear you don't understand or are aware that there are a number of well-educated individuals that do not subscribe to the idea that biblical studies, minimalist or not, is an actual worthy discipline. I'm not speaking of the book as a regional document of myth (it certainly isn't a historical document) but as alleged scripture. I have some experience in that area, though admittedly not enough, but if we're speaking of the bible as literature, a subject that I am schooled in, it is nothing to write home about. The "begats" are kinda cool in a beat sort of way, but beyond that . . .

Be cautious riding your high horse around here as there are many here better equipped than I ready to knock you off.

Do you have any evidence the new testament writers told the truth?

Did they believe that they were telling the truth? After all,none of them actually met Jesus,if Jesus ever existed.

 

[Aepervius]

What I've seen so far in the thread is a lot of grand, sweeping statements, which usually contribute little to the advancement of any subject.

That and a militant, kneejerk, foam at the mouth attacking of anyone new.

If you guys are open to actual discussion without demeaning, I'm into it. If not, it probably isn't my thing. I have a sneaking suspicion that the latter might end up being the case, but I'm open to making the attempt.

You know, I was thinking "well I must have missed a psot because I saw no relevant evidence, no interresting link , nothing from OCapitain pertaining to evidence".

So I went there :

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/search.php?searchid=267510

Nope. Nothing. Just you mentionning some list, and then getting angry.

If you have evidence, litterature, links or anything relevant gfeel free to cite. Up to now, you haven't provided anything of value.

 

[Mojo]

Really?

You're incapable of Googling things yourself?

I'm not inclined to spoonfeed anyone who isn't willing to follow issues to ground.

Introducing arguments or claims backed up on other sites, but refusing to link to them is not exactly indicative of good faith on your part. It isn't a question of "spoonfeeding", it is just common courtesy.

 

[catsmate]

Really?

You're incapable of Googling things yourself?

I'm not inclined to spoonfeed anyone who isn't willing to follow issues to ground.

If you have points to make, and evidence to support them, that are relevant to the subject of this thread please make them.

 

[Lothian]

Really?

You're incapable of Googling things yourself?

I'm not inclined to spoonfeed anyone who isn't willing to follow issues to ground.

It is sad that some people just aren't prepared to put in the work, but I am feeling generous.

Here you go.

 

[welshdean]

It is sad that some people just aren't prepared to put in the work, but I am feeling generous.

Here you go.

Great google fu there padawan.
A whole page of typical fundie 'love & tolerance' for their fellow man.

 

[welshdean]

Ocaptain, I went to the Yahoo Biblical Studies List and for me to read any of it I had to subscribe. As I'm not prepared to do that, would you post some of the 'Evidence why the NT writers told the truth' here so we can 'pick it's bones'.
If you're not prepared to do so then I must wonder why you bothered to make the preceding posts in this thread.

 

[OCaptain]

I'd love to hear what you have to say regarding the Q hypothesis. For a couple of reasons, A more fulfilling conversation would likely be had if you start a new thread on it.

1.) It would be off topic here.
2.) This thread is "scorched earth" Anyone that is mentally stable has avoided this thread like the plague. It's why you only see the likes of me and the others here now.

I think I'm in agreement with your assessment of the thread. The well was poisoned long ago, and there's too much armchair sniping for my tastes.

I will be declining further participation in it, and will consider your suggestion of creating my own.

 

[DOC]

All this squabbling is not answering the question whether the N/T writers told the truth.

"The burden of proof is with the claimant." So far there has not been a single scrap of evidence that the gospelers wrote the truth.

My 2500 posts in Part 1 and Part 2 of this thread say otherwise.