Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Ancient Sources: History and Theology.

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

  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    I have not disputed that point. Learn to read what I have written.

    However, you are employing the fallacy "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence..." Which leaves it equally possible [because the evidence is absent] that they had a conjurer and balloons at the last supper


    Perhaps she flew in later with Alitalia. After all the absence of evidence of planes is not evidence of the absence of planes.
    You are not making sense. You have no rational reason to doubt Matthew's account. Or the possibility of translators which certainly would be necessary for the Romans to interact with the Jews. There could be many reasonably way for that exchange to have been related.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    I have responded to it. You just choose to ignore my replies because you cannot explain the inherent contradictions within the various gospel texts.
    If I say, "On Thursday night, I went to Bob's house," and then later say, "On Thursday night, I went out with my wife," and then still later say, "On Thursday night, I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey," are those necessarily contradictions, or are they merely different details about the exact same event? Or suppose I relate a conversation I had with my friend Gary. I say, "Gary asked me if I knew how to knit. I said no." He relates it as, "We spent hours talking about the films of Stanley Kubrick, and then the topic of knitting somehow came up. I asked Mountain Man if he knew how to knit, and he just laughed at me." Again, necessarily contradictory, or merely different details about the exact same event?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    I think you don't have a response to the fact that your supposed "contradictions" are much ado about nothing.
    I have responded to it. You just choose to ignore my replies because you cannot explain the inherent contradictions within the various gospel texts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    The point is you have no logical argument otherwise. Translators certainly would have been around.
    I have not disputed that point. Learn to read what I have written.

    However, you are employing the fallacy "The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence..." Which leaves it equally possible [because the evidence is absent] that they had a conjurer and balloons at the last supper


    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Again, you have no logical basis to counter what is in Matthew.
    Perhaps she flew in later with Alitalia. After all the absence of evidence of planes is not evidence of the absence of planes.
    Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 05-11-2021, 01:05 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    I think your stylus has got stuck.
    I think you don't have a response to the fact that your supposed "contradictions" are much ado about nothing.

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
    Well by that logic there was a conjurer and balloons at the last supper.
    The point is you have no logical argument otherwise. Translators certainly would have been around.


    No other gospel does. What sources? We know very little about Pontius Pilate as a historical figure. However, I ask again, why do you imagine his wife [as Matthew tells us] would have been with him?
    Again, you have no logical basis to counter what is in Matthew.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    As for your supposed "contradictions", they are trivial to resolve and any number of essays and books have done so, which I will leave to the sincere seeker to find on his own since they are numerous and readily available through a simple internet search query. I will, however, note that what is commonly regarded as supposed "contradictions" in the Bible are generally down to differences in writing conventions where ancient writers did not write with the same precision as is often demanded today, and so they used what we might consider unconventional methods such as reordering events thematically rather than chronologically, compressing multiple events into a single narrative, paraphrasing, approximating, and so on. As the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy says, "When total precision of a particular kind was not expected nor aimed at, it is no error not to have achieved it. "
    I think your stylus has got stuck.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    Just admit it MM you cannot explain these contradictions. Don't worry. Your secret is safe with me!
    As for your supposed "contradictions", they are trivial to resolve and any number of essays and books have done so, which I will leave to the sincere seeker to find on his own since they are numerous and readily available through a simple internet search query. I will, however, note that what is commonly regarded as supposed "contradictions" in the Bible are generally down to differences in writing conventions where ancient writers did not write with the same precision as is often demanded today, and so they used what we might consider unconventional methods such as reordering events thematically rather than chronologically, compressing multiple events into a single narrative, paraphrasing, approximating, and so on. As the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy says, "When total precision of a particular kind was not expected nor aimed at, it is no error not to have achieved it. "

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    So what? The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...
    Well by that logic there was a conjurer and balloons at the last supper.


    Originally posted by seer View Post

    Well that is what the Gospel of Matthew tells us. Do you have any other source to back up your claims?
    No other gospel does. What sources? We know very little about Pontius Pilate as a historical figure. However, I ask again, why do you imagine his wife [as Matthew tells us] would have been with him?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    As for your supposed "contradictions", they are trivial to resolve and any number of essays and books have done so, which I will leave to the sincere seeker to find on his own since they are numerous and readily available through a simple internet search query. I will, however, note that what is commonly regarded as supposed "contradictions" in the Bible are generally down to differences in writing conventions where ancient writers did not write with the same precision as is often demanded today, and so they used what we might consider unconventional methods such as reordering events thematically rather than chronologically, compressing multiple events into a single narrative, paraphrasing, approximating, and so on. As the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy says, "When total precision of a particular kind was not expected nor aimed at, it is no error not to have achieved it. "
    Just admit it MM you cannot explain these contradictions. Don't worry. Your secret is safe with me!
    Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 05-11-2021, 12:38 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post


    Really? Are you contending there was some kind of resurrection information exchange?

    Then if so, why does Jesus give different accounts?

    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
    As for your supposed "contradictions", they are trivial to resolve and any number of essays and books have done so, which I will leave to the sincere seeker to find on his own since they are numerous and readily available through a simple internet search query. I will, however, note that what is commonly regarded as supposed "contradictions" in the Bible are generally down to differences in writing conventions where ancient writers did not write with the same precision as is often demanded today, and so they used what we might consider unconventional methods such as reordering events thematically rather than chronologically, compressing multiple events into a single narrative, paraphrasing, approximating, and so on. As the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy says, "When total precision of a particular kind was not expected nor aimed at, it is no error not to have achieved it. "

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

    The most obvious source for the details about Jesus' conversation with Pilate is Jesus is himself.
    Really? Are you contending there was some kind of resurrection information exchange?

    Then if so, why does Jesus give different accounts?

    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

    Leave a comment:


  • seer
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    Not Jewish peasants from a Galilean village.

    There would certainly have had to be a translator yet not one gospel account mentions that individual.
    So what? The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...


    We do not even know if Pilate was married. And more to the point, why would his wife be with him?
    Well that is what the Gospel of Matthew tells us. Do you have any other source to back up your claims?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    You floated this nonsense before. You don't think there were those around who were fluid in both languages?
    Not Jewish peasants from a Galilean village.

    Originally posted by seer View Post
    Translators?
    There would certainly have had to be a translator yet not one gospel account mentions that individual.

    Originally posted by seer View Post
    It is not possible for anyone in Pilate's circle (like his wife) who were sympathetic to the early Christians who could have shared the exchange?
    We do not even know if Pilate was married. And more to the point, why would his wife be with him?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by seer View Post

    You floated this nonsense before. You don't think there were those around who were fluid in both languages? Translators? It is not possible for anyone in Pilate's circle (like his wife) who were sympathetic to the early Christians who could have shared the exchange?
    The most obvious source for the details about Jesus' conversation with Pilate is Jesus is himself.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Juvenal, 10-13-2021, 08:41 AM
19 responses
113 views
0 likes
Last Post mossrose  
Started by seer, 10-11-2021, 06:32 PM
9 responses
78 views
0 likes
Last Post Machinist  
Started by lee_merrill, 10-08-2021, 06:03 PM
5 responses
46 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by seer, 10-06-2021, 05:21 PM
44 responses
252 views
0 likes
Last Post Tassman
by Tassman
 
Started by System199176, 10-06-2021, 09:36 AM
21 responses
225 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Working...
X