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

[Akhenaten]

Oh Dear. Waterman, you are in such deep doo-doo.

 

[Waterman]

Waterman,
Your interpretation of the Ancient Document Rule means that the Sagas and Saxo's history of Denmark is no longer to be taken as completely accurate.

Are you saying that Thor does not exist?
And that the Danish flag did not fall from the sky during a crusade in Estonia.?

Not at all... I am merely stating that the Ancient Document Rule is either using Greenleaf's reasoning or mine is leveling the playing field and renders all such documents equally valid.

 

[Toke]

Not at all... I am merely stating that the Ancient Document Rule is either using Greenleaf's reasoning or mine is leveling the playing field and renders all such documents equally valid.

Yes, that is the "problem".
I cannot claim Ancient validity of my lore without having to acknowledge all kinds of foreign superstition.

 

[Akhenaten]

I can. I got in first, everyone else is a copycat, and my fairytale lore is set in stone.

So nyaaah!

 

[I Ratant]

All the AD "rule" says is that such a document found in such a situation is really old.
Nothing about what is written on the AD.
Such as the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Or anything from Homer.
Or even any originals of the NT.
Or the OT.
Old, yes.
Factual,... well, no.

 

[Simon39759]

This is Brilliant and best exposes the type of logic Greenleaf used.

Why, thank, but yes, it seemed to me like it illustrated the extent of Greenleaf's tortured reasoning quite nicely.

Quotes are from the Website cited by DOC above. I will focus on the Ancient Documents Rule because that appears to be the crux of his arguement. If that is invalid then the rest of his reasoning begins to crumble. (snipped for brevity sake but not argumentative purpose, because it's ok that way)

Well done my good sir, interesting stuff.

Waterman,
Your interpretation of the Ancient Document Rule means that the Sagas and Saxo's history of Denmark is no longer to be taken as completely accurate.

Are you saying that Thor does not exist?
And that the Danish flag did not fall from the sky during a crusade in Estonia.?

Well, here, have a can of special pleading^TM, spread it profusely, it's cheaper than easy cheese...

 

[Toke]

..Snip..
Well, here, have a can of special pleading^TM, spread it profusely, it's cheaper than easy cheese...

Thank you, just what I needed.

 

[Simon39759]

Once again another skeptic wants this thread to end. That encourages me, that tells me it is an effective thread for presenting the truths of the New Testament and some skeptics don't want it up. If this thread hurt the case for Christianity in any way I have to believe skeptics would want it to stay up as long as possible.

And nobody is forcing anybody to come into this thread. If you don't like it, block it and then you don't have to worry about it.

And this site below I just "recently" brought in has important information and things to consider regarding the authors of the New Testament. Since the article is older if you feel any info is not accurate you can always look it up. But it is not logical not to consider 30 new pieces of info because 2 or 3 might be outdated.

http://www.bibleteacher.org/sgtestimony.htm

What freaking paranoid drivel!
I, and I warrant most people in this thread, have no ambition of hurting the case for Christianity:

1. I have no problem with most Christians; most of my friends are Christians. I only care about Christianity, per se, when it is having a direct impact: blocking promising avenues of medical research, for example, or denying the rights of my homosexual friends...
2. I am not delusional or megalomaniacal enough to imagine that I could ever the slightest of any significant impact on Christianity's fate.

I am not sure why but you seem to consider this thread like some sort of rhetorical battle between atheism (that you ignorantly conflate with skeptics) and Christianity. That illustrate a rahter inflated sense of self on your part and goes to explain why you are so continuously dishonest. It's not about reaching the truth or any approximation thereof, it's about you fighting for your Lord.


In reality, the only reason I am fed up with this thread is because it has gone nowhere in 10,000 posts.
You clearly have not good evidence to present. Chance is, if such an evidence existed, people in this thread, all of them much more knowledgeable than you are, would have found it themselves long ago...
You keep on repeating the same argument (which is really annoying) and displaying one of the crassest intellectual dishonesty I can imagine (which also annoying).

The assay by Greenleaf you posted and that you are so proud about is nothing but really poor apologetics full of special pleading and often outdated in term of scholarship, you might have known that if you'd read it (but probably not).

 

[Mojo]

Nag, nag, nag. You remind me of the curse of my life, my wife.

I don't have the evidence you seek. A gentleman who calls himself DOC has though. He has quoted some believer named Greenleaf, or Green tea or something as his evidence.

Sydney Greenstreet?

If we must spend another year on the quest, well, sir, it will be an additional expenditure in time of only five and fifteen seventeenths percent.

 

[Akhenaten]

What freaking paranoid drivel!
I, and I warrant most people in this thread, have no ambition of hurting the case for Christianity:

1. I have no problem with most Christians; most of my friends are Christians
2. I am not delusional or megalomaniacal enough to imagine that I could ever the slightest of any significant impact on Christianity's fate.

<snip for focus>

Sums my view up quite well Simon. I have no problem with my Christian friends believing in whatever they wish.

People belonging to cults like DOC's are just icky though.

In any case, it'll all be sorted out soon enough, although I doubt that any of us will be reporting back here with a definitive conclusion.

'cept me of course, but I'm speshul.

 

[Toke]

I can. I got in first, everyone else is a copycat, and my fairytale lore is set in stone.

So nyaaah!

I just wonder how much else is set in Egyptian stone, both before and after your reign.

Regarding copycats:
Why does that rip-off Wilhelm Tell get any credit for claiming a feat done 500 years before by Toke.
Particularly as Toke later surprised Harald I while he was out in the woods for a dump, put an arrow in the royal pucker and caused the kings death.

 

[Moss]

What logical fallacy do I commit when I ask DOC to consider why no current Harvard Law School professor uses the New Testament as a good example for textual evidence concerning factual happenings?

 

[Simon39759]

What logical fallacy do I commit when I ask DOC to consider why no current Harvard Law School professor uses the New Testament as a good example for textual evidence concerning factual happenings?

They would but:

1. They were brainwashed in God hatin' heathens by the evil lib'rul system.
2. They would be fired (or "expelled") by the evil lib'ruls...

 

[Akhenaten]

I just wonder how much else is set in Egyptian stone, both before and after your reign.

I believe there was some editing after my alleged death.

Regarding copycats:
Why does that rip-off Wilhelm Tell get any credit for claiming a feat done 500 years before by Toke.

It seems pretty blatant. Perhaps the Vikings should have their revenge by destroying the Swiss Navy. Shouldn't take long.

Particularly as Toke later surprised Harald I while he was out in the woods for a dump, put an arrow in the royal pucker and caused the kings death.

Speaking of surprising Kings . . .

​

 

[paximperium]

What logical fallacy do I commit when I ask DOC to consider why no current Harvard Law School professor uses the New Testament as a good example for textual evidence concerning factual happenings?

Argumentum ad "valid and up to date authorities"?

 

[Akhenaten]

I would have thought argumentum ad ampèregum, although I expect some resistance.

 

[TSR]

So, no response to Waterman's comments on Greenleaf? Color me shocked.

.
< breaks out the body paints >
.

 

[Akhenaten]

Shocked? Ampèrage?

Volt's going on here?

 

[TSR]

Well then, with eyes wide open, I'll gladly play Sancho Panza to your Don Quixote.

.
Quixote. Quixote. I seem to remember a story that was all about Dulcinea which mentioned a Quixote in passing....
.

 

[Waterman]

Well done my good sir, interesting stuff.

Thank you for your kind words I also thought your dismemberment was well executed.