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

[Akhenaten]

I'm perfectly willing to concede that there probably was a Jewish preacher in the 1st century called Yeshua, who quite possibly had a father called Yusef.

So what?

Well if everyone on this site felt the same way as you and Ehrman I think that would be a big step from where we are now.

We?

 

[Akhenaten]

On page 118 of the hardback edition of God Is Not Great he even opines that That he believed himself to be God is not supported by the Synoptic gospels.

So it was an opinion of his and he did not state it as fact.

So it begins.

When Ehrman states that Jesus existed it's a fact but when he states that Jesus wasn't divine it's just an opinion which you can wave away with your magical Cruciwand™.

Do you have any idea at all how of laughably transparent you are?

 

[ddt]

I have access to the book, and I have spent about a half hour so far skimming it. Just from that short time it seems most of the book is Ehrman giving facts as to why he believes the historical Jesus existed.

"Access to the book" - what kind of weasel wording is that? You're again worshipping Wilbur, it seems. Didn't you get the part about worshipping false gods?

Why did you "forget" to quote Kritikker's second and third sentences:

Prove me wrong by quoting the last paragraph on page 36.

ETA: or the last paragraph on page 57, 58, 60-64....

And when you have "access", prove it and quote that last paragraph on page 36. You've posted so many lies here and have so obviously been quote mining that Kritikker's analysis that you just copy from other websites is far more credible than that you actually have read (parts of) the book.

 

[dafydd]

I have access to the book, and I have spent about a half hour so far skimming it. Just from that short time it seems most of the book is Ehrman giving facts as to why he believes the historical Jesus existed.

The historical Jesus, not the mythical super being, judging by the reviews I've read. You're leaning on a broken reed yet again. Back to the topic. Do you have any evidence of fulfilled bible prophecies? Entertaining as your sidetracks are, they take us away from the nub of the thread.

 

[ddt]

So it begins.

When Ehrman states that Jesus existed it's a fact but when he states that Jesus wasn't divine it's just an opinion which you can wave away with your magical Cruciwand™.

Do you have any idea at all how of laughably transparent you are?

Can the Cruciwand make the foul taste disappear in the second half of the lemon too?

 

[Akhenaten]

I have access to the book, and I have spent about a half hour so far skimming it. Just from that short time it seems most of the book is Ehrman giving facts as to why he believes the historical Jesus existed.

What about Sea of Galilee Pedestrian Jesus, Fig Zapping Jesus and Zombie Jesus?

What does he say about those fellows, DOC?

 

[Akhenaten]

Can the Cruciwand make the foul taste disappear in the second half of the lemon too?

Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the lemon,
but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, "Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea", it shall be done.

Matty 21:21 (mostly)​

 

[DOC]

Some one in here said on the first page (which I currently can't get on for some reason) that I basically say the Resurrection is true because the bible said so. I've never said the Resurrection is true because the bible said so, but I have presented sites like the one below to give rational reasons to believe it happened.

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

 

[Agatha]

Which page does this quote come from, DOC?

The Jesus proclaimed by preachers and theologians today had no existence.

 

[dafydd]

Some one in here said on the first page (which I currently can't get on for some reason) that I basically say the Resurrection is true because the bible said so. I've never said the Resurrection is true because the bible said so, but I have presented sites like the one below to give rational reasons to believe it happened.

http://www.leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/josh2.html

That link is total nonsense.

''The writers of the four Gospels either had themselves been witnesses or else were relating the accounts of eyewitnesses of the actual events.''

Nonsense. A lie.
I will take your silence as an admission that you know of no fulfilled bible prophecies.

 

[DOC]

The historical Jesus, not the mythical super being, judging by the reviews I've read. You're leaning on a broken reed yet again. Back to the topic. Do you have any evidence of fulfilled bible prophecies? Entertaining as your sidetracks are, they take us away from the nub of the thread.

I think you're in the wrong thread, this is not my prophecy thread. But since you asked, many people believe Isaiah chapter 53 is a fulfilled prophecy. Some have even converted to Christianity because of it.

 

[carlitos]

Hello, DOC? You have access to the book, yes? Serious question:

Ehrman really says that Jesus was "from Nazareth?" I'm skeptical about that. Please post an excerpt from the book if this is the case.

 

[dafydd]

I think you're in the wrong thread, this is not my prophecy thread. But since you asked, many people believe Isaiah chapter 53 is a fulfilled prophecy. Some have even converted to Christianity because of it.

More fool them, the poor deluded buggers. When will you be posting some fulfilled prophecies in the other thread?

 

[Agatha]

That link is total nonsense.

''The writers of the four Gospels either had themselves been witnesses or else were relating the accounts of eyewitnesses of the actual events.''

Nonsense. A lie.

And if that is being put forward as a reason to suppose that the resurrection happened, it is exactly circular reasoning; relying on the events related in the Bible to assert that events related in the Bible are true.

 

[Akhenaten]

Some one in here said on the first page (which I currently can't get on for some reason) that I basically say the Resurrection is true because the bible said so.

Another no-information post that quotes no particular post of anyone else.

Quote or it didn't happen.

I've never said the Resurrection is true because the bible said so, but I have presented sites like the one below to give rational reasons to believe it happened.

<adsnip>

The only way this can be on topic is if you tell us what Ehrman has to say about it.

What does he say, DOC?

 

[Daald]

Finding evidence that a Peter Parker with a deceased uncle named Ben exists does not prove that spider man exists.

Do you understand why that is?

 

[Akhenaten]

I think you're in the wrong thread, this is not my prophecy thread.

All of the threads you start are exactly the same, DOC. Why quibble?

But since you asked, many people believe Isaiah chapter 53 is a fulfilled prophecy. Some have even converted to Christianity because of it.

And for the umpty-hundredth time DOC presents the fact that there are Christians as evidence for the truth of Christianity.

 

[Agatha]

From one of the reviews:

Even in this book Ehrman strikes out several yarns beloved by make-believers. The triumphant entry into Jerusalem (a pastiche taken from Zechariah); Jesus's nighttime chat with Nicodemus (dependent on a Greek pun that doesn't work in Aramaic); the epistle of James "might not" support the historical Jesus. In short, "some stories were made up" (page 85), and again, "some of the stories were legends through and through with no historical core" (page 190).

 

[dafydd]

From one of the reviews:

I read that too. Perhaps Doc should actually read the links that he provides.

 

[Akhenaten]

You don't even have the book. You haven't read it and you don't own it.

I have access to the book, and I have spent about a half hour so far skimming it. Just from that short time it seems most of the book is Ehrman giving facts as to why he believes the historical Jesus existed.

Far be it from me to call you a liar, DOC, but I've used my Pharaonic Powerz™ to access the hidden secrets of page 1 and I note that you removed most of Krikkiter's post before pretendeing to answer it.

Since you are unable to access Page 1 yourself, I'm happy to help you out in order that you can clear this matter up, as I'm sure you will be anxious to do.

DOC, cut the crap. You don't even have the book. You haven't read it and you don't own it.

Prove me wrong by quoting the last paragraph on page 36.

ETA: or the last paragraph on page 57, 58, 60-64....

Here's where you're getting your ******** from:

http://vialogue.wordpress.com/2012/04/29/did-jesus-exist-notes-review/