Bible as the most reliable ancient text
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-10-2017, 01:20 PM (This post was last modified: 23-10-2017 01:31 PM by dancefortwo.)
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
I alway laugh like hell when bible thumpers get all excited that the bible has the cities and towns that actually exist and somehow this is evidence of a god. Every myth book reflects the geographical environment it's written in. The The Hindu Vedas and South American holy stories are rampant with real geography and wars. Now if the Bible wrote specifically about the Ganges River in India or the South American mountain called Chopakalki in Peru, or places and events far outside of its writers experience that would be someting to take note of. But no, the Bible sticks to it's geographic location and never ventures beyond that.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like dancefortwo's post
23-10-2017, 01:42 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(22-10-2017 03:22 PM)AreUthinking? Wrote:  Kay. I read all your arguement, and I feel like you guys might be missing a point. All you said the new testament is bs and inaccurate, but you fail to realized it is the MOST accurate ancient text in the world. According to a person, the new testement have over 24,000 ancient copies compared to other historical text, and the tunner-up only have 543. Also, everything in the new testament can be proven via history. Now, the gospel of Luke is the only one that claimed that is written in chrologinical order, where as the other ones were not. With the "contradictions" It is just that factors don't cancel each other out. You can argue that one person only saw one angel because there is only one angel speaking, but you can not beleieve that 4 people have the same point of view and lifestyle. Here is the lifestyle that describe why they write that way:
Matthew: Tax collectorHobo
Mark: Brother Hobo
Luke: DoctorHobo
John: fishermanThumbsup[/size][/font]
Also, Jesus have indeed rised form the dead. If you dont believe me, every SINGLE theory proving he never resseructed and it is just a mere lie have been disprove by history, science, and people.Yes

Does this guy even know that this thread is over 4 years old? Who is Kay?

Doc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes docskeptic's post
23-10-2017, 01:47 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(23-10-2017 01:42 PM)docskeptic Wrote:  
(22-10-2017 03:22 PM)AreUthinking? Wrote:  Kay. I read all your arguement, and I feel like you guys might be missing a point. All you said the new testament is bs and inaccurate, but you fail to realized it is the MOST accurate ancient text in the world. According to a person, the new testement have over 24,000 ancient copies compared to other historical text, and the tunner-up only have 543. Also, everything in the new testament can be proven via history. Now, the gospel of Luke is the only one that claimed that is written in chrologinical order, where as the other ones were not. With the "contradictions" It is just that factors don't cancel each other out. You can argue that one person only saw one angel because there is only one angel speaking, but you can not beleieve that 4 people have the same point of view and lifestyle. Here is the lifestyle that describe why they write that way:
Matthew: Tax collectorHobo
Mark: Brother Hobo
Luke: DoctorHobo
John: fishermanThumbsup[/size][/font]
Also, Jesus have indeed rised form the dead. If you dont believe me, every SINGLE theory proving he never resseructed and it is just a mere lie have been disprove by history, science, and people.Yes

Does this guy even know that this thread is over 4 years old? Who is Kay?

Doc

I like his extremely casual citations: "According to a person..."

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Grasshopper's post
23-10-2017, 02:13 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(23-10-2017 08:57 AM)AreUthinking? Wrote:  
(22-10-2017 06:51 PM)julep Wrote:  Are you drunk-posting?

I am not In fact drunk posting. It's just someone messing around with my reply before I posted.

Mod hat on:

Mods only tamper with posts that include nudity and hyperlinks of self-promotion when posted by newbies.

Off the top of my head I can’t think of any other reason...well one, but I don’t want to even mention it and it doesn’t include anything having to do with you AreUthinking.

Mod hat off:

We have a Single Malt Scotch Whiskey thread you might like to check out. Smile

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2017, 02:15 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(23-10-2017 01:47 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(23-10-2017 01:42 PM)docskeptic Wrote:  Does this guy even know that this thread is over 4 years old? Who is Kay?

Doc

I like his extremely casual citations: "According to a person..."

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

Not to mention the (sic) tunner-up only has 543.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Full Circle's post
23-10-2017, 02:41 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(23-10-2017 09:01 AM)AreUthinking? Wrote:  Scientific parts:
... Means he died, because -Grr, forgot the organs- stop function that the blood and water are now mixed.

Not science.

Blood and water mixed?

Yeah, gotta be a poe.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2017, 04:15 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(23-10-2017 02:13 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(23-10-2017 08:57 AM)AreUthinking? Wrote:  I am not In fact drunk posting. It's just someone messing around with my reply before I posted.

Mod hat on:

Mods only tamper with posts that include nudity and hyperlinks of self-promotion when posted by newbies.

Off the top of my head I can’t think of any other reason...well one, but I don’t want to even mention it and it doesn’t include anything having to do with you AreUthinking.

Mod hat off:

We have a Single Malt Scotch Whiskey thread you might like to check out. Smile
I figured he meant somebody at his house, not one of us. Although if the posts are the result of two heads being put together...yikes!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2017, 05:17 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(23-10-2017 04:15 PM)julep Wrote:  I figured he meant somebody at his house, not one of us. Although if the posts are the result of two heads being put together...yikes!


The car talk guys demonstrated years ago that two people together can know less than either alone...

Quote:Posit the question: Do two people who don't know what they are talking about know more or less than one person who doesn't know what he's talking about? (Pardon the un-PC masculine pronoun, but I have found this to be, most predominately, a male phenomenon.)

In your recent conversations regarding electric brakes on a cattle carrier, I believe you definitely answered this query and have put our debate to rest. Amazingly enough, you proved that even in a case where one person might know nothing about a subject, it is possible for two people to know even less!

One person will only go so far out on a limb in his construction of deeply hypothetical structures, and will often end with a shrug or a raising of hands to indicate the dismissability of his particular take on a subject. With two people, the intricacies, the gives and takes, the wherefores and why-nots, can become a veritable pas-de-deux of breathtaking speculation, interwoven in such a way that apologies or gestures of doubt are rendered unnecessary.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
23-10-2017, 05:35 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(16-06-2013 01:45 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  In an ongoing debate with a Christian, I've stuck in a place where I don't know how to go on and Google isn't helping.

This particular guy ignores every bad detail in the Bible, all the cruelty and contradictions, because as he says "if Jesus was resurrected, nothing else matters", since, I guess, it's an amazing thing(?).

So I ask him, how can he be so sure that Jesus was resurrected? And he always answers in the same way: the New Testament in the most reliable ancient document ever. He goes on to show me that based on Text Criticism, the New Testament has not been altered or tampered in any way and the mistakes from the constant copying are minor.

The point is, even if that is true, it only means that the New Testament was the same 2000 years ago as it is now. How does it prove that it is reliable and historically true?

I'm quite buffled by the way he throws "reliability" around and I'm not quite sure about how to face this. Any help?

Tried this? Big Grin

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-10-2017, 05:58 PM
RE: Bible as the most reliable ancient text
(23-10-2017 04:15 PM)julep Wrote:  I figured he meant somebody at his house, not one of us. Although if the posts are the result of two heads being put together...yikes!

Maybe he meant the voices in his head.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: