Bible as the most reliable ancient text
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-06-2013, 04:05 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(16-06-2013 02:01 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  
(16-06-2013 01:54 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  Challenge him to back this up or admit that he can't establish it and shouldn't rely on it for convincing others. If he doesn't, stop talking to the guy. Is there an audience (including random browsers on a forum)? Aim to convince the audience rather than him, even if he's the one you're overtly speaking to. Is it completely private? Politely say that you and he are not going to come to a consensus the way this argument's going, and declare it over.

For bonus fun, ask him how he was convinced of the Bible's reliablity in the first place? (2-to-1 odds... figuratively, I hate gambling... that he was taught it at age 5 or something.) Ask him if how he would persuade someone who had never before encountered the Bible of its reliability if that person WASN'T 5 years old.

Don't actually get caught up on deconverting the guy. Even following the "evangelical atheism" mindset of some atheists, it's not worth it. Cost-benefit. There's higher quality recruits to atheism to be found out there, for much less effort.

Well, my main problem is that I don't know how to avoid confusion with "reliability", "accuracy" and "truth".
He shows me "evidence" that the NT is almost the same as the original centuries ago from "important" scholars. For him, if a text is proven to be as close to the original, it is also true and reliable. I even told him that there are no non-christian sources that speak of a resurrection and he just insists on the "reliability" factor.

I'm sure there is an "audience", since people randomly comment at times and I see them watching the thread and the truth is I'm only going on for them.

The fact that it's "unchanged" proves nothing. He's assuming that what was written in it, in the first place was what we would consider "accurate". He has not a shred of evidence for that, and a multitude of reasons to think otherwise. An unchanged lie is still a lie. No scholar today says "the apostles wrote the gospels". He clearly knows nothing about the state of Biblical scholarship.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
The noblest of the dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2013, 04:08 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
Surely the most obvious counter is ask him what is so convincing about a claim of something extremely unlikely and improbable that violates all current knowledge about reality? i.e. a person coming back to life after being definitely dead. Drinking Beverage

"Humans always measure what they see in front of them to what they already know. They will deny anything outside of that. They are shallow lifeforms, so enthralled with superficial appearances that they fail to see the truth."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2013, 04:33 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(16-06-2013 01:45 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  So I ask him, how can he be so sure that Jesus was resurrected?

This question isn't even important, because the Resurrection of Jesus argument is illogical, as I recently argued here. To sum it up briefly, even if it could be proven that Jesus rose from the dead, why would that prove that he was a god? Have we observed a pattern of gods that have risen from the dead, or are gods defined by rising from the dead? Neither, obviously -- it's an attempt to reverse-engineer an argument for God that presupposes that Jesus is God. It's as logical as saying "If I can prove Moses parted the Red Sea, then I've proven that God exists, because gods are the only ones that can part seas".

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-06-2013, 04:44 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(16-06-2013 04:33 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(16-06-2013 01:45 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  So I ask him, how can he be so sure that Jesus was resurrected?

This question isn't even important, because the Resurrection of Jesus argument is illogical, as I recently argued here. To sum it up briefly, even if it could be proven that Jesus rose from the dead, why would that prove that he was a god? Have we observed a pattern of gods that have risen from the dead, or are gods defined by rising from the dead? Neither, obviously -- it's an attempt to reverse-engineer an argument for God that presupposes that Jesus is God. It's as logical as saying "If I can prove Moses parted the Red Sea, then I've proven that God exists, because gods are the only ones that can part seas".


Agree. Ask him about all the other people who rose from the dead. In Matthew a whole host of zombies rose with him. Rocks were split, (of course no "split rocks" were ever saved or reported, the temple curtain was torn, and NOT ONE Jewish historian ever mentioned that monumental event, even while mentioning all sorts of other FAR less important trivialities.) Were THEY gods ? What happened to all of them ? Why was NOT one other zombie from the zombie invasion ever reported ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
The noblest of the dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
16-06-2013, 05:28 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(16-06-2013 04:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(16-06-2013 04:33 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  This question isn't even important, because the Resurrection of Jesus argument is illogical, as I recently argued here. To sum it up briefly, even if it could be proven that Jesus rose from the dead, why would that prove that he was a god? Have we observed a pattern of gods that have risen from the dead, or are gods defined by rising from the dead? Neither, obviously -- it's an attempt to reverse-engineer an argument for God that presupposes that Jesus is God. It's as logical as saying "If I can prove Moses parted the Red Sea, then I've proven that God exists, because gods are the only ones that can part seas".


Agree. Ask him about all the other people who rose from the dead. In Matthew a whole host of zombies rose with him. Rocks were split, (of course no "split rocks" were ever saved or reported, the temple curtain was torn, and NOT ONE Jewish historian ever mentioned that monumental event, even while mentioning all sorts of other FAR less important trivialities.) Were THEY gods ? What happened to all of them ? Why was NOT one other zombie from the zombie invasion ever reported ?

Richard Carrier did an excellent presentation on the book of Acts and why that book didn't even confirm its own claims to Jesus' death, the zombie invasion, and public healings. Not only did Jesus' resurrection not make it into outside sources, but not even one of the supposed resurrections did -- and those should have been big news.




My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Starcrash's post
17-06-2013, 03:47 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
I agree with Chas and others. No matter what you say, this person will never believe it. He's got his hands over his ears saying lalalalala.

Godless in the Magnolia State
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2013, 05:04 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(17-06-2013 03:47 PM)cjs Wrote:  I agree with Chas and others. No matter what you say, this person will never believe it. He's got his hands over his ears saying lalalalala.

This, pretty much.

Though if he's saying what you say - "scholars" say this,t hat, the other - Challenge him to name the scholars, and the specific papers, books, or other works they've produced and submitted to peer review... I'll bet he does nothing but list either dubious quote mines or Christian books, if he gives any sort of answer. I believe the technique is called "argument from authority" - "Well, smart people say this!" - and likely hasn't even looked into it himself.

In any case, you may well have to just admit you're talking to a brick wall.

My little rambling blog. (More topical than this one, at least.)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ricochet180's post
17-06-2013, 05:26 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
The Gospels have been changed. Stories that weren't in some of the older manuscripts suddenly appear in the newer copies of them. A perfect example is the "He who is without sin, cast the first stone" story in John's Gospel. Was NOT in the Older versions of the Gospels.

Was this an alteration? You bet your ass it was! Plus, since when is an unchanged document suddenly more reliable? Science changes it's views all the time because it IMPORVES it's views with more accurate data. Does this mean that science is unrelaible, no. Far from it. The Bible, even if it was unchanged (which it wasn't) is not the most reliable ancient text, it just so happens to be one of the more popular ones today.

The Gospel of Luke tells us there was a census conducted while Herod was king, and Corinius(sp) was Governor. No such Census ever took place. The Gospel records that they had to return to their family's original town. Census's don't usually require you to, at least not to my knowledge.

And so what if the Bible could point out a few towns or cities? So can the Illiad, doesn't mean that the Greek Gods were ever a real thing.

Also, Scholars don't regard the New Testament as historical fact. None of the miracles, including the ressurection, could be backed up by CONTEMPORARY sources. NONE.


Tell him to back up his claim before making it.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Atothetheist's post
18-06-2013, 02:16 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(16-06-2013 05:28 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(16-06-2013 04:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Agree. Ask him about all the other people who rose from the dead. In Matthew a whole host of zombies rose with him. Rocks were split, (of course no "split rocks" were ever saved or reported, the temple curtain was torn, and NOT ONE Jewish historian ever mentioned that monumental event, even while mentioning all sorts of other FAR less important trivialities.) Were THEY gods ? What happened to all of them ? Why was NOT one other zombie from the zombie invasion ever reported ?

Richard Carrier did an excellent presentation on the book of Acts and why that book didn't even confirm its own claims to Jesus' death, the zombie invasion, and public healings. Not only did Jesus' resurrection not make it into outside sources, but not even one of the supposed resurrections did -- and those should have been big news.




Thanks for this Carrier link. He says things I have thought about for a long time...
why the Romans never once looked for a "risen", Jebus, why the Jews were not interested in it at all, why so much (just as he says) is missing from Acts .. and NEVER discussed.
It's given me the impetus to make the same case I've had for a long time about the Ark of the Covenant in the Old T. Why is it no one talks about what happened to it ? Where was it taken to ? Why is it NEVER mentioned after the Exile ? Why was it unimportant when Temple II was rebuilt ?

Because it never existed. It was part of the Moses mythology.

It's a convoluted case, and will take a while to finish ... but watching this gave me the kick in the butt to get it written.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
The noblest of the dogs is the hot dog. It feeds the hand that bites it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-06-2013, 12:35 AM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
How can any book which tells four historically implausable, contradictory versions of the same story, be considered reliable?

The secret to a happy life is lowering your expectations to the point where they are already met
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes PeterKA's post
Post Reply

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Lets end the space program....because Bible Shadow Fox 8 92 Today 07:50 PM
Last Post: Reltzik
  A Very Misanthropik Bible Study Misanthropik 37 692 Today 12:46 AM
Last Post: JONES
  The Bible ok'ing abortion???? MrKrispy601 27 497 Yesterday 01:27 PM
Last Post: Im_Ryan
  Updated on my 3rd read of the bible MrKrispy601 24 337 20-07-2014 01:20 PM
Last Post: Fodder_From_The_Truth
  Hobby Lobby President Has Agenda To Have Mandatory Bible Curriculum In Public Schools WindyCityJazz 20 399 16-07-2014 06:13 AM
Last Post: Hobbitgirl
  Bible Golden Ratio "Code" TheLastEnemy 290 9,799 11-07-2014 10:42 AM
Last Post: Impulse
  Is Christianity really a monotheistic religion according to the Bible? Lunda 8 150 06-07-2014 06:34 PM
Last Post: Free Thought
Forum Jump: