Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

[Gary]

[QUOTE=Apologiaphoenix;222393]

Except you wrote this after your debate with me so you're saying you would not investigate the claims.

Looks like you're talking out of both sides of your mouth and you're still assuming the claims are stupid without giving any reason why.

I refer to it as presuppositional atheism.

I'm evangelizing. :)

I enjoy discussing/debating this subject. I am convinced that there is no good evidence, but obviously I'm interested in what you have to say or I wouldn't be discussing this with you.

[Gary]

Next time try to be more condescending and contemptuous and maybe you'll win more converts to your way of thinking.

In the story of the Emperor with no clothes, which approach do you think would best convince the Emperor that he was naked?

1. A long philosophical debate with the two tailors quoting citations from scholars, both pro and con, about the theoretical plausibility of invisible thread?

or

2. Telling him invisible thread doesn't exist and that you can see his talliwacker?

It is my honest belief that conservative Christianity is a cult. Sometimes to bring people out of a cult it is necessary to demonstrate in stark terms the nonsensibility of their belief system.

[Gary]

"A pre-70 dating for the writing of Matthew is a minority view."

France, R.T (2007). The Gospel of Matthew. Eerdmans. p. 19.

[Gary]

To set the terminus ad quem, Ignatius of Antioch and other early writers show dependence on the Gospel of Matthew. Dependence on Mark sets a terminus a quo for the dating of Matthew, which should be assumed to have been written at least a decade after the gospel upon which it relies. Several indications in the text also confirm that Matthew was written c. 80 CE or later.

J.C. Fenton summarizes the evidence for the dating of Matthew as follows (op. cit., p. 11):


The earliest surviving writings which quote this Gospel are probably the letters of Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch, who, while being taken as prisoner from the East to Rome about A.D. 110, wrote to various churches in Asia in Asia Minor and to the church at Rome. Ignatius refers to the star which appeared at the time of the birth of Jesus, the answer of Jesus to John the Baptist, when he was baptized, and several sayings of Jesus which are recorded only in this Gospel (12:33, 15:13, 19:12). It seems almost certain that Ignatius, and possibly the recipients of his letters also, knew this Gospel, and thus that it was written before A.D. 110. But how long before?

Here we cannot be so certain. But it is possible that we can find evidence that Matthew was writing after the war between the Romans and the Jews which ended in the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem in A.D. 70. See, for example, 22:7: The king was angry, and he sent his troops and destroyed those murderers and burned their city; and compare also 21:41, 27:25. Similarly, Matthew's Gospel contains a strongly anti-Jewish note running through it, from the teaching not to do as the hypocrites do in Chapter 6, to the Woes on the scribes and Pharisees in Chapter 23; and this may point to a date after c. A.D. 85 when the Christians were excluded from the Jewish synagogues. It is worth noting here that Matthew often speaks of their synagogues (4:23, 9:35, 10:17, 12:9, 13:54), as if to distinguish Christian meetings and meeting places from those of the Jews, from which the Christians had now been turned out.

Beare offers the following to date the Gospel of Matthew (op. cit., pp. 7-8):


It is generally agreed that it was written after the fall of Jerusalem to the armies of Titus (AD 70), and the widespread acquaintance with it which is exhibited in all the Christian literature of the second century makes it difficult to place its composition any later than the opening decade of that century. If the Sermon on the Mount can be regarded in any sense as 'the Christian answer to Jamnia. . . a kind of Christian mishnaic counterpart to the formulation taking place there' (Davies, Setting, p. 315), this would indicate a date a few years before or after the turn of the century.

Concerning the knowledge of the fall of Jerusalem that the author evinces, Schweizer writes concerning Matthew 22:7 (op. cit., p. 418):


The wrath of the host is mentioned by both evangelists, but it is impossible to conceive of the king coming with his army not only to slay those who had been invited but to burn down their city (not "cities"), and doing all this while the feast stands ready for the newly invited. The parable deals with ordinary citizens, who buy fields and use oxen, not with men who rule entire cities. After his punishment, furthermore, the verdict of the king in verse 8 is pointless. Verses 6-7 are thus clearly an interpolation in the narrative, which earlier passed directly from verse 5 to the wrath of the king (beginning of vs. 7), and then to verse 8. Here the events of A.D. 70 - the taking and burning of Jerusalem by Roman armies - have colored the language of the parable.

Source: Early Christian Writings
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/matthew.html

[Adrift]

In the story of the Emperor with no clothes, which approach do you think would best convince the Emperor that he was naked?

1. A long philosophical debate with the two tailors quoting citations from scholars, both pro and con, about the theoretical plausibility of invisible thread?

or

2. Telling him invisible thread doesn't exist and that you can see his talliwacker?

It is my honest belief that conservative Christianity is a cult. Sometimes to bring people out of a cult it is necessary to demonstrate in stark terms the nonsensibility of their belief system.

Yeah, I can see that approach is really working out for you so far. And what makes you think you're not the emperor?

[Sea of red]

Nice. I can say I can get caught up sometimes if I see an interesting article on something in space. Totally mindblowing. Got something in mind yet for the doctorate?

<- - - - - -

Nothing yet. I had a falling out so to speak with my adviser and stopped for awhile, but I just recently decided to go back and finish it. My thoughts are leaning towards possibly doing something in the area of the effects of dark matter on galactic dynamics. It would be conjecture as we don't understand dark matter fully - though we have theoretics from supersymmetry - that may offer some clues.

[Gary]

http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/markauthor.html

[Littlejoe]

Moderated By: Littlejoe

Gary, Back to back posting is considered "Flooding" unless you quote someone that shows you are obviously responding to different people. Please refrain from doing this. You may edit your posts up to 45 min's after posting, please use this feature in the future.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

[Gary]

Moderated By: Littlejoe

Gary, Back to back posting is considered "Flooding" unless you quote someone that shows you are obviously responding to different people. Please refrain from doing this. You may edit your posts up to 45 min's after posting, please use this feature in the future.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

I apologize. I was responding to Nick's request for evidence for the dating of the Gospel of Matthew. I will refrain from further comments until others comment.

[One Bad Pig]

My university gave the option to double in physics and astronomy which I took for my MS, and reverted to pure astronomy/astrophysics for my doctorate. My research is in galactic astrophysics and I was into radio astronomy for awhile.

I wish I'd have had the fortitude to stick with this - I was a year away from graduating with a double major in Aerospace Engineering/Astronomy, but ran out of GI Bill money.

[Sea of red]

I wish I'd have had the fortitude to stick with this - I was a year away from graduating with a double major in Aerospace Engineering/Astronomy, but ran out of GI Bill money.

Where you trying to get into Aerospace or a career in astrophysics?

[One Bad Pig]

Where you trying to get into Aerospace or a career in astrophysics?

Aerospace. I was taking the astronomy courses mostly just because I was interested. I settled for the Aerospace degree, and got a minor in Astronomy (the first such minor awarded by Penn State - they established it during my junior year). The course load would not have been easy for that last year (it would have heavily focused on physics), but it looked doable.

[William]

It seems to me that the question and debate surrounding the date of composition for the gospels and other books of the Bible could have been easily avoided by an All Powerful God, had the books been written in stone, or had the original manuscripts preserved somehow.

I can think of several ways that the Words of God could have better been delivered so that everyone could Know, or have better evidence for the Bible really being God's Message to mankind. This wasn't done. Instead, we have several books that we aren't sure who wrote them, not sure when they were written, and several others that appear to have been tampered with and edited.

Mere men can and have made things in stone that have lasted through the ages, but God wasn't interested in doing that? God wants all to be saved and doesn't want any to perish, but didn't want to go through the hassle of writing his own words in stone, so that we would always have the originals, or better yet, just reveal himself to all of his beloved creation, and instead decided to have men (many of which are unknown) write down some stuff on his behalf, that at the very least appears to have some issues and at least appears to have been edited?

But, this is just something that sticks out to me.

[William]

You keep saying things like this, but I don't really understand why. If the same claims made in the Bible were made in another book that purports to be telling factual events, I would have no problem in considering the evidence for the claims they put forward, and I'd like to think that most honest open-minded people would do the same. And as I've said before, I don't reject outright any of the miraculous claims of other religions. Historically, neither has the church.

really? so are there any miracles you believe to be true outside of the bible and outside of Christianity?

Like any native Americans, or Islam, or of the Hindus, or any else?

[William]

seems to be what Gary is harping on.

maybe you're not reading all the posts?