Christian Doctrine
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-12-2016, 06:18 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
Aliza, it's so interesting to read your posts. I'm always learning stuff about the Torah from you. Keep it up.

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
[+] 1 user Likes dancefortwo's post
22-12-2016, 08:45 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
The Gospels are another reason I believe.
Four independent writers who were either eye-witnesses or close acquaintances of eye-witnesses. So much of the Gospels has be proven to be true. Things like people, places and events. The writers had no compunction to write the Gospels except to get the story out. They were not made rich or given preferential treatment. They were killed and some in not very nice ways. The Gospels are different in ways that show they did not collude with each other. The Gospels tell the story and do not contradict each other.
The disciples prior to Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection and who they were afterwards is so very different. Peter cowered before a slave girl when Jesus was under arrest. Later Peter scolded the Jewish High Priest and those who were in power and could have made life very difficult.
Act 4:10
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
Act 4:13
Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marveled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

There are thousands of manuscripts of the Bible. Many more than any other ancient text. They were written early enough that the public that saw Jesus die also could read the Gospels and raise hell if they were false records.
The Gospels are history. Proven history.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2016, 09:09 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(22-12-2016 08:45 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  The Gospels are another reason I believe.
Four independent writers who were either eye-witnesses or close acquaintances of eye-witnesses. So much of the Gospels has be proven to be true. Things like people, places and events. The writers had no compunction to write the Gospels except to get the story out. They were not made rich or given preferential treatment. They were killed and some in not very nice ways. The Gospels are different in ways that show they did not collude with each other. The Gospels tell the story and do not contradict each other.
The disciples prior to Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection and who they were afterwards is so very different. Peter cowered before a slave girl when Jesus was under arrest. Later Peter scolded the Jewish High Priest and those who were in power and could have made life very difficult.
Act 4:10
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
Act 4:13
Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marveled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

There are thousands of manuscripts of the Bible. Many more than any other ancient text. They were written early enough that the public that saw Jesus die also could read the Gospels and raise hell if they were false records.
The Gospels are history. Proven history.

Um. No. The gospels were not written by eyewitnesses. They were written by anonymous writers 45 to 70 plus years after the alleged events took place and after almost two generations of oral storytelling . The names attached to the letters floating around the Mediterranean area were given in the second century by church fathers who had no idea who wrote them and no way to find out.

This is why your bible says "traditional" instead of "written by" or "authored by". At least it's honest about that.

The gospel of Mark is the first gospel written and it doesn't even have a resurrection scene or a virgin birth. The resurrection scene was added in the 3rd or 4th century by church officials so it would match the other gospels. The geography in Mark is way off indicating someone who had never set foot in Palestine.

The gospels are not evidence of anything except stories about a local hero that were told and retold. To quote Aliza's brilliant analogy from several months ago, "Jesus is the Paul Bunyon of his day." Hahaha. Thanks Aliza. Thumbsup

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
22-12-2016, 09:18 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(22-12-2016 09:09 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  
(22-12-2016 08:45 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  The Gospels are another reason I believe.
Four independent writers who were either eye-witnesses or close acquaintances of eye-witnesses. So much of the Gospels has be proven to be true. Things like people, places and events. The writers had no compunction to write the Gospels except to get the story out. They were not made rich or given preferential treatment. They were killed and some in not very nice ways. The Gospels are different in ways that show they did not collude with each other. The Gospels tell the story and do not contradict each other.
The disciples prior to Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection and who they were afterwards is so very different. Peter cowered before a slave girl when Jesus was under arrest. Later Peter scolded the Jewish High Priest and those who were in power and could have made life very difficult.
Act 4:10
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
Act 4:13
Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marveled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

There are thousands of manuscripts of the Bible. Many more than any other ancient text. They were written early enough that the public that saw Jesus die also could read the Gospels and raise hell if they were false records.
The Gospels are history. Proven history.

Um. No. The gospels were not written by eyewitnesses. They were written by anonymous writers 45 to 70 plus years after the alleged events took place and after almost two generations of oral storytelling . The names attached to the letters floating around the Mediterranean area were given in the second century by church fathers who had no idea who wrote them and no way to find out.

This is why your bible says "traditional" instead of "written by" or "authored by". At least it's honest about that.

The gospel of Mark is the first gospel written and it doesn't even have a resurrection scene or a virgin birth. The resurrection scene was added in the 3rd or 4th century by church officials so it would match the other gospels. The geography in Mark is way off indicating someone who had never set foot in Palestine.

The gospels are not evidence of anything except stories about a local hero that were told and retold. To quote Aliza's brilliant analogy from several months ago, "Jesus is the Paul Bunyon of his day." Hahaha. Thanks Aliza. Thumbsup

You are wrong on all but that Mark may have been the first written.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2016, 09:29 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(22-12-2016 08:45 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  The Gospels are another reason I believe.
Four independent writers who were either eye-witnesses or close acquaintances of eye-witnesses. So much of the Gospels has be proven to be true. Things like people, places and events.

Spiderman lives in New York. New York exists. Does that make Spiderman real?

The gospels were written anywhere from 30 to nearly 100 years after the events. Matthew and Luke are largely based on Mark. John is the last of the 4 to be written and evinces a much more evolved theology. They aren't 4 independent accounts, they are fan fiction. The names associated with them were added much later since the original authors are unknown.

Quote:The writers had no compunction to write the Gospels except to get the story out. They were not made rich or given preferential treatment.

I have no way to judge what their personal motivations were.

Quote:They were killed and some in not very nice ways.

That's church tradition but there's no good reason to believe it.

Quote:The Gospels are different in ways that show they did not collude with each other. The Gospels tell the story and do not contradict each other.

There are numerous cases where they contradict right down to the day of the trial, the timing of the crucifixion, and where and when the various post-resurrection appearances took place. That they are very similar in most ways is not surprising given that they built on one another.

Quote:The disciples prior to Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection and who they were afterwards is so very different. Peter cowered before a slave girl when Jesus was under arrest. Later Peter scolded the Jewish High Priest and those who were in power and could have made life very difficult.

No idea why a change in the personality of a character in a book would be compelling.

Quote:Act 4:10 ...Act 4:13...

The bible is the claim. Quoting it to people who don't accept it as authoritative is pretty pointless. Even if you could show that the gospels were totally consistent it wouldn't be any more proof of the supernatural than the Odyssey and the Iliad together prove Zeus exists.

Quote:There are thousands of manuscripts of the Bible. Many more than any other ancient text.

So? It was copied a lot. There are also thousands of variations; mostly fairly minor but some significant. Nobody denies that it was popular. The question is whether or not it was true.

Quote:They were written early enough that the public that saw Jesus die also could read the Gospels and raise hell if they were false records.

The earliest we have are 30+ years later which means that anybody who saw and remembered the events would be ancient for the time for even the oldest versions. That's if they even had a chance to hear about the Greek texts before they died.

Quote:The Gospels are history. Proven history.

Not by a long shot. Read some Bart Ehrman or Richard Friedman or Joseph Allegro... they all have good books available on the history of how what is today the new testament was written, edited, and compiled. I'd suggest Richard Carrier as well because while his opinion is still considered fringe he makes some good points.

A few from TTA's very own GWG:
No one who ever wrote of jesus, actually knew him
Easter "resurrection" myth challenge
Anonymously written gospels
The systemic errancy problem of the scribes
The top 10 verses that were not originally in the New Testament
No records of jesus
No Jesus

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
[+] 3 users Like unfogged's post
22-12-2016, 09:36 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
Read Norman Gielsler and then you will have the opinion of an actual scholar.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2016, 09:58 PM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(22-12-2016 09:36 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Read Norman Gielsler and then you will have the opinion of an actual scholar.

The vast majority of university accredited New Testament scholars date the gospels later and know they are not eyewitness accounts, including conservative scholar Bruce Metzgar.

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
[+] 1 user Likes dancefortwo's post
23-12-2016, 02:53 AM
RE: Christian Doctrine
OK Blitzy, I can dig that you read and believe the Gospels. So that's point 3 that you have cited as evidence to believe the Bible.

I'm afraid it's still unconvincing. Firstly, you haven't answered my previous question here.

Secondly, while you think the gospels are a lovely source, I have significant problems with them:
  • What proof can you cite that they are an eyewitness account?
  • I know how stories grow in the telling. So it's very easy for me to believe that the gospels may record something based on real events, nowhere near so easy to believe that it *describes* without distortion the said events.
  • There's nothing else. It's the gospels, take it or leave it. No credible other evidence is available. No Roman mentions (as far as I am aware) from the actual time of Jesus supposed life.
  • The whole region was seething with little cult religions, e.g. Mithraism. From my perspective it just looks like one cult got a bit more of a following than the others.

I can't see that reasonable belief is possible. I think that the best you can do is to acknowledge that and say that it will take a "leap of faith" for me to believe - in other words that I must *abandon* reason and simply believe.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
23-12-2016, 03:08 AM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(22-12-2016 09:36 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Read Norman Gielsler and then you will have the opinion of an actual scholar.

No really, Appeal to Authority again. That's real effective around here. You know, when you have no evidence to fall back on.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2016, 03:40 AM
RE: Christian Doctrine
(23-12-2016 03:08 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(22-12-2016 09:36 PM)Bzltyr Wrote:  Read Norman Gielsler and then you will have the opinion of an actual scholar.

No really, Appeal to Authority again. That's real effective around here. You know, when you have no evidence to fall back on.

Giesler is a dishonest apologist, if I remember correctly he dropped a huge straw man into an article in the christian post on Seths story of Suzy video.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like adey67's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: