RE: Modern examples of gullibility as evidence against Christian claims
July 12, 2012 at 1:46 pm
(This post was last modified: July 12, 2012 at 1:51 pm by Undeceived.)
(July 12, 2012 at 1:20 pm)Thor Wrote: Additionally, none of these writers claim to have met an earthly Jesus. Hence, they could not have been "eyewitness followers".
Luke 1:3, "Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you."
John 21:24, "This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true." Just before the verse, he is referring to "the disciple whom Jesus loved" which is the writer's third-person reference to himself (John).
In additions to their claims of knowing an earthly Jesus, Peter in 2 Peter 1:16 adds, "We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." Mark followed Peter, so it is longstanding tradition that he obtained much of his information from him.
Quote:Then explain why the Gospel of John disagrees with events described in Mark, Matthew, and Luke.
What part?
Quote:This means nothing. I could quote "The Lord of the Rings". Doesn't mean the events really happened.
It means the quoter believed they happened. You don't use fiction to support the point you're making in an essay.
Quote:Oh, you're killing me! That whole bit where "God" sends plagues upon Egypt, Moses parts the Red Sea, receives the Ten Commandments, etc...?
That is the issue before the court. The verdict can't be presumed; it must be proved by evidence. There are no proved myths in Jewish lore.
Quote:Like you guys are even the least bit skeptical?
The 1st century Jews were. That's why they tried to kill Jesus.
Quote:No, he didn't exist. And I say so because there is zero evidence to support any of the stories about him.
The earliest histories of Alexander the Great were written by Arrian and Plutarch more than four hundred years after Alexander’s death. Two writers. Four hundred years later. This is typical. Other examples, first date is time written and second is earliest copy:
Herodotus (History) 480 - 425 BC 900 AD
Thucydides (History) 460 - 400 BC 900 AD
Aristotle (Philosopher) 384 - 322 BC 1,100 AD
Caesar (History) 100 - 44 BC 900 AD
Pliny (History) 61 - 113 AD 850 AD
Suetonius (Roman History) 70 - 140 AD 950 AD
Tacitus (Greek History) 100 AD 1,100 AD
All of these people are considered to have existed. Whereas the earliest mentions of Jesus are in 65AD, a mere three decades after his death. By your logic, 99.9% of people in history did not exist. The scientific method does not work on history, but multiple concurring accounts do. Jesus has four.
