• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ

Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Spartan said:
Flush. You've got NOTHING but denials.
Click to expand...
No, the fact is that you use poor sources. You have been challenged to find claims that went through historical peer review and that does not appear to be the case for any of your sources. Stating that you have no evidence is an observation. You could easily refute that claim with some genuine peer reviewed evidence. That you cannot do so is very telling.
 
Spartan

Spartan

Well-Known Member
Spartan: "The Gospels are 1st century and were written by the earliest eyewitnesses (Matthew, John, and Mark for eyewitness Peter) and Luke."

TagliatelliMonster said:
This is simply not true, as just about every biblical scholar will tell you.
The gospels weren't written by these people, that's just how they are named.
The authors of the gospels are completely anonymous and certainly not eyewitnesses.
Click to expand...

Can you guys someday back up your knee-jerk claims with some substantiation? In this case show me your polls or whatever that says almost every biblical scholar rejects the notion that the traditional authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) wrote their Gospels? Where's your backup evidence for that? You don't have it, do you!?
 
J

JJ50

Well-Known Member
Spartan said:
Spartan: "The Gospels are 1st century and were written by the earliest eyewitnesses (Matthew, John, and Mark for eyewitness Peter) and Luke."



Can you guys someday back up your knee-jerk claims with some substantiation? In this case show me your polls or whatever that says almost every biblical scholar rejects the notion that the traditional authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) wrote their Gospels? Where's your backup evidence for that? You don't have it, do you!?
Click to expand...
You don't have any evidence that they actually wrote them either.
 
Spartan

Spartan

Well-Known Member
TagliatelliMonster said:
What claims?

Did you even read the post you are replying to?
I just explained to you at length how it is a logical impossibility to do this and therefor a dishonest request, and how the burden of proof is ON YOU and how this request is just another attempt at shifting that burden.

It's not upto me to prove your stories false. It's upto you to demonstrate the accuracy thereof instead.
If I can't show it false, that doesn't mean it must be seen as correct by default.

You still have your entire work in front of you.

Not being able to demonstrate how Darth Vader is a fictional character, doesn't mean that Star Wars is a true story. Your apostles and bible aren't any different.

These aren't independent accounts. They are the exact opposite of independent.
Perhaps you should look up what "independent" means.

BELIEVERS of a religion making religious claims about there religion, is the exact opposite of "independent".
Not to mention that none of these accounts are contemporary.

I don't need any particular foundation to express being unconvinced of fantastical stories that don't have one shred of valid evidence.
Click to expand...

Flush. You're lost on the issues. No doubt because you're either purposely defiant of the truth or you just haven't done your homework.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Spartan said:
You don't have the first clue what a good source is.
Click to expand...
Wrong again. I am not the one that constantly has to rely on liars, losers, and loons.

The standards are very fair. Real scholars, whether in history or science, publish new ideas in peer reviewed journals. That requires a more formal approach,writing method, and most of all support of one's idea with evidence. Have any of the claims that you have presented that support you gone through peer review?
 
firedragon

firedragon

Veteran Member
Spartan said:
Spartan: "The Gospels are 1st century and were written by the earliest eyewitnesses (Matthew, John, and Mark for eyewitness Peter) and Luke."



Can you guys someday back up your knee-jerk claims with some substantiation? In this case show me your polls or whatever that says almost every biblical scholar rejects the notion that the traditional authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) wrote their Gospels? Where's your backup evidence for that? You don't have it, do you!?
Click to expand...

Mate. Can you give me evidence to your claim that Mark was written by an eye witness called mark?

Not faith statements, evidence.

P.S. Try not to dismiss others by saying something about an individuals education or what ever which is actually ad hominem.
 
Spartan

Spartan

Well-Known Member
firedragon said:
Mate. Can you give me evidence to your claim that Mark was written by an eye witness called mark?
Click to expand...

According to early sources, Mark was a scribe / interpreter for the Apostle Peter, who was an eyewitness.

Mark Authorship

2. Church Fathers and Mark’s Gospel

Papias (c. 60 to c. 130)

He was the bishop of Hierapolis.

"Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord’s sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements.

Irenaeus (c. 115-c. 202)

He is a rich source of Christian traditions. He was the bishop of Lyons, France. As a boy he knew Polycarp personally. (Polycarp [c. 69-155] was a disciple of John the Apostle and other apostles, became the bishop of Smyrna [look under Asia on the map], and was martyred when he was eighty-six years old).

Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter I:

"Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia."

Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter X, 5

"Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative: “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send My messenger before Thy face, which shall prepare Thy way."

More in the link above.
 
Last edited:
TagliatelliMonster

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Spartan said:
Spartan: "The Gospels are 1st century and were written by the earliest eyewitnesses (Matthew, John, and Mark for eyewitness Peter) and Luke."



Can you guys someday back up your knee-jerk claims with some substantiation? In this case show me your polls or whatever that says almost every biblical scholar rejects the notion that the traditional authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) wrote their Gospels? Where's your backup evidence for that? You don't have it, do you!?
Click to expand...

Jesus And The Hidden Contradictions Of The Gospels

Who Wrote The Gospels?

Though it is evidently not the sort of thing pastors normally tell their congregations, for over a century there has been a broad consensus among scholars that many of the books of the New Testament were not written by the people whose names are attached to them.


Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia

Strictly speaking, each Gospel is anonymous.[55][56]


Originally, these gospels weren't even identified by these names. The names as identification were added in 180 or later.


You should do some research.
 
TagliatelliMonster

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Spartan said:
Flush. You're lost on the issues. No doubt because you're either purposely defiant of the truth or you just haven't done your homework.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

I'm sorry if you don't care about rational reasoning and employing valid logic.

If you can't comprehend how it is intellectually dishonest to ask someone to falsify the by definition unfalsifiable AND on top of that try to use that as a shift of the burden of proof, as if a story is to be seen accurate by default unless it can be disproven (while being unfalsifiable, of all things....), then I agree that this discussion isn't going to go anywhere.

But probably for very different reasons then you think.......

And with this 2 sentence post, you can feel like you managed to completely ignore and dodge the point being made in the post you reply to. Not only will you refuse to live upto your own burden of proof, but you'll also completely ignore when it is pointed out to you that your reasoning is infested with logical fallacies.
Willfull ignorance, is what this is called....



Ow well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top