Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » The (preferably audio) case for God? (Page 27)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 31 pages: 1  2  3  ...  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31   
Author Topic: The (preferably audio) case for God?
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Everard, did you know that originally both the Church of England and Luther split from the Church not for doctrinal reasons, but for heirarchical reasons? That doesn't really support your claim."

You might want to look into that a little more deeply. There were quite a few issues of doctrine that were contested.

"Additionally, with the birth control issue, would a scientist trust the common man's understanding of gravity?"

Nope, he wouldn't. On the other hand, there's a fight going on in the church heirarchy over birth control.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PanHeraclitean
Member
Member # 3120

 - posted      Profile for PanHeraclitean   Email PanHeraclitean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Are you talking before or after Malanchton "helped" his writing?

Do you have some source for the fight in the hierarchy?

Posts: 1259 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
moodi,

Of course Islam sees the Mahdi and Isa as good people. But no where in Islam is Isa considered anything more than a mere Prophet, and definately not a bigger prophet than Muhammad. But the Mahdi is the "savior" which means he is above the status of a mere Prophet.

The Hadith is what I've been reading at home, but it is thoroughly confusing since it has authentic sayings, but there is also "questionable" sayings, and so on. I much prefer the chronological approach in the bible. lol

The problem I have is that I am studying Islam through Christian eyes. So the things I read that contradict my religion lead me to believe it is an evil religion. But I am allowed to have those beliefs because I live in America and not in Saudi Arabia. lol

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Carlotta
Member
Member # 3117

 - posted      Profile for Carlotta   Email Carlotta   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
TLynch,
Thanks for answering my questions. I forgot to make the distinction you are making between a church, as in a parish or group, and a denomination, as in a theology.
I'm glad you're feeling better today. Most if not all of the people here are very respectful to other posters even if they completely disagree with your ideas. Hope you stick around.

Btw, do you think God gave us the Bible primarily for telling us what's going to happen in the future, or for telling us how we ought to live, or what?

Posts: 1318 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Carlotta,

My interest in history and also in the unknown(prophecy) has led me to my faith. But my dad was right last night when he pointed that very thing out to me that you just said.

The prophecies in the Bible are all well and good, but the Bible is definately for telling us how to live a right life and how to follow the right path towards salvation. Everything else that "is to happen" will happen and we must not concern ourselves too much with it. It is important to be aware of it, but it should not be the focus of our faith.

My intent was to share what I have learned, but I probably just ended up coming off as some religious zealot. lol, live and learn I suppose.

Though I am learning how to get my point across without coming off as presumptious or rude or anything else. This place is truly different than any other forum I've been on.

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PanHeraclitean
Member
Member # 3120

 - posted      Profile for PanHeraclitean   Email PanHeraclitean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
TLynch, how is ornery different? Honestly this is the first and only forum I have been on and am interested in how most forums differ.
Posts: 1259 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
moodi
Member
Member # 3020

 - posted      Profile for moodi   Email moodi   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:

Of course Islam sees the Mahdi and Isa as good people. But no where in Islam is Isa considered anything more than a mere Prophet, and definately not a bigger prophet than Muhammad. But the Mahdi is the "savior" which means he is above the status of a mere Prophet.


I guess you don't know the level of holiness that surrounds Issa/Jesus in Islam. There's an entire chapter in the Kuran the depicts Mary and Isa's birth which is considered as one of the biggest miracles humanity has witnessed. Prophets are considered as the closest people to God because they are the "chosen" ones and thus the Mahdi cannot be on their level since there are no more prophets after Muhammad.

Posts: 134 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Carlotta
Member
Member # 3117

 - posted      Profile for Carlotta   Email Carlotta   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, Pan, for one thing people here are literate. They mostly use capital letters when called for, etc. For another, maybe because of the strictly enforced rules, people don't just name call or vent, they actually present arguments to be discussed, and they're at least equally interested in hearing what people have to say as they are in getting their own point across.
Posts: 1318 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, Carlotta, you probably give us too much credit.

On the other hand, this is a keeper: "for one thing people here are literate"
[LOL]

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
TomD, predictability and repeatability are components of evidence, it would seem. Thus they would be effected if everyone on Gods green earth were performing experiments.
And...?
I suspect that we actually perform experiments every day, whether we know it or not.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
moodi,

Islam also claims Jesus was born at the base of a Palm tree. They also deny he ever died on the cross. Even Roman historical documents prove Jesus was crucified.

I am not saying that Islam thinks Jesus is not holy, but they deny that he is Son of God. Which is the central belief of Christianity. And besides, the Jesus of Islam that is supposed to return is decidedly not the same Jesus that lived 2000 years ago. How can the Jesus of Islam "break the cross" and go about to slaughter or convert the entire world? When the Jesus that lived preached non-violence and passiveness?

It is that very belief that inspired tens of thousands of martyr's in the first few centuries who "laid down their life willingly" for Christ with the courage and self sacrifice that only a non-violent pious person can do. This is the fundemental difference between what Islam believes to be a martyr and what the Bible and Jesus believes to be a martyr.

The only path I could find in the Qur'an to salvation and to paradise is to die fighting for the cause of Allah. Killing in war or in battle or in suicide.

While the path to salvation in Christianity is simply through Jesus Christ because he died on the cross so that we could attain paradise through our devotion to Him. In the Bible he even told one of the two criminals being crucified with him that they would enter paradise together.

The most famous quote in history has to be Jesus' when he said, "Forgive them Father for they know not what they do."

Here is a great big difference to illustrate the difference between Islamic Jesus and the Christian Jesus:

Matthew 6 43-44
"You have heard the commandment, 'You shall love your countryman but hate your enemy.' My(Jesus) command to is: love your enemies, pray for your persecutors.


This single statement is exactly the opposite of what is called for in Islam.

Moodi, you seem to know quite a bit about Islam though, are you disagreeing with me that Isa does in fact return to slaughter or convert the entire world to Islam? Do you disagree that the Mahdi will return to conquer the entire world under the banner of Islam? Do you disagree with my understanding of Islamic prophecy that the Mahdi and Isa will slaughter the Jews and it is the Dajjal that is "defending" the Jews from this genocide?

If so, please elaborate where your disagreement is coming from so I can better understand where our different understandings of Islam part ways. This topic is probably the only one I am truly prepared to talk about on this strict forum.

In the rest of the threads I have fumbled through with passion and emotion and have been utterly destroyed intellectually by others here. Maybe I've found my niche until I can learn the process around here. I'm good at opinions, weak on facts...but not when it comes to Biblical and Islamic Eschatology. [Wink] lol

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Even Roman historical documents prove Jesus was crucified.
Hold up.
We don't even have contemporary accounts proving that Jesus existed. If you have access to such an account, let me assure you that it would be worth millions.

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok, they are in the vaults of the Vatican. But most seculars believe they must be forged because the Vatican has them.

I will search...the information is always online. Here is what Islam wants to do:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/crucify.html

Changing history...

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PanHeraclitean
Member
Member # 3120

 - posted      Profile for PanHeraclitean   Email PanHeraclitean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
TomD, Josephus doesn't count?

By the way, I agree that to an extent we do experiments everyday, but do they count as scientific inquiry? The point I'm trying to make is that science has a proper mode of inquiry and procedures. I have not seen any of you believe that all valuable inquiry should have a canon. In fact you seem to limit it to science or expand science to encompass those fields. Theology and religion also have a canon. Just because people don't follow a canon doesn't doesn't invalidate it. Wouldn't you agree?

Posts: 1259 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This is the best I could do on such short notice. Plenty of anti-Christian sources that pop up immediately, but at least this one lists some credible sources.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
not sure how credible this one is...sounds legite

http://www.bible.ca/d-history-archeology-crucifixion-cross.htm

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
here we go... http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/33097
Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This is a really interesting site:

http://www.sowhataboutjesus.com/existed.php

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
lots of links.

What is the specific claim you are trying to support (quoting the passage from the source document, of course), or are you expecting people to mine through millions of words to get to your point?

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
mainly the last link. Thats the easiest to read and get through. I was just trying to find the best possible source for the proof that was asked. Jesus did exist and was crucified. I also added the Islamic arguement website to denounce that Jesus ever died on the cross. re-writing history gets us no where I would think.
Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why don't you copy the very specific claim so we don't have to guess.

Something in the form of <words that come from linked page> followed by your analysis, e.g. "this particular document illustrates that john B, a Walmart employee, sold sandals to Jesus and took down his contact info for CRM purposes"

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.sowhataboutjesus.com/existed.php
Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That link contains the answer to the question(direct link, it supports my analysis a few posts ago when someone said there was no proof he existed). I gotta go, movie night with the wife! have a good one!
Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
ummm... I obviously missed it. What proof is provided in that link?

I certainly didn't see reference to any contemporary accounts (all those mentioned were born after Jesus' death)

At best you've got some hearsay, nothing else.

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
TomD, Josephus doesn't count?
Would you consider Josephus to be a reliable contemporary account? I wouldn't.

TLynch, it's also worth noting that all the "evidence" you've provided here is hearsay. I've read Tacitus' account, for example, and he actually mentions Jesus only to say that other people say that he was executed by Pilate; he has no first-hand knowledge of the deed himself (and, indeed, if you check out his date of birth, could not).

So we know there's some scanty historical evidence suggesting that, by 40 or 50AD, some people were claiming that someone named Jesus had been executed by Pilate and was the Christ. What we don't have is the actual evidence that these claims were valid.

[ January 25, 2007, 11:35 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If it was written within a few decades of Jesus' death then it certainly isn't heresay. A life can span several decades. Why wouldn't the "greatest Historian in Roman history" be worthy of proof?

I can't offer a death certificate, they just didn't keep track of that sort of stuff back then. But what consitutes proof in the realm of historical accuracy is the number of different sources accounting of the same event. I offered Jewish, Roman, Christian, Greek, ect who all offered the same event in the same way.

So your arguement is that because they were all written in the decades following the event then it must mean they are all inaccurate and false? Come on, give me a little wiggle room here. If that is what you constitute as needed proof then I could argue the existence of my own great grandfather or that Columbus actually sailed across the Atlantic.

I have offered several separate accounts from several different people from different lands and different times and cultures and they all make the same account of a man named Jesus who claimed to be the Son of God and who was crucified by Pilate to satsify the demands of the Jewish religous elite. What more do you require?? [Smile]

[ January 26, 2007, 12:00 AM: Message edited by: TLynch ]

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
If it was written within a few decades of Jesus' death then it certainly isn't heresay.
Why not? From a legal perspective, it's hearsay if you repeat something someone told you they heard from the next room over -- much less across a gulf of decades.

quote:
I offered Jewish, Roman, Christian, Greek, ect who all offered the same event in the same way.
What all your sources say is that the Christians say Jesus was executed by Pilate. What reason would they have to doubt Christians on this score? I have little to no doubt, given the lazy approach to history that was common of the era, that they simply repeated what they were told as fact.

quote:
Come on, give me a little wiggle room here. If that is what you constitute as needed proof then I could argue the existence of my own great grandfather or that Columbus actually sailed across the Atlantic.
There are no documents contemporary with your grandfather that once demonstrated his existence? And there were no records kept of Columbus' journey until years after it happened? I doubt both these things very strongly.

quote:
What more do you require?
Something that does not amount to "the Christians say there was a man named Jesus who lived more than thirty years ago...."
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
And there were no records kept of Columbus' journey until years after it happened? I doubt both these things very strongly.
Yup...
quote:
The Columbus documents available today include more than 2,500 notes penned in the margins of books he owned; some 80 letters, notes and memorials; copies of the log from his first New World voyage; volumes he compiled; and his will. Most of the books and manuscripts are in Spain, but there are important Columbus materials in Italy, France, and the United States.

http://www.christopher-columbus.eu/who-was-columbus/italy.htm
Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"The Columbus documents available today include more than 2,500 notes penned in the margins of books he owned; some 80 letters, notes and memorials; copies of the log from his first New World voyage; volumes he compiled; and his will. Most of the books and manuscripts are in Spain, but there are important Columbus materials in Italy, France, and the United States."


All of Christ's words were written by his apostles, but for some reason todays world disregard the Bible as a historically accurate text. Even though the existence of many stories in the Bible have been proven over the years. Such as Sodem and Gamorah(spl?) or many of the old Jewish kings thought to be myths.

This is where we part from the realm of ideas. You require proof other than what is written in the Bible, since many have decided for us that the Bible is some big farse of a lie.

It's not fair to arbitrarily deny the writings of one of the oldest surviving text in human history, yet it is being done right now by you guys. If a historical account of Jesus was written 20 years after his death by someone who personally knew Him then why is that considered heresay??

According to your philosophy, I can dispute Columbus' claim. He could have forged those documents and pretended to set sail. Much like Amerigo Vespuchi was able to get the new continents named after him by claimed to have discovered them first even though he had never left Italy. lol There is far more historical record of Jesus that has survived than what we have on Columbus. New gospels are being discovered every year, all saying the same exact thing!

Are you claiming that there is some massive conspiracy to fool people into believing in God? They believed in God before Jesus ever came. There is just too much written record dating from the first century to collaborate the story of Jesus and NO written record to refute it! The first written record to appear disputing the life of Jesus came in the seventh century by Muhammad.

Show me as many historical documents from the first century that tells a different story of Jesus and I will listen and even be curious about it, but you have offered nothing but circumstantial evidence with nothing to back it up historically. To my knowledge the only written evidence from the first century AD regarding the life of Jesus only serves to reinforce what is written in the Bible.

Where is your written proof that isn't heresay?? [Smile] Gotcha.

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not to be arrogant or anything, its just fun to turn the tables for once. It feels like I have been takin upper cuts and jabs for 12 rounds and now I have finally been able to go on the offensive. I think I like this way of arguement, much more satisfying without the usual spiral to angry rudeness. [Wink]
Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Much like Amerigo Vespuchi was able to get the new continents named after him by claimed to have discovered them first even though he had never left Italy. lol There is far more historical record of Jesus that has survived than what we have on Columbus. New gospels are being discovered every year, all saying the same exact thing! "

AHHHHH *tears out hair*


"Are you claiming that there is some massive conspiracy to fool people into believing in God?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocrypha#New_Testament_apocryphal_literature

It's quite possible that the church cherry picked some of the more convincing, fitting data.


It's more likely, I'd say, that the tyrrannical church of the middle ages would do this, than the hundreds of eye witness's, scholars, people involved, etc who found the new land and actually mapped it.

You think hearsay from two thousand years ago is just as reliable as documented first and second hand accounts half a millenium ago?

Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
TLynch, here is a partial list of the blind assertions from your post:

* All of Christ's words were written by his apostles,
* the existence of many stories in the Bible have been proven over the years
* There is far more historical record of Jesus that has survived than what we have on Columbus.
* Amerigo Vespuchi was able to get the new continents named after him by claimed to have discovered them first even though he had never left Italy.
* New gospels are being discovered every year, all saying the same exact thing!

At least half of these are demonstrably, factually wrong. For the others - those that different people may have different opinions on - you provide no support for your opinion or you attempt to provide support by evoking a logical fallacy.

Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
"Are you claiming that there is some massive conspiracy to fool people into believing in God?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocrypha#New_Testament_apocryphal_literature

It's quite possible that the church cherry picked some of the more convincing, fitting data.

Data? Cherry picking? Are you suggesting that in assembling the book called the New Testament, an anthology of the most inspirational writings of Jesus' disciples, that you think that it was somehow dishonest to not include shoddier work, writings that seemed inconsistent with the work that was known to be authentic, or include documents by Jesus' enemies? Or have I lost the context of what you meant?
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by DonaldD:
ummm... I obviously missed it. What proof is provided in that link?

I certainly didn't see reference to any contemporary accounts (all those mentioned were born after Jesus' death)

At best you've got some hearsay, nothing else.

Hearsay must mean something different in Canada.

The gospels contain eyewitness testimony to the crucifixion. John identifies himself outright as the writer of the book that bears his name, and describes himself at the scene of the cross. You can dispute that he is who he claims he is, or you can dispute that he saw what he says that he saw. But that isn't "hearsay," at least not by the federal rules of evidence, nor by any other account that I've heard of. If you Canadians call eyewitness testimony hearsay, then what do you call a big mug of stale beer? [Big Grin]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I suppose I could have said that at best you've got hearsay and if you really want to include the gospels, you've got writings of questionable historical authorship (including John)

But to answer what you are really asking: that would be "a shame"

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ah. I was not counting the Bible as a historical document capable of corroborating the historical claims made in the Bible. I had assumed, since we were questioning the validity of the scriptural account, that the scriptural accounts themselves were not being considered as evidence for their own claims.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lynch:

In what sense has the story of the destruction of the cities of the plain been "proved"? and what date are you putting on the destruction? I might also add, what longitude and latitude are you putting on them.

Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Richard,

I watched a special on I think the Discovery channel. Two ancient cities were unearthed in Jordan that fit the same time period of the two cities and were both destroyed at the same time. They also thought they found the cave that the one innocent man in Sodem at slept, the guy who had been seduced by his own two daughters. lol It's a pretty interesting story, but the two cities do exist and archeologists(not the church) believe they are Sodem and Gomoragh. Much like Troy was thought to be a myth, not anymore.

As for another post:
"""
* All of Christ's words were written by his apostles(How is this not true? Some I will admit were written by people who "knew the apostles who knew Jesus", but Islam is no different in their Hadith's)
* the existence of many stories in the Bible have been proven over the years(I gave examples that proved this statement, so how is this untrue?)
* There is far more historical record of Jesus that has survived than what we have on Columbus.(It is a simple fact that there is more literature on Jesus than any other figure throughout all of history, it's not even close!)
* Amerigo Vespuchi was able to get the new continents named after him by claimed to have discovered them first even though he had never left Italy.(This is what is taught to us in school, so either it is true or schools are lying to the kids about history)
* New gospels are being discovered every year, all saying the same exact thing!(Ok, here is the one that isn't so true. It's not every year, but new gospels are discovered every once in a while. Judas, Mary, Dead Sea Scrolls, ect ect)

So please point out where I am factually wrong, and offer the alternative.
"""

Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TLynch
Member
Member # 3581

 - posted      Profile for TLynch   Email TLynch   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As for the New Testament being just a ploy by the church to portray Jesus in a certain way... They did take the gospels of the most legitimate writers of the time as well. The reasoning for it can be twisted by anyone, the only real fact concerning the New Testament is that the men who wrote the gospels in the New Testament were men who were either very close to Jesus personally or men who were very devout. Two criteria important to the Church leaders of the 3-4 centuries. It wasn't some grand design to trick people, they just took what they thought were the most divinely inspired writings.
Posts: 267 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PanHeraclitean
Member
Member # 3120

 - posted      Profile for PanHeraclitean   Email PanHeraclitean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What particular definition are we using for historical document? As I recall historians have to use some documents as source texts and others as corraborating documents. The bible is a grouping of books. Thus you have several source documents. You can go to apocraphal literature for even more evidence.

Josephus wasn't contemporary, but I believe that historian was not a real common profession in the time of Jesus.

As a parallel, how would we prove the existence of Socrates?

Posts: 1259 | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 31 pages: 1  2  3  ...  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1