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

  • #46
    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.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by seer View Post

      You are not making sense. You have no rational reason to doubt Matthew's account.
      The pericope at 27.19 is not corroborated anywhere else [even in the other gospels] and we have no extraneous contemporary evidence that Pilate was married at this time. There is therefore every rational reason to question the veracity of this account.


      However, this pericope needs to be understood within its context. The interpretation of dreams was another form of divination in the ancient world and dreams were often interpreted to be signs of divine guidance. In Matthew both Joseph [1.20] and the Magi [2.12] have dreams that guide them to certain actions. Joseph receives an angelic messenger in a dream telling him to marry Mary and the Magi are warned in a dream not to return to Herod. They therefore return to their own country "by a different road".

      That a Gentile woman has such a profound dream wherein she has "suffered a great deal" about Jesus and his innocence only serves to deepen the guilt of the Jewish leaders. That she only knows he is innocent because of her dream lends further emphasis to this dream being a divine intervention. Hence it is not Pilate's wife but God [through this Gentile woman] who testifies to Jesus' righteousness.
      Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 05-12-2021, 04:38 AM.
      "It ain't necessarily so
      The things that you're liable
      To read in the Bible
      It ain't necessarily so
      ."

      Sportin' Life
      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

        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?
        We have four supposed independent eye-witnesses to the alleged same event i.e. the empty tomb, who went to it and what was found to be there.

        Why do those four accounts differ in their specifics?

        Why do these same alleged eye-witnesses not agree on when the interrogation with Pilate took place? The Synoptics writers tell us it was after Passover. John writes it was on early on the eve of Passover.

        Why is there a ten year discrepancy between the two birth narratives?
        "It ain't necessarily so
        The things that you're liable
        To read in the Bible
        It ain't necessarily so
        ."

        Sportin' Life
        Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

          We have four supposed independent eye-witnesses to the alleged same event i.e. the empty tomb, who went to it and what was found to be there.

          Why do those four accounts differ in their specifics?

          Why do these same alleged eye-witnesses not agree on when the interrogation with Pilate took place? The Synoptics writers tell us it was after Passover. John writes it was on early on the eve of Passover.

          Why is there a ten year discrepancy between the two birth narratives?
          I feel like no matter what explanation I give, you're just going to keep asking, "But why? But why?" It's like conversing with a toddler. I've already given you an answer, but to be more specific:

          You say, "Why do those four accounts differ in their specifics?" to which I can only answer, why not? Why do you expect that different people would all report the exact same details?

          Regarding the timing of the Passover, John does not say that Jesus was interrogated "early on the eve of Passover", but, rather, that the Jewish leaders refused to enter the governor's quarters "so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover" (John 18:28). In Jewish tradition, there were actually multiple meals eaten during the time of Passover and not just the Sedar. It is these other meals that are likely being referenced. More information here.

          Regarding the supposed ten year discrepancy, I suppose you're referring to when the census took place? At the risk of being accused of arguing by weblink, I will simply direct to you this comprehensive essay by Christian Thinktank's Glenn Miller.
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
            The pericope at 27.19 is not corroborated anywhere else [even in the other gospels] and we have no extraneous contemporary evidence that Pilate was married at this time. There is therefore every rational reason to question the veracity of this account.


            No there isn't, you are just making stuff up again.

            However, this pericope needs to be understood within its context. The interpretation of dreams was another form of divination in the ancient world and dreams were often interpreted to be signs of divine guidance. In Matthew both Joseph [1.20] and the Magi [2.12] have dreams that guide them to certain actions. Joseph receives an angelic messenger in a dream telling him to marry Mary and the Magi are warned in a dream not to return to Herod. They therefore return to their own country "by a different road".
            And?

            That a Gentile woman has such a profound dream wherein she has "suffered a great deal" about Jesus and his innocence only serves to deepen the guilt of the Jewish leaders. That she only knows he is innocent because of her dream lends further emphasis to this dream being a divine intervention. Hence it is not Pilate's wife but God [through this Gentile woman] who testifies to Jesus' righteousness.
            So? But the point was - there could have been a number of sources for the exchange in question.

            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by seer View Post

              No there isn't, you are just making stuff up again.
              This pericope is not referenced anywhere else. That is a fact. It there cannot be cross referenced.



              Originally posted by seer View Post
              And?
              To illustrate the importance of dreams as divine warnings.


              Originally posted by seer View Post
              So? But the point was - there could have been a number of sources for the exchange in question.
              Where are they then? And why do the other three alleged "eye-witnesses" to these events not mention this particular incident?

              "It ain't necessarily so
              The things that you're liable
              To read in the Bible
              It ain't necessarily so
              ."

              Sportin' Life
              Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                I feel like no matter what explanation I give, you're just going to keep asking, "But why? But why?" It's like conversing with a toddler. I've already given you an answer, but to be more specific:

                You say, "Why do those four accounts differ in their specifics?" to which I can only answer, why not? Why do you expect that different people would all report the exact same details?
                If they are all eye witnesses why do their "testimonies" contradict each other as to which specific individuals actually went to the the tomb and what they found when they got there.

                You are simply wriggling.

                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Regarding the timing of the Passover, John does not say that Jesus was interrogated "early on the eve of Passover",
                Yes he does: Then they took Jesus from Caiaphas to Pilate’s headquarters.[g] It was early in the morning. They themselves did not enter the headquarters,[h] so as to avoid ritual defilement and to be able to eat the Passover. 29 So Pilate went out to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this man?” 30 They answered, “If this man were not a criminal, we would not have handed him over to you.” 31 Pilate said to them, “Take him yourselves and judge him according to your law"

                Bear in mind how the Jews define a day.

                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                but, rather, that the Jewish leaders refused to enter the governor's quarters "so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover" (John 18:28). In Jewish tradition, there were actually multiple meals eaten during the time of Passover and not just the Sedar.
                It is these other meals that are likely being referenced. More information here.
                That is what is known as "torturing the text" and is pure speculation.

                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Regarding the supposed ten year discrepancy, I suppose you're referring to when the census took place? At the risk of being accused of arguing by weblink, I will simply direct to you this comprehensive essay by Christian Thinktank's Glenn Miller.
                And that is a confection put together to impress the undiscerning.

                I could take it apart section by section but it would be an extremely detailed and long reply and I doubt you would bother to read it.
                "It ain't necessarily so
                The things that you're liable
                To read in the Bible
                It ain't necessarily so
                ."

                Sportin' Life
                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                  I could take it apart section by section...
                  Which seems to be the only way you can respond to any argument, taking it on one out-of-context piece at a time instead of addressing the whole of it at once. It's a tiresome and intellectually dishonest debate tactic that gives the false appearance of a rebuttal without actually being a rebuttal and is something I have little patience for.
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    Which seems to be the only way you can respond to any argument, taking it on one out-of-context piece at a time instead of addressing the whole of it at once.
                    Clearly a university education by-passed you.
                    "It ain't necessarily so
                    The things that you're liable
                    To read in the Bible
                    It ain't necessarily so
                    ."

                    Sportin' Life
                    Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                      Clearly a university education by-passed you.
                      Yes, I suppose that's why I can present my arguments as a series of unbroken paragraphs instead of picking apart a post sentence fragment by sentence fragment and inserting vacuous rejoinders like "You are simply wriggling." Apparently an inability to present a complete train of thought from beginning to end is the mark of the university educated.

                      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                      Than a fool in the eyes of God


                      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                        The pericope at 27.19 is not corroborated anywhere else [even in the other gospels] and we have no extraneous contemporary evidence that Pilate was married at this time. There is therefore every rational reason to question the veracity of this account.
                        It wasn't all that long ago that scoffers such of yourself claimed that Pilate never existed because we had no record of him. That Christian's simply concocted him out of whole cloth.

                        Then in the early 60s all of that changed when the "Pilate Stone was uncovered during an archaeological dig at Caesarea Palestinae. And since that time some coins and a ring have been found bearing his name.

                        And that is pretty much the extent of the historical record outside of the Bible that we have on him.

                        So for you to disdainfully sniff that there is "no extraneous contemporary evidence that Pilate was married at this time" is at the very least disingenuous and likely dishonestly duplicitous. The fact is that we know exceedingly little about Pilate due to a lack of contemporaneous accounts concerning him.

                        Moreover, isn't it interesting that we finally uncovered evidence for his existence during our lifetime. I mean, considering that he was the Roman governor of Judea? What I mean is that you have repeatedly demanded all sorts of contemporary documentation for someone you argue "had no impact on the world. He lived and died a nonentity" and then use the scarcity of such material to argue against his existence. But here we have a governor that we didn't have a scrap of documentation about outside of Christian sources.

                        So if documentation from Pilate's time that mention him, probably the most important person in the region, were unknown until a little over 50 years ago, why should anyone expect a bunch of documentation concerning Jesus?

                        And ironically, even with only the tiny fragments we have, as Warren Carter informs us in Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor, modern scholars know a good deal more about him than about any other of the Roman governors there. Apparently, for some all we have is a name.

                        So much for demands for contemporary documents mentioning someone.


                        I'm always still in trouble again

                        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                          We have four supposed independent eye-witnesses to the alleged same event i.e. the empty tomb, who went to it and what was found to be there.

                          Why do those four accounts differ in their specifics?
                          That is exactly what we should expect to see from four separate accounts.





                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            It wasn't all that long ago that scoffers such of yourself claimed that Pilate never existed because we had no record of him. That Christian's simply concocted him out of whole cloth.

                            Then in the early 60s all of that changed when the "Pilate Stone was uncovered during an archaeological dig at Caesarea Palestinae. And since that time some coins and a ring have been found bearing his name.

                            And that is pretty much the extent of the historical record outside of the Bible that we have on him.

                            So for you to disdainfully sniff that there is "no extraneous contemporary evidence that Pilate was married at this time" is at the very least disingenuous and likely dishonestly duplicitous. The fact is that we know exceedingly little about Pilate due to a lack of contemporaneous accounts concerning him.

                            Moreover, isn't it interesting that we finally uncovered evidence for his existence during our lifetime. I mean, considering that he was the Roman governor of Judea? What I mean is that you have repeatedly demanded all sorts of contemporary documentation for someone you argue "had no impact on the world. He lived and died a nonentity" and then use the scarcity of such material to argue against his existence. But here we have a governor that we didn't have a scrap of documentation about outside of Christian sources.

                            So if documentation from Pilate's time that mention him, probably the most important person in the region, were unknown until a little over 50 years ago, why should anyone expect a bunch of documentation concerning Jesus?

                            And ironically, even with only the tiny fragments we have, as Warren Carter informs us in Pontius Pilate: Portraits of a Roman Governor, modern scholars know a good deal more about him than about any other of the Roman governors there. Apparently, for some all we have is a name.

                            So much for demands for contemporary documents mentioning someone.
                            It is a fact that there is not a single piece of archeological evidence that contradicts the Bible. There is much in the Bible for which there is no physical evidence (which is not unexpected for events that happened thousands of years ago), but every time a piece is discovered, it has always supported the Biblical record.
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                              Yes, I suppose that's why I can present my arguments as a series of unbroken paragraphs instead of picking apart a post sentence fragment by sentence fragment
                              :
                              It's called analysing the text!
                              "It ain't necessarily so
                              The things that you're liable
                              To read in the Bible
                              It ain't necessarily so
                              ."

                              Sportin' Life
                              Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                                It is a fact that there is not a single piece of archeological evidence that contradicts the Bible.
                                How about Jericho?
                                "It ain't necessarily so
                                The things that you're liable
                                To read in the Bible
                                It ain't necessarily so
                                ."

                                Sportin' Life
                                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seer, 07-20-2021, 12:05 PM
                                94 responses
                                372 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 07-16-2021, 07:39 AM
                                52 responses
                                253 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Mountain Man, 07-05-2021, 04:27 PM
                                74 responses
                                445 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by tabibito, 06-30-2021, 02:53 AM
                                50 responses
                                325 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by seer, 05-12-2021, 05:35 AM
                                662 responses
                                4,229 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Working...
                                X