Skeptic Bible Study: Historical Documents?

bastardsheep Says:

Jul 4, 2008 - The list of books that are allegory can be found in the index. The list that are literal I shall put below. And that concludes the list of books that are literal.

primelimelite Says:

Jul 7, 2008 - lostn65. good point--I also wonder about that?

baetores Says:

Jul 8, 2008 - Not all the bible stories can be regarded as perfect historical documents. For example about some simple earthly events there are contradicting accounts: there are 3 bible passages about the death of king Saul which are all the three of them contradicting. I'm afraid that people will say: well, if there is already contradiction about rather simple earthly events, let alone about the really difficult matters...

baetores Says:

Jul 8, 2008 - Talking about contradictions: If anyone of you would hear the truth about it, would you like to hear it, would you be prepared to hear it? Or would it contradict your current long-grown habits so that it would cause resistance?

JohnLArmstrong Says:

Jul 9, 2008 - QUOTE: "John, if you believe in the existence of a deist god, what stops you from believing in magic?" Apologies, Lost, for not answering this right away. I've been inundated with posts and vids to responds to (I seem to have gotten their attention). In my book and videos, I don't flag the "power of God" moments in the Bible except to question why we have no evidence of these fantastic events. (cont)

JohnLArmstrong Says:

Jul 9, 2008 - (cont) What I DO flag are mortals who, without divine assistance, have magical powers as well as other claims that run contrary to what we know of our world (like the claim that disease is caused by demonic possession). Though I believe in a divine First Cause, the universe itself is a natural one. The "miracles" that I believe in are ones that can be studied and eventually understood.

SethVincent Says:

Jul 13, 2008 - We know the story is baloney ..... No guy would stop to ask for directions let alone "Wise" men .... LOL

migkillertwo Says:

Sep 1, 2008 - "christians, get over it" I am stunned that you presented this video with such a cavalier attitude john. material which comes from you is, not unlike the RRS, universally soaked in a lack of self-criticism.

JohnLArmstrong Says:

Sep 1, 2008 - QUOTE: "not unlike the RRS" Why, thank you.

Antisyncretism Says:

Sep 2, 2008 - 'i dont have much to say so im just gonna give links to other info for u to look yourself' while ur just giving links i might as well say 'go look at the entire internet and read all books'

Antisyncretism Says:

Sep 2, 2008 - ur claim to a contradiction was just a show of your misunderstanding

migkillertwo Says:

Sep 2, 2008 - between Luke and Acts? yeah, a contradiction between these two works is a patent impossibility.

JohnLArmstrong Says:

Sep 2, 2008 - QUOTE: "yeah, a contradiction between these two works is a patent impossibility." Did Jesus ascend into Heaven on the day of his resurrection (Luke) or 40 days afterwords (Acts)?

Antisyncretism Says:

Sep 3, 2008 - interesting plz give reference..

migkillertwo Says:

Sep 3, 2008 - to second antisyncretism, that is quite interesting. a reference would be greatly appreciated.

JohnLArmstrong Says:

Sep 3, 2008 - Luke chapter 24 Acts chapter 1:1-9

migkillertwo Says:

Sep 3, 2008 - John, if you read Luke 24, there is no chronological link between verse 49 and verse 50. now, to repeat, the evidence for common authorship of Luke and Acts is far too vast to be usurped this forced and unsupported contradiction.

JohnLArmstrong Says:

Sep 3, 2008 - QUOTE: "there is no chronological link between verse 49 and verse 50. " I assume you mean 50 and 51, right? Are you referring to Ehrman's claim that the phrase about him being carried up into Heaven is a later addition?

migkillertwo Says:

Sep 3, 2008 - "I assume you mean 50 and 51, right?" no, I don't. your theory that Luke claims the ascension was on the same day as the resurrection needs a chronological link between verse 49 and 50. "Are you referring to Ehrman's claim that the phrase about him being carried up into Heaven is a later addition?" no, but tell me more. I trust that he has something better than a few late manuscripts of the NT as he does for 1 Corinthians 14?

JohnLArmstrong Says:

Sep 3, 2008 - QUOTE: "no, but tell me more. I trust that he has something better than a few late manuscripts of the NT as he does for 1 Corinthians 14? Not sure. It's from his book "Misquoting Jesus" which I have not read. My understanding is that it doesn't appear in early manuscripts.

migkillertwo Says:

Sep 3, 2008 - well that detail certainly is not to be found in the textual footnotes of my bible.

justplainolmee Says:

Nov 8, 2008 - You enjoy the idea of possessing wisdom. You are very opinionated. You may believe or not believe, it is your choice. God resists the proud. How do you know that there was an ice age except that someone TOLD you there was one. You believe because someone TOLD you. That is not free thinking. It is following. I would rather follow GOD. Take care.

Longsday Says:

Nov 10, 2008 - No, a person accepts that there was an ice age because the people who "told" the world about it have evidence for their assertion that he can look at for himself.

justplainolmee Says:

Nov 10, 2008 - What qualifies you to know anything of science enough to verify anything that is said? That very thing, if any, is given by men. You simply mimic what they have told you while in a Christians life, he/she has the evidence of Christ for himself or herself. Who are you to tell that person that it is not real. Have you gone anywhere and examined anything? How many years of study in these areas do you have? What types of information have you personally gathered in the field?

justplainolmee Says:

Nov 10, 2008 - You say that there is proof of an ice age because the people who say so have proof. Well, the New Testament is word of God penned by those who were WITH Jesus. As you believe your scientists, we believe the testimony of Christ. However, our belief is greater. What is your hope in science? You manufacture error in scripture because you do not comprehend. Since you like to TRY to quote scripture to disprove it, what does it mean when it says that 'God resists the proud'?