Originally posted by shunyadragon

Your the one totting the eye witness records, of which there are none,.......

Dear Shunyadragon,

While I was busy chatting with John Reece in Biblical Languages 301, on one of my older threads titled, 'The Best Study Bible is....?' about the KJV Only Controversy, I opened up a very old drawer, in an equally old cupboard regarding the matter of the Dr. Bruce Metzger's views about the text of the New Testament.

Well, as I was reading through the Wikipedia history on the late Dr. Metzger, I found the following two paragraphs and would be interested to what your 8 years of learning on Theology Web Campus grants you in the way of a response...

Please pay particular attention to the bold passage at the end of this quote:

Central to his scholarly contribution to New Testament studies is his trilogy: The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (1964; 2nd ed., 1968; 3d enlarged ed., 1992); The Early Versions of the New Testament: Their Origin, Transmission, and Limitations (1977); The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance (1987).

Metzger's commentaries often utilize historical criticism and higher criticism, which attempt to explain the literary and historical origins of the Bible and the biblical canon. For instance, Metzger argues that the early church which assembled the New Testament did not consider divine inspiration to be a sufficient criterion for a book to be placed in the canon. Metzger says that the early church, saw it as very important that a work describing Jesus' life be written by a follower of or an eyewitness to Jesus, and considered other works such as The Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistles of Clement to be inspired but not canonical. Because of such views, he was criticized by some Christian fundamentalists (but not most evangelicals).

Before you repeat your mantras, please consider that you have consistently stated the opposite, and unless you are able to present a solid reason for why you make such claims, I am going to consider the matter closed.

Have you ever wondered about 1 John introduction, or Luke 1's introduction? These copies in their original were by eye-witnesses and those who had talked to eye-witnesses of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I can see from your comments that what you might be saying, but who knows, when you give so little in the way of body to what you are trying to say?
But as to the matter of manuscripts, and such like, I had hoped you were more convinced of the reliablity of the New Testament, for your reactions to my thoughts left me puzzled, for the logical mind can read that the words (grammar) leave no doubt that the letters of Paul were written by someone who saw the apostles who had seen, heard, touched, felt the Lord Jesus.
The dating of 1 Corinthians being within 30+ years of the Lord, we have a considerably powerful document, along with others mentioned earlier in this thread.
I believe Mark is now of supreme interest.

As to the matter of manuscripts and copies being myth, erroneous etc, this is not something I thought you would be caught up in. If that is the case then we are stuck there, and discussing resurrection, afterlife and such like would be no more than a whimsical considerations and perhaps you might want to take those doubts into a thread of your own. Might I suggest, 'The New Testament - Truth, Fairytale or Myth ?", with a presentation of facts supporting your claims. There are certainly enough books out there of similar titles, but I thought that someone, like yourself, who has spent so long much time debating these issues, would have by now assembled strong enough arguments of your own. So let's read them, either in such a thread, or direct to this one.

I hope that my wordy comment, has something you can latch onto and thereby give me a beacon on where you are at (in terms of your views) regarding the reliability of the New Testament Scriptures.

In a simple question, 'What do you think of the New Testament?' (please elaborate)

Sincerely,
HH

Originally posted by shunyadragon

.............. go for it in a thread.

Dear Shunyadragon,
I decided to start a fresh thread titled 'Truth, Myth or Fairy Tales'


I look forward to reading your thoughts.
Sincerely,
HH.

Add 4:

The Old Testament passages, relative to the belief in the afterlife / next world.

Let us now examine other passages of the Old Testament which foretell the resurrection of others besides Christ Himself.

Job

This book is regarded by most scholars, to be the oldest book in the Bible.

In the midst of overwhelming grief and afflication, when his earthly future appears to be without a single ray of hope, Job gives utterance to an amazing confession of faith concerning the eternal destiny of his soul and the resurrection of his body.

For I know that my Redeemer lives,
And He shall stand at last on the earth;
And after my skin is destroyed, this I know,
That in my flesh I shall see God,
Whom I shall see for myself,
And my eyes shall behold, and not another.
(Job 19:25-27)

The language of Job is so terse and so charged with meaning that it is difficult to find any one translation which adequately brings out the full force of the original. The following is an alternative translation of the central section of the passage just quoted.

After I shall awake, though this body be destroyed, yet out of my flesh I shall see God....

Whichever translation we may prefer, certain facts stand out with absolute clarity from this passage. Job knows that his physical body will suffer the process of decomposition. Nevertheless, he looks forward to a period at the end of time when he will again be clothed with a body of flesh and appear in that body directly before God. This assurance of Job is based on the life of one whom he calls, 'My Redeemer."

Thus the whole passage is a clear anticipation of the final resurrection of Job's body, made possible through the resurrection of the Redeemer, Jesus Christ.

Peace,
HH.

Note: I will continue to add passages from the Old Testament, from time to time. This of course is based on the fact that St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, is referring to the Old Testament, when he speaks of the truth of death, burial and resurrection.

Thread Title: When I die ?

HH.

Originally posted by shunyadragon

We have later compiled documents that people believe in. This not much different than the records of other historical accepted figures that have included in their biographies supernatural and miraculous occurences which are not accepted as historical fact.

Shunyadragon,
Now to this comment.

Ignore the 'supernatural and miraculous occurences' if you like, but there are historical records that cannot be ignored. These would be the building blocks for considering the facts that are believed by the writers of the New Testament.

For starters, what are your thoughts about Cornelius Tactitus, who was best known for two books - The Annals and The Histories. ?


Sincerely,
HH.

Originally posted by headheart

Shunyadragon,
Now to this comment.

Ignore the 'supernatural and miraculous occurences' if you like, but there are historical records that cannot be ignored. These would be the building blocks for considering the facts that are believed by the writers of the New Testament.

For starters, what are your thoughts about Cornelius Tactitus, who was best known for two books - The Annals and The Histories. ?


Sincerely,
HH.

Tactitius annals and histories were written about 109 AD.

Originally posted by shunyadragon

The record of NDE's is inconclusive.

Okay, before we explore some actual cases, I would like you to watch this video.

Unbelievable: Investigations...from the Duke Laboratory


Sincerely,
HH

Originally posted by shunyadragon

Tactitius annals and histories were written about 109 AD.

Would you agree that he was the greatest historian of Ancient Rome, who is generally acknowledge for his 'intergrity and essential goodness' ?


Secondly, are you familiar with what he wrote in the Annals concerning 'Christus', in about 115 AD ?


Sincerely,
HH

Originally posted by headheart

Would you agree that he was the greatest historian of Ancient Rome, who is generally acknowledge for his 'intergrity and essential goodness' ?


Secondly, are you familiar with what he wrote in the Annals concerning 'Christus', in about 115 AD ?


Sincerely,
HH

I have never doubted the historical existence of possibly one or more Jewish messiah rebel leaders, and at least one with a name similar to Jesus and claimed to be Christ, the anointed one.' The reference to Christus is in conclusive if referring specifically to Christ.

Originally posted by headheart

Okay, before we explore some actual cases, I would like you to watch this video.

Unbelievable: Investigations...from the Duke Laboratory


Sincerely,
HH

Actually I live near Duke now, and in the 1990s. I know one of the subjects that participated in the Duke studies, and one of people how worked in the research. Yes, there were interesting findings, but the over all conclusions of the research did not reveal anything conclusive.

Originally posted by shunyadragon

I have never doubted the historical existence of possibly one or more Jewish messiah rebel leaders, and at least one with a name similar to Jesus and claimed to be Christ, the anointed one.' The reference to Christus is in conclusive if referring specifically to Christ.

Hi again.

Perhaps we should read the most important one, which is found in the Annals before we conclude anything definite.

The following was recounted concerning the great fire in Rome during the reign of Nero:

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.

Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man’s cruelty, that they were being destroyed.

What facts we can learn, both explicit and implicit, concerning Christ and the Christians who lived in Rome in the 60s A.D ?

Sincerely,
HH

Originally posted by shunyadragon

Actually I live near Duke now, and in the 1990s. I know one of the subjects that participated in the Duke studies, and one of people how worked in the research. Yes, there were interesting findings, but the over all conclusions of the research did not reveal anything conclusive.

What aspect of the study, did the person you knew participate in, and what aspect of the research did the other person you knew work on ?

Sincerely,
HH

Originally posted by headheart

Dear Shunyadragon,

While I was busy chatting with John Reece in Biblical Languages 301, on one of my older threads titled, 'The Best Study Bible is....?' about the KJV Only Controversy, I opened up a very old drawer, in an equally old cupboard regarding the matter of the Dr. Bruce Metzger's views about the text of the New Testament.

Well, as I was reading through the Wikipedia history on the late Dr. Metzger, I found the following two paragraphs and would be interested to what your 8 years of learning on Theology Web Campus grants you in the way of a response...

Please pay particular attention to the bold passage at the end of this quote:

Before you repeat your mantras, please consider that you have consistently stated the opposite, and unless you are able to present a solid reason for why you make such claims, I am going to consider the matter closed.

Have you ever wondered about 1 John introduction, or Luke 1's introduction? These copies in their original were by eye-witnesses and those who had talked to eye-witnesses of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I can see from your comments that what you might be saying, but who knows, when you give so little in the way of body to what you are trying to say?
But as to the matter of manuscripts, and such like, I had hoped you were more convinced of the reliablity of the New Testament, for your reactions to my thoughts left me puzzled, for the logical mind can read that the words (grammar) leave no doubt that the letters of Paul were written by someone who saw the apostles who had seen, heard, touched, felt the Lord Jesus.
The dating of 1 Corinthians being within 30+ years of the Lord, we have a considerably powerful document, along with others mentioned earlier in this thread.
I believe Mark is now of supreme interest.

As to the matter of manuscripts and copies being myth, erroneous etc, this is not something I thought you would be caught up in. If that is the case then we are stuck there, and discussing resurrection, afterlife and such like would be no more than a whimsical considerations and perhaps you might want to take those doubts into a thread of your own. Might I suggest, 'The New Testament - Truth, Fairytale or Myth ?", with a presentation of facts supporting your claims. There are certainly enough books out there of similar titles, but I thought that someone, like yourself, who has spent so long much time debating these issues, would have by now assembled strong enough arguments of your own. So let's read them, either in such a thread, or direct to this one.

I hope that my wordy comment, has something you can latch onto and thereby give me a beacon on where you are at (in terms of your views) regarding the reliability of the New Testament Scriptures.

In a simple question, 'What do you think of the New Testament?' (please elaborate)

Sincerely,
HH

The highlighted red portion is the important point, The different parts of the NT were written by either followers or eye witnesses. Please note the or, it is inconclusive that eye-witnesses or even the disciples wrote the gospels. Specific authorship of the gospels is at present unknown.

What is my view of the NT. It is what the writers believed was true at the time they were written in the form we have today. The present evidence is some version or versions of the gospels was written about 70 AD. We do not have, at present any evidence of written testimony either within or outside believers dating to the life of Christ.

This view does not reflect belief, but straight forward neutral assessment of the present historical evidence.

Originally posted by headheart

What aspect of the study, did the person you knew participate in, and what aspect of the research did the other person you knew work on ?

Sincerely,
HH

The person who participated was tested for ESP. The researcher was a doctorate graduate student who later taught at Duke. At present he is retired and works in a private practice.

Headheart,

The idea of living after you are dead is an idea which makes about as much sense to me as a square circle. Christians-or any other religious believers for that matter-cannot explain how it is possible to live once the chemical and electrical processes in your body cease and your cells degenerate into their constitute elements. Yes, I know-religious believers will claim that there is something called a "soul" which contains our consciousness and personality and which somehow goes on after we die, but there is no coherent explanation of what such a thing would be and there is no compelling evidence of a mind/brain duality.

You are of course aware that you have no memories of anything prior to the existence of your physical brain. It is clear to us today (though it was not in ancient times) that the brain is seat of consciousness. We can map out certain areas of the brain which deal with different forms of cognition. The back of the brain will process visual information, for example, and the forebrain is involved wth complex thinking and creativity. Other areas of the brain store memories. The brainstem controls basic life functions like breathing and heartrate. If any of these specific area of the brain are damaged, the corresponding function of that specific area of the brain is diminished or lost.

What do you think happens when the entire brain is gone?

As far as NDE are concerned, there is no case that I am aware of that represents compelling evidence of an actual "out of body" experience. The feellings and sensations and observations recorded by NDE patients all have natural explanations, as far as I know.

Cheers,

Jimbo

Originally posted by shunyadragon

The highlighted red portion is the important point,

Hello again, Shunyadragon.

In the comment that followed ( here ) I decided to create a seperate thread dealing specifically with what unbelievers think about the New Testament Scriptures, which I titled
"Truth, Myth or Fairy Tales?".

What I have decided to do on this thread is to concentrate on Tacitus and other early non-Christian sourses, as well as O.T. passages and perhaps a few examples of near death experiences.

I am looking forward to your reply to my recent question about Tacitus. Here is the question again.

Perhaps we should read the most important one, which is found in the Annals before we conclude anything definite.

The following was recounted concerning the great fire in Rome during the reign of Nero:

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.

Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man’s cruelty, that they were being destroyed.

What facts [can we] learn, both explicit and implicit, concerning Christ and the Christians who lived in Rome in the 60s A.D ?

Sincerely,
HH

Originally posted by jimbo

Cheers,

Jimbo

Dear Jimbo,
It is the word 'Cheers' that holds me back from spending time presenting you with an argument regarding mind-matters. As to examples of NDE, I have that at the bottom of the list for this thread, and will attend to it once I have worked through what I explained to Shunyadragon, in the comment previous to this one.

Do you celebrate Christmas ?

Sincerely,
HH