Nine Pieces Of Evidence That Confirm The Historical Accuracy Of The Bible

[sooda]

[video]

 

[Spartan]

[video]

Trump Derangement Syndrome

 

[Spartan]

That's fine, you're free to believe what you like, even if it contradicts reality. Perhaps you don't remember that several people refuted many parts of it, alongside myself, the last time you posted it. And you and I had a back-and-forth about it.

No, I never saw any credible refutation of any of it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, I never saw any credible refutation of any of it.

You have, but you could not understand it at best. Cognitive dissonance struck in all probability.

 

[SkepticThinker]

No, I never saw any credible refutation of any of it.

You've actually replied to several of them, several times.

 

[Dan Mellis]

Trump Derangement Syndrome

Poor educational and moral standards

 

[Spartan]

You've actually replied to several of them, several times.

Show it to me. Otherwise give it up.

 

[lukethethird]

Nuts. People have been eyewitnesses of supernatural, sudden healings for ages. I've seen them myself. Healing services are going on around the U.S. regularly. Sure, some are bogus but there's the real thing also. I don't expect you to believe that, but there it is. I also doubt you've ever researched them to know one way or the other.

Psychosomatic illnesses can be immediately cured and that can happen frequently at such events, otherwise nothing supernatural going on.

 

[Spartan]

Psychosomatic illnesses can be immediately cured and that can happen frequently at such events, otherwise nothing supernatural going on.

Well I saw 12 in a half hour. The odds that all those were all psychosomatic are nil.

 

[sooda]

Well I saw 12 in a half hour. The odds that all those were all psychosomatic are nil.

Have you ever seen mob hysteria? Its powerful stuff but its not supernatural. I saw it in a Shia riot in the early 1950s.

 

[Spartan]

Have you ever seen mob hysteria? Its powerful stuff but its not supernatural. I saw it in a Shia riot in the early 1950s.

That's a ludicrous explanation for what I saw.

 

[sooda]

That's a ludicrous explanation for what I saw.

Did you personally know anyone who was healed and did you follow up on their cases?

 

[lukethethird]

Well I saw 12 in a half hour. The odds that all those were all psychosomatic are nil.

What are the odds of 12 miracles taking place in a half hour?

 

[joelr]

Nuts.

You say nuts but that's what you did, you retreated from the debate shouting "heretic" and satanist". It's just a few pages back.

I don't know where you get your information that you've proven the Gospels to be anonymous, but your claim is patently false. To the contrary, we do have credible evidence that supports the traditional Gospel authors as the writers of their Gospels. And here it is:

Who Wrote the Gospels? Internal and External Arguments for Traditional Authorship

We have already been through this. The author of that article holds ZERO degrees and he keeps saying "evidence suggests" which is speculation and even worse he's reading them as if they were written in English? He's not exploring the Greek text at all to even see if his "suggestions" make sense. They don't.

All biblical scholars understand the gospels are anonymous. I gave a link to Carrier who is a PhD in biblical history. But since you are trying to discredit Carrier any way possible because it's been demonstrated he can demonstrate the anon and mythical nature of the gospels, we'll go to a nice "conservative" source, the Americal Bible Society, http://bibleresources.americanbible.org


"The titles of the four canonical Gospels consist of three words: euaggelion (gospel), kata (according to), and the name of the author. There is some mystery to these titles because each word confronts interpreters with a different problem."

"Since it is doubtful that Jesus preached in Greek, it is obvious that the Gospels contain a translation of his words. It is therefore quite possible that the use of kata in the titles of the Gospels was to remind readers that they were reading a translation."

Meaning the authors were ANON!


Gospel - Wikipedia

Composition
The Gospel of Mark probably dates from c. AD 66–70,[10] Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90,[11] and John AD 90–110.[12] Despite the traditional ascriptions all four are anonymous, and none were written by eyewitnesses.[13] Like the rest of the New Testament, they were written in Greek.[14]

If they cheat on their wife why should we believe they won't cheat on other things?

First it doesn't matter what Carrier does in his spare time do you know why?
His work can be checked? All sources say the same:
The Gospel According to Mark [Greek: τὸ κατὰ Μᾶρκον εὐαγγέλιον, to kata Markon euangelion]

This "kata" designation means "as told to me by" in Greek of those times.

Any information Carrier gives is sourced so anyone can see for themselves what the source material he's drawing from is. His article on pagan gods and savior cults is fully sourced so your attempt to discredit him is a fail.

That's hilarious!

It is hilarious and it's what you did. If a scholar doesn't agree with your apologetics agenda you'll start with using "liberal" and move to "heretic" and satanic" to discredit them.
It doesn't work, it a clear concede on your part, no one can't see right through that.

 

[joelr]

That's the definition of liberal theologians - those who deny the truths of God. Even Jesus (God) confirmed Sodom and Gomorrah was legitimate.

Using a myth (NT) to prove an older myth (OT) is a fail on the highest possible level.

I've already shown what scholarship is saying, the archeologists are in disagreement.

You have some very strange ideas concerning all that. The New Testament is a myth? Not in a million years, joelr.

Of course it's a myth? It's written as mythology using mythic structure, it's written in a similar style to other pagan myths of the time and the material directly borrows from other myths pre-dating Jesus?
All outside mentions just mention people who follow the gospels and worship their demi-god and that's it?
The events described were not recorded in histories, no zombies roaming around (which would be a big deal?), no sun going out, nothing.

The entire historicity field considers the supernatural stories to be myth, while many believe Jesus was an actual man the god-version is considered to be mythicized.
All of the published biblical historians Carrier, Price, Pagels, Brodie, Thompson, Ehrman, Dohrety, Pervo..etc.. believe this so saying the idea is "weird" is odd. Clearly someone doesn't steer far from apologetics and stays clear of actual scholarship.

Hyperbole. But there was a large gang of those abusers of the flesh in those cities. Remember, God said if there were even ten honest men in the city, he wouldn't destroy it (Genesis 18). So there you have it - a sewer of corruption.

Right, gang rape. No specific mention of homosexuality. I could care less but there is no clear proven position.

Sorry to burst your little bubble but I've already linked to evidence for the site of that devastation, and the ancient Jewish historian Josephus confirmed the story.

Josephus mentioned the city was near the Dead Sea. The city was destroyed ~2000 years before Joesphus time so saying that he "confirms" the story is another example of drawing faulty conclusions.
Modern archeologists have several different sites they are excavating and none agree on which site could be the most probable. Why don't you try to actually learn something about your beliefs that involve actual scholars?

The article you linked to is non-scholarship crank from 2003.
I can link to crank theories about any subject all day, but the argument defeats itself.
Stanton Friedman did not prove aliens crashed at Roswell but he made a ton of money on book sales.
I'm going by the opinions of the archeologists working with the American Biblical Society.
If they are "satanists" to you then cool, good luck with that.

 

[RESOLUTION]

God's people can and do live in the real world.. Getting 2 million people and their herds across the Red Sea or Reed Sea or Gulf of Aqaba is hilarious.

Is there any rationality in your reply? What 2 million people? Do you not see how your deliberate attempt to mock has shown you willing to mislead?

 

[RESOLUTION]

Because it was foretold and because people who didn't really want the truth like yourself, could not gleam it.

Are all the contradictions the truth?[/QUOTE]
Show us the contradictions from NT using the OT and let us see what you really have.

 

[RESOLUTION]

Not exactly true, seing as the highest rates of apostasy is amongst those who have actually studied the bible and compared it to reality

False reply seeing the actual word of God was given to man via the Holy Spirit and God himself with Moses.
The bible contains truth and it is clear that only those who are wise unto God and his ways actually understand the truth.

Example: Acts 8 You see how someone reading did not understand and how Philip told him about Christ. You have not read the bible and you make claims for others and it shows false by reading.
You see apostasy is not found in the bible it is a state of mind you choose. For instance... No one studies the bible to compare to present day reality.
What is clear is that the highest rates of apostasy has nothing to do with the truth about God or whether they read the bible or to what they compared it.
It isn't about comparison the bible has to be read in the knowledge and truth of whom God is. Only a believer can receive what God gives his children.

It is personal and how your mind is set is what you will acknowledge.

 

[RESOLUTION]

How do you know these eyewitness accounts were preached and that they were the same, when there are differences in these even in the modern accepted versions of the bible? Is your argument honestly "oh yeah he did loads more too" because thats just another claim which you probably cant substantiate.

Why bother arguing your case if you dont have a case to start with?

Dan, even I don't have to explain how Christianity became known abroad and believers are all over the world.
It isn't about being able to substantiate what is written in the bible. It is the fact that believers have a living relationship with God and you have to obey to understand.
Something which you are unable and unwilling to do.

 

[joelr]

Documenting A Miracle



Do your homework.

you think that's proof?

"

• Thallus (unknown lifespan, claimed to be active in 2nd century CE): Thallus supposedly references (date unknown) a solar eclipse at the time of Jesus' crucifixion. This reference is, at best, third-hand quotation of a summary, and is not recorded in other historic records.

• Phlegon (unknown lifespan, 2nd century CE; no works survive): Phlegon was a writer who recorded (date unknown) an earthquake, which apologists interpreted as referring to the horrors on the day of the crucifixion. Other apologists rightly trashed this interpretation.

Christian apologists mostly use the above sources for their evidence of Jesus because they believe they represent the best outside sources."

The following is a list of common evidence provided by apologists[71] in an attempt to provide historical evidence for Jesus. It is generally evidence for the existence of early Christianity, and none is evidence for Jesus per se. All of the writers were born after the Crucifixion and could not have been eyewitnesses to Jesus. Moreover in many cases our oldest copies of their works are centuries after they were supposedly written, allowing ample time for copyists to "improve" them. It should be noted that Pliny the Younger was good friends and regularly corresponded with Tacitus and Suetonius so any thing one reports that the other two don't know about is suspect.



Evidence for the historical existence of Jesus Christ - RationalWiki