Announcement

Collapse

Archeology 201 Guidelines

If Indiana Jones happened to be a member of Tweb, this is where he'd hang out.

Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?

Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.

Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Confirmations of the New Testament

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    OK from the perspective of the believer, but not the subject of the thread.
    Relevant nonetheless. Plenty of people confuse the truth of claims about history, with the truth of theological claims. So pointing this out is not off-topic, but is very relevant to it. Distinctions of that kind need making, for the sake of clarity, to avoid confusion of thought.
    Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 11-30-2019, 07:14 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      Precisely. I could now write a book about WWII over 70 years later that relies on eyewitness testimony like from my father and a couples of uncles as well as neighbors I knew growing up.
      Excellent analogy 😀

      Comment


      • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
        So, handwave followed by handwave. Keep up the good fight, shunya.
        Fact: No original texts.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
          It does refer to closeness to an original text, even though we don't have the originals.

          Source: Aland and Aland, The Text of the New Testament

          All the papyri before the third/fourth century are placed in the highest category because of their age, even when their "free" text sets them at a distance from the original text.

          © Copyright Original Source



          Blessings,
          Lee
          Unfortunately there are not original texts to refer to.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            Fact: No original texts.
            This was dealt with 4 months ago, upthread. Go back to sleep, Frank.
            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
            sigpic
            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

            Comment


            • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
              This was dealt with 4 months ago, upthread. Go back to sleep, Frank.
              No it was not, and again NO original texts, and abundant evidence that the text of the gospels represent an evolved edited text, without known author. This true for some of the letters.

              It was only dealt with by an assertion of belief, and not evidence. It is a fallacy to use the tect to prove the text when there is no evidence.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                No it was not, and again NO original texts, and abundant evidence that the text of the gospels represent an evolved edited text, without known author. This true for some of the letters.

                It was only dealt with by an assertion of belief, and not evidence. It is a fallacy to use the tect to prove the text when there is no evidence.
                This was dealt with, 4 months ago, upthread. Go back to sleep, Frank.
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  This was dealt with, 4 months ago, upthread. Go back to sleep, Frank.
                  No it was not, and again NO original texts, and abundant evidence that the text of the gospels represent an evolved edited text, without known author. This true for some of the letters.

                  It was only dealt with by an assertion of belief, and not evidence. It is a fallacy to use the text to prove the text when there is no evidence.

                  Hand waves do not count. This is Archaeology 201, which begs for archaeological evidence.

                  The objections to the claims of the original video have been made and documented.

                  1) The New Testament was set in history history of the time, and like all ancient scripture contain known events, people and places, but based on this they cannot be concluded to be completely accurate. Not all events are known by current archaeology evidence of parallel record, such as the timing of census and tax collection recorded in the gospels.

                  2) There is no reason to believe that those literate writing 100 to 200+ years after Jesus did not know most of the events, places and people of the time of Jesus.

                  3) All the historical records cited in the video are late, third hand, and of questionable provenance such as Josephus' writings.

                  3}Absolutely no text has been found within 100 years of the life of Jesus. I am being generous here, because the texts found are even later.
                  Last edited by shunyadragon; 12-19-2019, 09:42 AM.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    No it was not, and again NO original texts, and abundant evidence that the text of the gospels represent an evolved edited text, without known author. This true for some of the letters.

                    It was only dealt with by an assertion of belief, and not evidence. It is a fallacy to use the text to prove the text when there is no evidence.

                    Hand waves do not count. This is Archaeology 201, which begs for archaeological evidence.

                    The objections to the claims of the original video have been made and documented.

                    1) The New Testament was set in history history of the time, and like all ancient scripture contain known events, people and places, but based on this they cannot be concluded to be completely accurate. Not all events are known by current archaeology evidence of parallel record, such as the timing of census and tax collection recorded in the gospels.

                    2) There is no reason to believe that those literate writing 100 to 200+ years after Jesus did not know most of the events, places and people of the time of Jesus.

                    3) All the historical records cited in the video are late, third hand, and of questionable provenance such as Josephus' writings.

                    3}Absolutely no text has been found within 100 years of the life of Jesus. I am being generous here, because the texts found are even later.
                    For the third time, this was dealt with, 4 months ago, upthread. Repeating your objections doesn't make them any more valid. Go back to sleep, Frank.
                    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                    sigpic
                    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                      For the third time, this was dealt with, 4 months ago, upthread. Repeating your objections doesn't make them any more valid. Go back to sleep, Frank.
                      For the third time:

                      No it was not, and again NO original texts, and abundant evidence that the text of the gospels represent an evolved edited text, without known author. This true for some of the letters.

                      It was only dealt with by an assertion of belief, and not evidence. It is a fallacy to use the text to prove the text when there is no evidence.

                      Hand waves do not count. This is Archaeology 201, which begs for archaeological evidence.

                      The objections to the claims of the original video have been made and documented.

                      1) The New Testament was set in history history of the time, and like all ancient scripture contain known events, people and places, but based on this they cannot be concluded to be completely accurate. Not all events are known by current archaeology evidence of parallel record, such as the timing of census and tax collection recorded in the gospels.

                      2) There is no reason to believe that those literate writing 100 to 200+ years after Jesus did not know most of the events, places and people of the time of Jesus.

                      3) All the historical records cited in the video are late, third hand, and of questionable provenance such as Josephus' writings.

                      3}Absolutely no text has been found within 100 years of the life of Jesus. I am being generous here, because the texts found are even later.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                        Shuny, when someone claims to be an eyewitness, we count that as a reference to being an eyewitness.

                        Bob claims to be an eyewitness and Mary records the account - we have an eyewitness account.
                        Where exactly were the writers of the four canonical gospels hiding during the interrogation with Pilate? Were they all lurking behind the columns clasping their tabulae and stylus? More to the point how did they [and Peter] sneak into the Antonia? If they were all eyewitnesses why do the four accounts differ?

                        Mark:
                        • Jesus before Pilate.
                        • Pilate: Are you the king of the Jews?
                        • Jesus: You say so.
                        • Accused by Chief Priests.
                        • No answer by Jesus
                        • Pilate astonished.

                        Matthew as Mark, except that Pilate was “greatly” astonished.

                        Luke:
                        • Chief Priests charge Jesus.
                        • Pilate: I find no crime in him.
                        • Chief Priests: Trouble maker from Galilee to Jerusalem.

                        John:
                        • Before Pilate early on the eve of Passover (not after Passover as in the Synoptics).
                        • Pilate: What is the charge?
                        • Pilate: You judge him.
                        • Jews: We cannot execute.
                        • Pilate: Are you king of the Jews?
                        • Jesus: A kingdom not of the world


                        Furthermore, why do all four gospel writers give different timings for the trial? Was it on the eve of Passover [John]? Or after Passover[Synoptics]?
                        "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                          Where exactly were the writers of the four canonical gospels hiding during the interrogation with Pilate? Were they all lurking behind the columns clasping their tabulae and stylus? More to the point how did they [and Peter] sneak into the Antonia?
                          Jesus could have told them after his resurrection.

                          If they were all eyewitnesses why do the four accounts differ?
                          Cold Case Christianity may be of some help here, eyewitness accounts show the event from different perspectives, and the differences may be differences of emphasis.

                          Furthermore, why do all four gospel writers give different timings for the trial? Was it on the eve of Passover [John]? Or after Passover[Synoptics]?
                          Well, here we read:

                          Source: Evidence for Christianity

                          … as in Matthew 27:62 he says that the day after the crucifixion was the "one after Preparation Day" (ie preparation day for the Passover.

                          Source

                          © Copyright Original Source


                          So it seems there is some agreement.

                          Blessings,
                          Lee
                          "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                            Jesus could have told them after his resurrection.
                            That preposterous suggestion does not explain why the four accounts are all different and why the three Synoptics differ with John on the timing of this "trial".


                            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                            Cold Case Christianity may be of some help here, eyewitness accounts show the event from different perspectives, and the differences may be differences of emphasis.
                            Forgive me if I do not accept the special pleading of a believer. Nor can events from 2000 years ago be assessed in the light of present day homicide investigations.

                            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post

                            Well, here we read:

                            [cite=Evidence for Christianity]… as in Matthew 27:62 he says that the day after the crucifixion was the "one after Preparation Day" (ie preparation day for the Passover.
                            The festival lasts for several days.
                            "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

                            Comment

                            widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                            Working...
                            X