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

[zooterkin]

I said I'd bring in some new evidence and here is some new historical evidence that has been right in front of our faces. But if you don't notice evidence, and then do notice it, it becomes new to you.

You big tease, DOC. You had me going at this point, and then all you produced was nonsense that has all been debunked in this thread already.

 

[Aepervius]

i have never seen anything conclusive to prove he did not.

Nitpick but that would be quite a feat to prove.

Let us put it that way, tehe is no conclusive proof he did exists (aka : a corpse and/or corroborative manuscript from non christian source), but there is a good heap of indicative evidence he did indeed exists. Nothing definitive either way.

That said, DOC want to spring from "Jesus existed" to "Jesus did all what is in the bible and more" which is an enormous leap of faith (which we don't have).

 

[Lothian]

I said I'd bring in some new evidence and here is some new historical evidence that has been right in front of our faces. But if you don't notice evidence, and then do notice it, it becomes new to you.

So you are bringing is stuff you have brought up before because some people may not have seen it.

Some people in here talk of the NT legend. Well the following historical evidence hurts that legend theory. All of the 33 historical people mentioned below are in the New Testament and they are “all” also mentioned mentioned by Non-Christians sources. These sources include Joshephus, Tacitus, Philo, inscriptions, Seutonius, etc.. The following list is from the book cited in post #1 (pg. 270).

Jesus, Agrippa I, Agrippa II, Ananias, Annas, Aretas,

Bernice (wife of Agrippa II), Caesar Augustus, Caiaphas, Claudius

Drusilla wife of Felix, Egyptian false prophet, Erastus, Felix,

Gallio, Gamaliel, Herod Antipas, Herod Archilaus, Herod the Great

Herod Philip I, Herod Philip II, Herodius, Herodias’s Daughter

Salome, James, John the Baptist, Judas the Galilean, Lysanias,

Pilate, Quirinius, Porcius, Festus, Sergius Paulos, Tiberius Caesar.

___

This is not new evidence. Over 100 years ago, your hero, Sir William Ramsay dismissed your 'evidence' as follows.

The surrounding facts are matter of history, and can be discussed and proved by historical evidence. The essential facts of the narrative are not susceptible of discussion on historical principles, and do not condescend to be tested by historical evidence. That truth exists and moves on a higher plane of thought. No man can make historical investigation and historical proof take the place of faith​

In plain English. We know real people are mentioned in the bible but that does not make the supernatural elements of the story true. There is no evidence for the magic, for that you need faith.

Some skepics might say well the NT writers were just writing an historical novel. Well, there are many problems with this theory.

I agree, the main problem is that it is a strawman. Most skeptics say is was written specifically to attract people to the faith. The story was sexed up and lots of miracles, magic and bits from other faiths added over the years.

1) There is no record of historical novels in Palestine during that era. In fact there are no records of novels at all (in that era of no paper). And some skeptics want us to believe all of the sudden 4 historical novels are written.

Wrong, wrong and that strawman again. You have had explained that there were novels and paper. I am happy to dig out and repost all the replies to this effect if you want.

And as the book cited in post #1 states (on page 271), there are other problems with this theory

2) It can’t explain why independent non-Christian writers collectively reveal a storyline similar to the NT.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=6366925#post6366925

They are reporting the story propagated by the church. Wow, I have just explained it. Actually, before you shower me with accolades. It wasn't my own work. I had help from a 7 year old.

3) It can’t explain why the NT writers endured persecution, torture, and death. Why would they have done so for a fictional story.

We don't know who wrote the NT, there is no reliable independent evidence of persecution, torture and death of the alleged authors outside the NT. How did Simon die?

4) Novelists usually do not use the names of real people for the main characters. If they did, those real people –- especially powerful government and religious Officials {e.g. Agrippa I, Agrippa II, Caesar Augustus, Caiaphas, Herod Antipas, Herod Archilaus, Herod the Great, Herod Philip I, Tiberius Caesar, (and all the descendants of these people, for example all the Kennedy descendants} would deny the story, destroy the credibility of the authors, and maybe even take punitive action against them for doing so.

Excuse me your ignorance is showing, you might want to tuck it back in before kids start staring and pointing.

5) Since the NT contains multiple independent accounts of these events by nine different authors, the historical novel theory would require a grand conspiracy over a 20 to 50 year period between those nine authors, who were spread all over the ancient world. This is not plausible either. In fact, the assertion that the NT events are part of a grand conspiracy exists only in novels. In the real world, such assertions are crushed by the weight of the evidence.

That strawman yet again, I admire your persistence. The original story is likely to be exaggerated and mutated as it is spread. When it was recollected 300 years later it is not surprising that there were so many different versions. Compare with the many different versions of Robin Hood.

We have seen all this before and explained why it is not evidence. If you don't have any evidence it would be far simpler to admit it rather than repeating the same tripe every few months.

 

[GrandMasterFox]

Well others here have pointed out your blatant lies already, so I'll just focus on one point:

1) There is no record of historical novels in Palestine during that era. In fact there are no records of novels at all (in that era of no paper).

Do you realize how many references to writings and writers are there in the OT alone?

Do I really need to start quoting your own holy book again, DOC?
Seriously, stop preeching your idiocies and at least read your own book.

 

[joobz]

When detectives don't have a body, they look at circumstantial evidence.

And when detectives don't have a body, they don't instantly assume that the person was resurrected.

 

[zooterkin]

And when detectives don't have a body, they don't instantly assume that the person was resurrected.

Nor, without any other evidence, do they assume that there was a person.

 

[amb]

1) There is no record of historical novels in Palestine during that era. In fact there are no records of novels at all (in that era of no paper). And some skeptics want us to believe all of the sudden 4 historical novels are written.

Only one novel was written. That of Mark. The other three had the first novel in front of them when they wrote theirs, and added their version depending on who they were writing for.

 

[carlitos]

4) Novelists usually do not use the names of real people for the main characters. If they did, those real people –- especially powerful government and religious Officials {e.g. Agrippa I, Agrippa II, Caesar Augustus, Caiaphas, Herod Antipas, Herod Archilaus, Herod the Great, Herod Philip I, Tiberius Caesar, (and all the descendants of these people, for example all the Kennedy descendants} would deny the story, destroy the credibility of the authors, and maybe even take punitive action against them for doing so.

This is so patently absurd, I can't even believe that someone wrote it. My God, but DOC is completely unaware of historical fiction? It's a whole category on Amazon, for pete's sake.

I could write a novel today, and make the Kennedys into the lead characters, and they couldn't "take punative action" against me for doing so. What a moronic argument.

 

[zooterkin]

I could write a novel today, and make the Kennedys into the lead characters, and they couldn't "take punative action" against me for doing so.

(I know we like to show DOC that we admit mistakes, but I think you're allowed to correct your own typos and spelling mistakes without highlighting them. )

What a moronic argument.

Indeed, and one that has been rubbished several times already, yet DOC blithely keeps repeating it.

 

[carlitos]

(I know we like to show DOC that we admit mistakes, but I think you're allowed to correct your own typos and spelling mistakes without highlighting them. )

Yeah, let me just cast this beam out of my eye, and maybe I won't have to squint so hard to see the sawdust.

 

[Mojo]

I said I'd bring in some new evidence and here is some new historical evidence that has been right in front of our faces. But if you don't notice evidence, and then do notice it, it becomes new to you.

On the other hand, if the alleged evidence has not only been noticed but comprehensively shredded right before your own eyes, pretending that it is somehow "new evidence" makes you look rather dishonest.

 

[joobz]

On the other hand, if the alleged evidence has not only been noticed but comprehensively shredded right before your own eyes, pretending that it is somehow "new evidence" makes you look rather dishonest.

Why do I get the feeling that this thread is some perverse version of the Notebook?

 

[Sun Countess]

It can’t explain why the NT writers endured persecution, torture, and death. Why would they have done so for a fictional story.

DOC, can you explain why the followers of Jim Jones left the United States to move to Guyana, and then participated in a mass killing/suicide if their beliefs were pure fiction? They felt they were being persecuted for their beliefs, and rather than face any consequences, they were willing to die for them. Is this evidence that their beliefs were true? Was Jones really a Messiah? Why did you avoid the message that 979 people were willing to die for?

Honestly, DOC, I do worry that you don't get out of the house much. If you need any evidence of what people are willing to do in the name of fiction, go back a few years and visit some Harry Potter forums. Just because you haven't heard of something from inside your insular bubble, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

[kmortis]

Why do I get the feeling that this thread is some perverse version of the Notebook?

Really? The Notebook? A lovestory?

Hrm...I was thinking more a combination of Momento, Slaughterhouse 5 and Aliens. ETA: and a pinch of Eraserhead.






What can I say? I need the Aepervius vote in the upcoming election.

 

[Aepervius]

Really? The Notebook? A lovestory?

Hrm...I was thinking more a combination of Momento, Slaughterhouse 5 and Aliens.

Add a pinch of eraser head, and I agree with you.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Some people in here talk of the NT legend. Well the following historical evidence hurts that legend theory. All of the 33 historical people mentioned below are in the New Testament and they are “all” also mentioned mentioned by Non-Christians sources. These sources include Joshephus, Tacitus, Philo, inscriptions, Seutonius, etc.. The following list is from the book cited in post #1 (pg. 270).

Jesus, Agrippa I, Agrippa II, Ananias, Annas, Aretas,

Bernice (wife of Agrippa II), Caesar Augustus, Caiaphas, Claudius

Drusilla wife of Felix, Egyptian false prophet, Erastus, Felix,

Gallio, Gamaliel, Herod Antipas, Herod Archilaus, Herod the Great

Herod Philip I, Herod Philip II, Herodius, Herodias’s Daughter

Salome, James, John the Baptist, Judas the Galilean, Lysanias,

Pilate, Quirinius, Porcius, Festus, Sergius Paulos, Tiberius Caesar.

A - It has already been pointed out to you that the non-Biblical sources that mention Jesus are highly suspect.

B - Who the hell is the "Egyptian false prophet?" If we don't know his/her name, how do we know it is the same false prophet every time? Do you know how many "false prophets" were wandering around back then?

Novelists usually do not use the names of real people for the main characters. If they did, those real people –- especially powerful government and religious Officials {e.g. Agrippa I, Agrippa II, Caesar Augustus, Caiaphas, Herod Antipas, Herod Archilaus, Herod the Great, Herod Philip I, Tiberius Caesar, (and all the descendants of these people, for example all the Kennedy descendants} would deny the story, destroy the credibility of the authors, and maybe even take punitive action against them for doing so

.
I just finished a novel in which King Edward VII visited a prostitute. I haven't heard of the British royal family suing the author.

I could write a novel today, and make the Kennedys into the lead characters, and they couldn't "take punative action" against me for doing so. What a moronic argument.

(I know we like to show DOC that we admit mistakes, but I think you're allowed to correct your own typos and spelling mistakes without highlighting them. )

Not sure what this is about, but the word is "punitive." (Like "punishment.") As much as we hassle doc when he's wrong we ought not to chivvy him when he's not.

 

[zooterkin]

.
I just finished a novel in which King Edward VII visited a prostitute. I haven't heard of the British royal family suing the author.

Well, that's pretty trivial compared with some of the things they royal family have been accused of (the Duke of Clarence (Victoria's grandson) has been suggested to have been Jack the Ripper), and may well have been true, anyway (one of his mistresses was a prostitute, according to wikipedia). Nevertheless, other examples could easily be found to show how ridiculous this already much discredited argument is.

Not sure what this is about, but the word is "punitive." (Like "punishment.") As much as we hassle doc when he's wrong we ought not to chivvy him when he's not.

That's what I was trying to say, in perhaps too roundabout a fashion.

 

[Matt78]

These are all reasons to believe the NT authors wrote what they believed was true, but it is not evidence that it was true.

Agreed. There are some very good reasons why much of the NT is bunk. Earl Doherty does a superb job explaining in his books why the core element of the Gospels, Jesus of Nazareth, never even existed.

 

[joobz]

Really? The Notebook? A lovestory?

Well, it's that whole.
Person A forgets past, and thinks X.
Person B retells what happens in history to explain why X is wrong.
Person A comes to a possible understanding of Person B.
Person A suddenly forgets past, and thinks X again.


Perhaps 50 first dates would be a better analogy. Maybe at the start of each day, we should simply repost all counter arguments to get DOC back up to speed on the current conversation? That way, he won't think he'll need to go back to the diner and serve spam to everyone.

 

[zooterkin]

Well, it's that whole.
Person A forgets past, and thinks X.
Person B retells what happens in history to explain why X is wrong.
Person A comes to a possible understanding of Person B.Person A suddenly forgets past, and thinks X again.

I don't think I've seen the highlighted step occur in this case.