The testimony of the NT writers

[lukethethird]

opinion.

The more than fifty direct citations from the Old Testament we find in Matthew is a fact that can be demonstrated. Can you discern fact from opinion in my post?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then you should learn, grasshopper.

Name calling now to try to cover up your own ignorance. Why do you keep forgetting that in this discussion you are the one that has screwed up?

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is so interesting how atheist et al come out of the woodwork to try to disprove what they don't believe in.

Me thinks thou protest too much.

A lot of us were Christians. and demonstrating that you are wrong is just that. It is showing that the claims of some Christians when it comes to the gospel are contradicted by the evidence. Those that hold onto such beliefs far to often try to abuse the Bible for their own personal agendas.

 

[Subduction Zone]

opinion.

And a quite valid one. You keep forgetting it is what one can support that counts in a discussion.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

you haven't proved you are free of mistakes

I don't have to. If you think you have found a fault in something I've written, then you should be able to falsify it. You found a mistake below, albeit not one in reasoning, and I agreed to that and corrected it. Can you find fault in my critical thinking? I'm sure that somebody can, somebody with more developed skills, but how about you?

And if someone's reasoning in the first century is correct and your reasoning is fallacious... then it is still fallacious.

Yes, but what's your point? Are you saying that my reasoning is fallacious? If so, see above.

this isn't a democratic position of who is "a good critical thinker" and who is not.

That's correct. People who haven't learned to argue without fallacy don't have a vote in the community of critical thinkers who can. I often make the same point when creationists tell me that there is dissent in their camp with the community of evolutionary scientists. So what if they dissent? They don't get a vote. Neither do other lay people including those who happen to agree with the consensus of qualified opinions. If I sent them a letter telling them that I agree with their conclusions, I wouldn't expect an answer.

We aren't talking about Bahai - another fallacy

I was.

Do you know what a fallacy is? Once again, quote or paraphrase the allegedly fallacious comment and name the fallacy it commits in your estimation.

Show me ONE document that shows the embellishment to support your position.

Document was a misstatement. I should have written Q source. Interesting that that was all you wanted to address on that matter. Let's change it to Q source and maybe you'd like another try at addressing the chart showing multiple sources for Matthew and Luke rather than deflecting to semantics this time. Incidentally, one of the benefits of learning critical thinking skills is the ability to focus on rebuttal including noticing when your point hasn't been addressed. Politicians do this commonly when they hear questions they don't like, and those lacking that kind of focus simply don't notice, including the interviewer quite often it seems. So, did you want to try to rebut the thesis of the story of Jesus being an evolving legend with evidence of its evolution in the synoptic Gospels. Maybe you'd like to address the Gospel of Peter, a clear but failed attempt to extend the legend further.

 

[Kenny]

The more than fifty direct citations from the Old Testament we find in Matthew is a fact that can be demonstrated. Can you discern fact from opinion in my post?

Relevance?

What is relevant is about 20 relevant citations were mentioned by Matthew to demonstrate the prophetic inerrancy of the TaNaKh.

That he confirmed Mark's testimony is also pretty relevant.

 

[Kenny]

And a quite valid one. You keep forgetting it is what one can support that counts in a discussion.

You lost your battle a LOOOOONG time ago.

You are a free-will independent spirit that are welcome to believe however you want. But what you believe, as you haven't proven, hasn't invalidated the word through the prophets and apostles.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Relevance?

What is relevant is about 20 relevant citations were mentioned by Matthew to demonstrate the prophetic inerrancy of the TaNaKh.

That he confirmed Mark's testimony is also pretty relevant.

As "prophesy" most fail since most of his verses were not prophetic, and if read in context did not apply. He quote mined his own holy book.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You lost your battle a LOOOOONG time ago.

You are a free-will independent spirit that are welcome to believe however you want. But what you believe, as you haven't proven, hasn't invalidated the word through the prophets and apostles.

On my, even more projection.

And please, you are the one believing what you want to believe. You were the one that got very emotional when you were shown to be wrong. If I am shown to be wrong I am happy because I learned something new. This also shows that you do not understand the concept of critical thinking. What one believes is no longer a choice. when one reasons critically.

 

[Kenny]

I don't have to. If you think you have found a fault in something I've written, then you should be able to falsify it. You found a mistake below, albeit not one in reasoning, and I agreed to that and corrected it.

In that you haven't found a fault in mine, your position is faulty

Yes, but what's your point? Are you saying that my reasoning is fallacious? If so, see above.

See above.

That's correct. People who haven't learned to argue without fallacy don't have a vote in the community of critical thinkers who can. I often make the same point when creationists tell me that there is dissent in their camp with the community of evolutionary scientists. So what if they dissent? They don't get a vote. Neither do other lay people including those who happen to agree with the consensus of qualified opinions. If I sent them a letter telling them that I agree with their conclusions, I wouldn't expect an answer.

And? So if someone dissents, they don't get to vote because you are somehow the guru? I DISENT

I was.

A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, whereas the real subject of the argument was not addressed or refuted, but instead replaced with a false one.

you don't get to vote

Document was a misstatement. I should have written Q source. Interesting that that was all you wanted to address on that matter. Let's change it to Q source and maybe you'd like another try at addressing the chart showing multiple sources for Matthew and Luke rather than deflecting to semantics this time. Incidentally, one of the benefits of learning critical thinking skills is the ability to focus on rebuttal including noticing when your point hasn't been addressed. Politicians do this commonly when they hear questions they don't like, and those lacking that kind of focus simply don't notice, including the interviewer quite often it seems. So, did you want to try to rebut the thesis of the story of Jesus being an evolving legend with evidence of its evolution in the synoptic Gospels. Maybe you'd like to address the Gospel of Peter, a clear but failed attempt to extend the legend further.

I am not addressing "politicians" because it isn't relevant - you are acting like a politician.

it wasn't "against the law" to use what another person stated. If anything, it can be used as such to validate what the original person said.

Modern western thought calls it "plagiarism". But that doesn't translate, as you apply it to eastern custom, that it is wrong to do so in their time.

The fact that the others had "unique information" just validates that indeed they were witnesses as the next generation confirmed. Now, unless you can show me where the next generation was wrong to attribute the authors to the books, you are not operating on critical thinking.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Modern western thought calls it "plagiarism". But that doesn't translate, as you apply it to eastern custom, that it is wrong to do so in their time.

You miss the point. Even if plagiarism was not thought to be wrong back then it still indicates that the author of Matthew was not a witness (the author of Luke never claimed to be a witness) . A person that witnessed something and is putting out his narrative will use his own language. Police know this in interviews. If all of the suspects have the exact same story in their alibi it often raises suspicions. A recently greed to script can be followed. When we remember things as individuals we will remember different details and misremember different things. That is why a chorus line rises suspicions when it comes to "testimony".

 

[lukethethird]

Relevance?

What is relevant is about 20 relevant citations were mentioned by Matthew to demonstrate the prophetic inerrancy of the TaNaKh.

That he confirmed Mark's testimony is also pretty relevant.

What is so relevant about copy and paste? Is that all it takes to convince you of magical prophesies?

Copy and paste reveals their sources.

 

[Kenny]

You miss the point. Even if plagiarism was not thought to be wrong back then it still indicates that the author of Matthew was not a witness

you choke on a gnat and swallow a camel.

The sermon on the mount is unique to Matthew.... and it's there because he is a witness. 3 miracles and 10 parables are unique to Matthew... and they are there because he is a witness. Much of the details of before and after the crucifixion are unique to Matthew because he is a witness.

BUT

We already have proven that you are blinded by bias and you have reached and proven your irrelevancy in the matter of the realities of the bible. (as noted before)

 

[Subduction Zone]

you choke on a gnat and swallow a camel.

The sermon on the mount is unique to Matthew.... and it's there because he is a witness. 3 miracles and 10 parables are unique to Matthew... and they are there because he is a witness. Much of the details of before and after the crucifixion are unique to Matthew because he is a witness.

BUT

We already have proven that you are blinded by bias and you have reached and proven your irrelevancy in the matter of the realities of the bible. (as noted before)

No, you will swallow anything when it comes to the Bible. Though "the Sermon on the Mount" is unique, in a way, to Matthew, many of the same teachings are found in Luke in the shorter sermon on the plain. Luke 6 17-49

oremus Bible Browser : Luke 6:17–49

A better job is done on it in Matthew, but most of the same lessons are there. In Matthew he is going up the mountain, in Luke he is coming down to a level space.

You keep saying "because he is a witness" when it may merely be an oral tradition that had been repeated up to that time. What makes you think that the disciple Matthew ever had formal instruction in Koine Greek?

The bias is yours. When you won't own up to rather clear but minor errors how are you going to judge the others?

 

[Kenny]

No, you will swallow anything when it comes to the Bible. Though "the Sermon on the Mount" is unique, in a way, to Matthew, many of the same teachings are found in Luke in the shorter sermon on the plain. Luke 6 17-49

oremus Bible Browser : Luke 6:17–49

A better job is done on it in Matthew, but most of the same lessons are there. In Matthew he is going up the mountain, in Luke he is coming down to a level space.

You keep saying "because he is a witness" when it may merely be an oral tradition that had been repeated up to that time. What makes you think that the disciple Matthew ever had formal instruction in Koine Greek?

The bias is yours. When you won't own up to rather clear but minor errors how are you going to judge the others?

Keep living your dream!

The problem with languages is that you probably lived a sheltered life?

Which Languages Are Spoken In Belgium?

Knowing more than one Lagrange is quite common.

 

[lukethethird]

you choke on a gnat and swallow a camel.

The sermon on the mount is unique to Matthew.... and it's there because he is a witness. 3 miracles and 10 parables are unique to Matthew... and they are there because he is a witness. Much of the details of before and after the crucifixion are unique to Matthew because he is a witness.

BUT

We already have proven that you are blinded by bias and you have reached and proven your irrelevancy in the matter of the realities of the bible. (as noted before)

Matthew got the beatitudes from the old testament.

The Old Testament Background of the Beatitudes

 

[Subduction Zone]

Keep living your dream!

The problem with languages is that you probably lived a sheltered life?

Which Languages Are Spoken In Belgium?

Knowing more than one Lagrange is quite common.

Tell me, how was that a refutation? The Sermon on the Mount is not that unique. All you did was to make a claim. I gave you something that you could compare it to. Maybe you have never read both.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Matthew got the beatitudes from the old testament.

The Old Testament Background of the Beatitudes

There is little doubt that the author of Matthew was well aware of the Septuagint. One of his biggest fails was based on a mistranslation in that work.

 

[lukethethird]

There is little doubt that the author of Matthew was well aware of the Septuagint. One of his biggest fails was based on a mistranslation in that work.

Yeah, he had Jesus straddle two donkeys as he rode in to make his big impression on Jerusalem.

 

[rational experiences]

The theme old testimony once a verbal only story as mutated humans conscious life returned.

As heavens UFO sun cross ark was leaving getting smaller.

So conscious evolution proves men could Understand their old man's maths science terms again.

Theme Stephen Hawkings the scientist knowing evils. Life mind body leaving genetics warning.

Same today as it was before. DNA genesis leaving every nation. Scientist a man causes.

As earths heavens shares cooling above of sun mass that crossed.

So as ark hit melted landed Mt Ararat it's science cause had stopped.

Sciences fall ended.

Bio life was then saved as veiled mountains disintegrating mass to its feet. Was flooded as ark had stopped landed. Flooding stopped mass disintegration. Told exactly what you did pyramids and temples had blown.

Encasement pressures blown off.

So men remembered technology.

Data studies allowed Rome to rebuild it.

In an unknown era.

Introduced henges Englands built more than likely the last Henge. That blew up killing builders. Jewish Egyptian designers. Whose slave family built pyramids for Egyptians.

Why Israel decree you are not allowed to return home as you assisted evil men. Same kind of scenario of Hitler with Jews trying to get information.

Gods body mass cross body attack piercing was into mountain. Why cloud angel fell above. Clouds were used by temples in mount...notice Ain zero didn't say mountain.

I saw a vision mountain temple burning.

Cross sacrifice was to gods law mountain rock attack historic it's piercing by UFO mass. That bores holes. Body of god. On cross sun UFO ark fall. Not man.

Gods mass also leeches out of its body.

Seen above us as humans on ground look above to mountains.

Themed look back visionary man's documents did not compile new advice correctly.

As cave sin hole opened below man's feet as sink holes. New sin.

As crop circle phi fall was stopped by vacuum void...life was saved by infinite gods law space mother. The day no light existed above. By causes man of science known today as memory I caused it. Not I was using it.

Leaving its mark... M Ark.

Stopped fall was the warning.

Not let's use the fall for new science today.
I'll open it up and get an ark myself theme.

Humans should realise man said 13 as M is 1000 and is out of time.

Based on the event its end. Stopped.

So they know Jesus the man is not phi the UFO sun ark attack. As men made life a victim of technology.

No human is machines mass gained from point mass zero pressures either.

So conscious AI contact of life is a new evil choice but not a machine theory. Seeing you are using machines yourself.

Theme man using machines he designed destroys all life on earth warning. As only human men designed built machines.

What was conjured you said came out of gods body mass. As you knew already.

Predicted mass change a future nearly blew up two overheated machines his proof.