Archaeology of the New Testament

[Cypress]

the dumbest religion proving thread ever!!!

This thread doesn't prove jack shit about Christian doctrine and practice.

Archeology provides evidence that some of the people and places described in the New Testament are historically verifiable.

 

[ZenMode]

Satan wasn't evil, pride got the best of him! He was popular!

Right....but, per the Bible, God is surprised by nothing. In other words, he knows what's going to happen before it happens.

So, why create a spirit that he knew would be evil?

For that matter, why create mankind in such a way that he knew he'd have to drown all of them, by flooding the Earth, because they would become so wicked?

 

[IBDaMann]

Hollering terms like "electrons flow!" and "circuits!"

Too funny! @Cypress doesn't know the difference between writing and hollering.

is a superficial eighth grade-knowledge of cell phone technology,

All experts understand this material. It's too bad that you can't even grasp the high-level easy stuff.

... and wouldn't even come close to giving you the expert knowledge ...

Thank you for the additional "No True Scotsman" fallacy; I need to ask @Into the Night if he caught this one.

of pure physics and engineering that would enable you to manufacture or repair a cell phone,

Did someone just pivot completely out of the original subject matter?

By the way, pure physics won't help anyone repair a cell phone. You say the stupidest shit.

let alone set up a cellular 5G network.

You're absolutely correct! Now that you put it that way, Jesus must really be an historical figure.

So whenever you point to science as proof of your superiority to ancient Galileans,

You missed the point entirely. I was pointing to your inferiority to ancient Galileans.

the fact is you don't actually understand science at anything other than a superficial level.

There you go pretending you are omnipotent, declaring what other people know and don't know. You weren't allowed to have friends as a child, were you?

You claimed Jesus was not reported in any history books.

It's straight logic. The New Testament is not an historical account, i.e. it does not meet the rigor of historical standards. I didn't make the standard. Sorry, kiddo.

That claim is completely wrong.

Only to those who are logically inept, such as yourself.

[A] famous Roman, in one of the most famous Roman books, published a half-century after the events in question, i.e. around 105 AD, recounts parts of the legend of Jesus,

FTFY. I agree.

as a historical fact.

I wonder if @Into the Night has chastized you for referring to this as a "fact" in our discussion.

 

[Into the Night]

Right....but, per the Bible, God is surprised by nothing. In other words, he knows what's going to happen before it happens.

Non-sequitur fallacy.

So, why create a spirit that he knew would be evil?

How do you know he knew a particular spirit would be evil?

For that matter, why create mankind in such a way that he knew he'd have to drown all of them, by flooding the Earth, because they would become so wicked?

He didn't destroy mankind. He didn't drown all of them.

 

[Into the Night]

Too funny! @Cypress doesn't know the difference between writing and hollering.

I find this chant common among Democrats. They somehow seem to think writing has a volume level or something.

All experts understand this material. It's too bad that you can't even grasp the high-level easy stuff.

For some reason he thinks all current flow is a cell phone.

Thank you for the additional "No True Scotsman" fallacy; I need to ask @Into the Night if he caught this one.

I did, Valid call.

Did someone just pivot completely out of the original subject matter?

Yes, he did.

By the way, pure physics won't help anyone repair a cell phone. You say the stupidest shit.

Heh. Quite true! It won't help you build or even paint a house, construct a firework or shoot it, build or maintain a car, etc.

You're absolutely correct! Now that you put it that way, Jesus must really be an historical figure.

The humor by non-sequitur is noted.

You missed the point entirely. I was pointing to your inferiority to ancient Galileans.

True.

There you go pretending you are omnipotent, declaring what other people know and don't know. You weren't allowed to have friends as a child, were you?

Nah. He's just trying to use a Magick Word. Perhaps he's casting a spell.

It's straight logic. The New Testament is not an historical account, i.e. it does not meet the rigor of historical standards. I didn't make the standard. Sorry, kiddo.

Redefinition fallacy. Buzzword fallacy. Denial of logic. Denial of conditional.
History is not a 'standard'. It is not a 'rigor'.

Only to those who are logically inept, such as yourself.

Kettle fallacy.

FTFY. I agree.

Then you must accept his story as potential history.

I wonder if @Into the Night has chastized you for referring to this as a "fact" in our discussion.

Yes. I have. History is not a 'fact'. 'Fact' is not a history. He is trying to use 'fact' as 'Universal Truth'. It is a termination fallacy and a redefinition fallacy to use 'fact' in this way.

 

[ZenMode]

Non-sequitur fallacy.

Nope.

How do you know he knew a particular spirit would be evil?

See previous post re: God being surprised by nothing.

He didn't destroy mankind. He didn't drown all of them.

Word games. Void. Dumb.

 

[Into the Night]

Nope.

Denying your fallacies does not make them go away, Void.

See previous post re: God being surprised by nothing.

RSAA

Word games. Void. Dumb.

Inversion fallacy. You cannot blame your problems on anybody else, Void.

 

[Ichabod Stain]

Too funny! @Cypress doesn't know the difference between writing and hollering.


All experts understand this material. It's too bad that you can't even grasp the high-level easy stuff.


Thank you for the additional "No True Scotsman" fallacy; I need to ask @Into the Night if he caught this one.


Did someone just pivot completely out of the original subject matter?

By the way, pure physics won't help anyone repair a cell phone. You say the stupidest shit.


You're absolutely correct! Now that you put it that way, Jesus must really be an historical figure.


You missed the point entirely. I was pointing to your inferiority to ancient Galileans.


There you go pretending you are omnipotent, declaring what other people know and don't know. You weren't allowed to have friends as a child, were you?


It's straight logic. The New Testament is not an historical account, i.e. it does not meet the rigor of historical standards. I didn't make the standard. Sorry, kiddo.


Only to those who are logically inept, such as yourself.


FTFY. I agree.


I wonder if @Into the Night has chastized you for referring to this as a "fact" in our discussion.

excellent work.

its like shooting retards in a barrel.

 

[ZenMode]

Denying your fallacies does not make them go away, Void.

Random words.

RSAA

Inversion fallacy. You cannot blame your problems on anybody else, Void.

The Bible says that God is surprised by nothing. It also says:

• Psalm 147:5 "His understanding is infinite".
• 1 John 3:20 "...God is greater than our heart and knows all things".

Jesus/God also predicted future events like Peter's denial.

In order for that to be true, God would have to know what is going to happen before it happens, which means God knew that he would have to drown the world, The Fall was going to happen, the being he created would become Satan, etc.

So, rather than avoiding and deflecting, would you like to contribute anything useful on that topic?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Random words.

The Bible says that God is surprised by nothing. It also says:

• Psalm 147:5 "His understanding is infinite".
• 1 John 3:20 "...God is greater than our heart and knows all things".

Jesus/God also predicted future events like Peter's denial.

In order for that to be true, God would have to know what is going to happen before it happens, which means God knew that he would have to drown the world, The Fall was going to happen, the being he created would become Satan, etc.

So, rather than avoiding and deflecting, would you like to contribute anything useful on that topic?

1. You're arguing with a very irrational person. You'd be better served by discussing religion with your cat.
2. Cherry-picking from the Bible versus looking at the overall message, especially the NT, is a tactic used by the MAGAts and other haters.

 

[ZenMode]

1. You're arguing with a very irrational person. You'd be better served by discussing religion with your cat.
2. Cherry-picking from the Bible versus looking at the overall message, especially the NT, is a tactic used by the MAGAts and other haters.

I don't think god's claimed omniscience is really debatable. I don't even need quotes from the Bible.

 

[Ichabod Stain]

1. You're arguing with a very irrational person. You'd be better served by discussing religion with your cat.
2. Cherry-picking from the Bible versus looking at the overall message, especially the NT, is a tactic used by the MAGAts and other haters.

what is the overall message?

Gaza babies must die?

 

[Cypress]

what is the overall message?

Love God and love your fellow human beings.

 

[ZenMode]

love your fellow human beings.

God said.... right after he drowned the world.

 

[Cypress]

God said.... right after he drowned the world.

For somebody who is quick to claim the Bible is nothing but myths and fairytales, you are very quick to believe it is a literal account of history when it suits your purposes

 

[Ichabod Stain]

Love God and love your fellow human beings.

so where are you on murdering the Gaza babies?

 

[Ichabod Stain]

God said.... right after he drowned the world.

that was yaldabaoth.

Jesus represents real god.

 

[Ichabod Stain]

For somebody who is quick to claim the Bible is nothing but myths and fairytales, you are very quick to believe it is a literal account of history when it suits your purposes

that's you trying to find caiphus's ceramic douchebag with Jesus's initials on it.

 

[Cypress]

that's you trying to find caiphus's ceramic douchebag with Jesus's initials on it.

The college educated person looks for literary context.

The Torah is a collection of Jewish stories compiled by scribes a thousand years after the events the events portrayed. There is no witness testimony. That literary context is pregnant with the potential for myth and allegory.

The NT was written by eyewitnesses, by people who interviewed the eyewitnesses, or people who knew the people who interrogated the eyewitnesses. The fact that Roman, Jewish, Christian, and archaeological sources all corroborate the historicity of some of the people and places described in the NT means we can approach the gospels as books that have at least some legitimate historical witness testimony in them.

 

[Ichabod Stain]

The college educated person looks for literary context.

no they don't.

some college educated people know religion is not about historical accuracy.

its about morality.

The Torah is a collection of Jewish stories compiled by scribes a thousand years after the events the events portrayed. There is no witness testimony. That literary context is pregnant with the potential for myth and allegory.

The NT was written by eyewitnesses, by people who interviewed the eyewitnesses, or people who knew the people who interrogated the eyewitnesses. The fact that Roman, Jewish, Christian, and archaeological sources all corroborate the historicity of some of the people and places described in the NT means we can approach the gospels as books that have at least some legitimate historical witness testimony in them.

you're a fucking idiot.