Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 165

Thread: Confirmations of the New Testament

  1. #11
    Must...have...caffeine One Bad Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Inside the beltway
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    21,193
    Amen (Given)
    6261
    Amen (Received)
    11938
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    I have listened to the video, and yes all the points brought up in the video have been addressed in other threads throughout the history of Tweb. Again, it is recognized that the Bible is set in history, and historical accuracy of some facts does not make the NT a first recorded and witnessed account of the life of Jesus.

    All the historians cited recorded third hand information. This is well known.
    Ooh, hand waving at length! More better!

    It is important that the NT be recognized as factually accurate and in line with what historians of the period wrote, because that calls into serious question the allegation that people freely made wholesale changes to the text until the fourth century. Historians writing at third hand is immaterial given their independence from the NT record. Do you have a legitimate point to make somewhere?
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio

    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

  2. Amen Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  3. #12
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,301
    Amen (Given)
    1554
    Amen (Received)
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Ooh, hand waving at length! More better!

    It is important that the NT be recognized as factually accurate and in line with what historians of the period wrote, because that calls into serious question the allegation that people freely made wholesale changes to the text until the fourth century. Historians writing at third hand is immaterial given their independence from the NT record. Do you have a legitimate point to make somewhere?
    Whole sale changes? There is absolutely no objective verifiable evidence that any of the gospels were written at the time of Jesus Christ by eye witnesses. Simply, again . . . the historians cited at the time were giving third hand accounts, and yes the accounts by Josephus are obviously edited, and added. We have no originals of Josephus's works. The argument in the video is that the third hand accounts provided by the historians and others are evidence for the gospels being written as first hand eye witness accounts of the life of Jesus, and of course, as with all history, historians will not accept this. When correlated with archaeological evidence contemporary historians will support a degree of reliability. There are absolutely no archaeological evidence. first hand accounts, nor writings made for the life of Jesus, dated to the time he lived.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  4. #13
    Must...have...caffeine One Bad Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Inside the beltway
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    21,193
    Amen (Given)
    6261
    Amen (Received)
    11938
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Whole sale changes? There is absolutely no objective verifiable evidence that any of the gospels were written at the time of Jesus Christ by eye witnesses.
    No, they were written about a generation later. There is also no objective verifiable evidence that any of the gospels were NOT written by eyewitnesses.
    Simply, again . . . the historians cited at the time were giving third hand accounts, and yes the accounts by Josephus are obviously edited, and added. We have no originals of Josephus's works. The argument in the video is that the third hand accounts provided by the historians and others are evidence for the gospels being written as first hand eye witness accounts of the life of Jesus, and of course, as with all history, historians will not accept this. When correlated with archaeological evidence contemporary historians will support a degree of reliability. There are absolutely no archaeological evidence. first hand accounts, nor writings made for the life of Jesus, dated to the time he lived.
    Get back to me when you can set a reasonable standard for evidence (and accurately portray what you're citing, while you're at it). Yours tosses out nearly all of recorded history.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio

    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

  5. Amen Teallaura, Chrawnus, Cerebrum123, NorrinRadd amen'd this post.
  6. #14
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,301
    Amen (Given)
    1554
    Amen (Received)
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    No, they were written about a generation later. There is also no objective verifiable evidence that any of the gospels were NOT written by eyewitnesses.
    Arguing from the negative is not a coherent argument. It is up to the one proposing an argument to provide the evidence.

    Get back to me when you can set a reasonable standard for evidence (and accurately portray what you're citing, while you're at it). Yours tosses out nearly all of recorded history.
    No, history is not dependent on the necessity of the claim of eyewitness and ancient histories vary in their accuracies, and historians have no problem with this, it is acknowledges that history is a work in progress in progress. The provenance of historical accuracy depends on corresponding archaeological, available written records most often not eyewitness accounts. The claim in this thread is that there are first hand eyewitnesses that wrote the gospels.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  7. #15
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,233
    Amen (Given)
    415
    Amen (Received)
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    We have no originals of Josephus's works.
    What about the Arabic version that was cited in the video? That might clear up the confusion.

    The argument in the video is that the third hand accounts provided by the historians and others are evidence for the gospels being written as first hand eye witness accounts of the life of Jesus …
    What evidence do you have that these accounts are third hand, though? Josephus died about 100 CE, for instance.

    Blessings,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

  8. #16
    tWebber rossum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    London.
    Faith
    Buddhist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    71
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    There is also no objective verifiable evidence that any of the gospels were NOT written by eyewitnesses.
    The Gospels themselves say that none of the evangelists were present at the birth of Jesus or during His early life. Parts of the Gospels are therefore third hand and not written by eyewitnesses, the Gospels themselves tell us this.

  9. Amen JimL amen'd this post.
  10. #17
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,301
    Amen (Given)
    1554
    Amen (Received)
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    What about the Arabic version that was cited in the video? That might clear up the confusion.
    No because the Arabic version is also very late with no originals of Josephus's writings.

    What evidence do you have that these accounts are third hand, though? Josephus died about 100 CE, for instance.
    Simply none including Josephus (born 36.37 AD) had and was writing past the life span of any possible witnessing at the time of Jesus's life. The other writers were even later.

    Most historians generally accept that Jesus Christ was a real person, and live approximately the time that the Bible describes, and he was convicted for inciting rebellion against Rome and claiming to be the King of the Jews, had a following in Palestine and crucified under Roman Law,
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-19-2019 at 08:49 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  11. #18
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,233
    Amen (Given)
    415
    Amen (Received)
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    No because the Arabic version is also very late with no originals of Josephus's writings.
    Well, the lateness of a copy doesn't imply the copyists were not careful. The Dead Sea Scrolls showed that the Jewish copyists were careful indeed.

    Simply none including Josephus (born 36.37 AD) had and was writing past the life span of any possible witnessing at the time of Jesus's life.
    So his could have been second-hand testimony.

    Most historians generally accept that Jesus Christ was a real person, and live approximately the time that the Bible describes, and he was convicted for inciting rebellion against Rome and claiming to be the King of the Jews, had a following in Palestine and crucified under Roman Law,
    I think one or two references cite Jesus as inciting rebellion, another (the Talmud) says he practiced sorcery. But there is varied evidence that the NT is authentic history, written by eyewitnesses or those who had access to eyewitnesses. Not third-hand testimony, as you and Rossum have claimed.

    Blessings,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

  12. Amen Teallaura, Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  13. #19
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,301
    Amen (Given)
    1554
    Amen (Received)
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    Well, the lateness of a copy doesn't imply the copyists were not careful. The Dead Sea Scrolls showed that the Jewish copyists were careful indeed.
    The fact that copies from different sources differ in key aspects do imdicat alteration and additions over time. The Hebrew culture at the time of the Dead Sea scrolls were concerned about accuracy within Judaism. The Arabic translators of literature outside Judaism do not share that concern, and it is unlikely that they necessarily even knew the source of the documents. When it came to their own traditional literature and the Quran they were meticulously accurate like the copyists of the Dead Sea scrolls.


    So his could have been second-hand testimony.
    I consider this unlikely, and most historians agree.

    I think one or two references cite Jesus as inciting rebellion, another (the Talmud) says he practiced sorcery. But there is varied evidence that the NT is authentic history, written by eyewitnesses or those who had access to eyewitnesses. Not third-hand testimony, as you and Rossum have claimed.
    As far as being consistent with Roman Law, and history the crucifiction of Jesus Christ is more consistent with the penalty for rebellion against Rome. It still remains that all the references to Jesus Christ are late including Josephus at the time of the Jewish Revolt and later. There is a conflict in the two references by Josephus concerning Jesus Christ. The first, which better reflects Josephus's beliefs and sentiments call Jesus, a 'so-called Christ (prophet?)' is more in line with the reference that is believed to be added by Christian copiests.

    Claiming the gospels were written or based on eyewitness accounts remains speculation. The historical accuracy of facts, people, and events is universally normal for ancient writings in virtually all cultures without considering them based directly on eye witness accounts. The religious claims and miraculous life of Jesus is considered the history of the religion, and not factual history supported by archaeological evidence nor ancient writings from outside the religion. The first gospel was likely a simpler biography (Q?) that evolved into later gospels as the current gospels appear to be evolved as the evidence indicates. Much of what you claim in terms of the life of Jesus is the reason by far most historians consider Jesus Christ a real person in history, but do not consider the gospels to be written nor based on first hand eye witnesses. A simpler early biography like Q may have been, but that too is speculation, but it is consistent with other ancient literature in history.

    As with other ancient religions like Buddhism the religious and miraculous claims attributed to Buddha are separate from the actual historical evidence based on archaeology, historical references, and the writings of Buddha. As with Jesus Christ Buddha is considered a real person in history, and his writing may be at least in part attributed to Buddha. Claims of contemporaneous eye witness accounts of the miraculous life of Buddha are lacking.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-21-2019 at 06:11 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  14. #20
    tWebber rossum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    London.
    Faith
    Buddhist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    71
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    As with other ancient religions like Buddhism the religious and miraculous claims attributed to Buddha are separate from the actual historical evidence based on archaeology, historical references, and the writings of Buddha. As with Jesus Christ Buddha is considered a real person in history, and his writing may be at least in part attributed to Buddha. Claims of contemporaneous eye witness accounts of the miraculous life of Buddha are lacking.
    Just like Jesus we have nothing written by the Buddha. In ancient India, writing was considered a worldly tool for merchants, and not to be used for sacred texts. Those texts were instead memorized and passed on from monk to monk. The early texts (the suttas in the Pali canon) are extremely repetitious for this reason. There are also many numbered lists for the same reason: The Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path etc. One whole section of scripture contains nothing but these lists.

    Those texts were only written down about 400 years later. Different schools wrote slightly different versions, so we have a reasonable idea of what the originals were like.

    Jain scriptures contain contemporary mentions of the Buddha, just as Buddhist scriptures contain contemporary mentions of the Jain Mahavira -- their lives overlapped. As you say, the Buddha was a real person, as was the Mahavira.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •