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

[joolz]

Well to be fair, atheists haven't been demanding proof until comparatively recently....

You are kidding right?

Why should we be asking for proof anyway? You are the one with the imaginary friend. Atheists are rational. If you really want to convince us to believe in your god then you should be falling over yourselves to offer us evidence without us even asking.

You are clearly happy with atheism as you don't see the need to provide any evidence of your imaginary friend. Maybe you'd like to be an atheist too since you have no evidence of your god?

 

[OCaptain]

Because those are the things that the New Testament writers wrote about.

Haven't you read it yet?





Most of us don't think it is and that's why we keep asking for evidence.

Do you have any?





I already knew the former to be true and it's too late to prevent the latter.





Not at all. DOC can't be here all the time so it's nice of you to stand in for a while.

Well, it's certainly not ALL they wrote of. I'd be surprised if it was predominantly about miracles. What is fascinating for me is the historicity of the texts, primarily Old Testament ( which you'll find out if you look at pages 6, 10, and 11 of my post history. The normal day-to-day life of the times, events, people and stuff.

Boring compared to what you seem to be looking for.

 

[Resume]

Well, it's certainly not ALL they wrote of. I'd be surprised if it was predominantly about miracles. What is fascinating for me is the historicity of the texts, primarily Old Testament

Well, since the topic of the thread is the new testament . . . have you read the thread at all?

 

[OCaptain]

Well, since the topic of the thread is the new testament . . . have you read the thread at all?

How much buys me more civility than Oliver? I've only made about halfway through.

What do I win?

 

[joobz]

Thanks for the surprising candor and welcoming spirit. Would you recommend a good thread where I can find the kind of civil, intellectual discussion I am seeking?

I would also suggest checking forum rules. The biggest complaint everyone has here (and it is understandable) is that you are not discussing the thread topic. This is called "derailing" and is typically frowned upon. Mainly becuase it distracts from the OP (original post) topic.

More practically to you, is that other forumites who may be interested in your discussion wouldn't see it as most typically avoid this thread. (Note this thread is the oblivion plane of the forum. Only spoken of by others in hushed tones of sadness and despair)

If you are interested in a civil discussion, I recommend starting a thread of your own in Religion and Philosophy on the topic of your choice. If you start a thread with a cordial and open demeanor, you will most likely receive that in kind(exceptions do exist, you are free to place these people on ignore). If you start one with a challenge or derision, you will only get what you give.

 

[Resume]

How much buys me more civility than Oliver? I've only made about halfway through.

What do I win?

A buck three-eighty answers both your questions.


ETA: joobz is offering very good advice.

 

[Akhenaten]

Well, it's certainly not ALL they wrote of. I'd be surprised if it was predominantly about miracles.

Nobody is suggesting that it is, but since it's a belief in these sorts of things - particularly the resurrection - on which Christianity is founded then they are of somewhat more significance than trivial stuff like a few place names or whether the bloody Colossians were backsliding into the worship of elemental spirits.

What is fascinating for me is the historicity of the texts, primarily Old Testament ( which you'll find out if you look at pages 6, 10, and 11 of my post history. The normal day-to-day life of the times, events, people and stuff.

Fine, start a thread about it.

This thread is about the New Testament and these aren't the Hebrews you're looking for.

Boring compared to what you seem to be looking for.

We're looking for some evidence to back up the OP's claim that he knows the New Testament writers told the truth and it's been anything but boring, as you'd know if you'd bothered to acquaint yourself with the thread.

 

[OCaptain]

Thank you, although I have to wonder how many of you read the posts that don't fit in pigeonholes, as I've been in this thread off and on since page 15, post 576. Resume's dismissive reply to me then (#578) was uneducated.

 

[Akhenaten]

Thank you, although I have to wonder how many of you read the posts that don't fit in pigeonholes, as I've been in this thread off and on since page 15, post 576.

Yeah, good, You've only got 519 pages and 20,729 posts to go before you're all caught up.

Resume's dismissive reply to me then (#578) was uneducated.

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.

I like the way the highlighted words work together.

You'll live.

 

[joobz]

Thank you, although I have to wonder how many of you read the posts that don't fit in pigeonholes, as I've been in this thread off and on since page 15, post 576. Resume's dismissive reply to me then (#578) was uneducated.

I remember now.
Interestingly, I gave similar advice last time as well.
I also remember reading many fun exchanges between you and Piggy and others.
It unfortunately died.

 

[OCaptain]

Yeah, good, You've only got 519 pages and 20,729 posts to go before you're all caught up.

​

You'll live.

And Welshdean's response to me (post #603) Where he confuses me with a Fundie, and suggests that "Fundies have no place in the 21st century, and the sooner this world is free of them, the sooner we can all enjoy a true 'enlightenment'". That even fits Dafydd's definition of hate (wishing harm or death to others).

Jeez, what more do you want? The irony is lost on most of you. We've had almost this same damn conversation last year, with the same people saying the same thing. (and even then, joobz was the voice of reason -way to go, joobz).

 

[Complexity]

That's your stomp?

That's the most polite stomp I have received since arriving at JREF.

If you hadn't told me, I would have missed it! Thanks.

I've only encountered you today.

It took me one post to get the measure of you.

You're pretty interchangable with others of your type.

When you leave, another will take you place.

So it goes.

 

[Complexity]

Yes, but I'm not DOC. Why can't you guys give everyone the benefit of the doubt and allow each to demonstrate who he/she is?

As I said, you're all pretty interchangable - different names, same arrogant ignorance.

You, DOC - it really doesn't matter.

 

[Complexity]

I am not a troll.

Yes, you are.

You are a Troll for Jesus.

 

[Complexity]

Thanks for the surprising candor and welcoming spirit. Would you recommend a good thread where I can find the kind of civil, intellectual discussion I am seeking?

Answers In Genesis.

(seems to be about your speed)

 

[Complexity]

Thank you, although I have to wonder how many of you read the posts that don't fit in pigeonholes, as I've been in this thread off and on since page 15, post 576. Resume's dismissive reply to me then (#578) was uneducated.

I suspect he was adapting his response to best suit his respondee.

 

[Complexity]

And Welshdean's response to me (post #603) Where he confuses me with a Fundie, and suggests that "Fundies have no place in the 21st century, and the sooner this world is free of them, the sooner we can all enjoy a true 'enlightenment'".

If you don't want to be confused with a fundie, don't write with the ignorance and inanity of one.

 

[OCaptain]

I suspect he was adapting his response to best suit his respondee.

And somehow, I'm not shocked to learn your suspicion is wrong.

It's not my fault you can't be bothered. That's your baggage.

Whatever.

 

[Complexity]

And somehow, I'm not shocked to learn your suspicion is wrong.

It's not my fault you can't be bothered. That's your baggage.

Whatever.

Bothered? To do what?

Invest time and energy in this interaction?

Been there, done that. You're all the same.

What I enjoy are discussions with intelligent people on interesting topics.

Those discussions rarely never happen in threads like this one.

(there are some intelligent people posting in this thread, but the topic sucks)

 

[tsig]

And what is my paradigm?

And, I chose my words because the perspectives among some at JREF when it comes to anything with regard to the Ancient Near East (specifically where it touches upon the bible) is quite unique in its aggressiveness. I'd seen and experienced skepticism in the past, of course, but some take it to a different level of near-hatred here.

My observations, of course.

Why do you feel it necessary to inject emotion into the argument? How do you know the emotions of the other posters?