Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Apr 10, 2020 4:54 am





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 522 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 ... 35  Next
The NT was written in the 2nd century 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Worthy of Worship


Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2021
Location: NY
Thanks: 560
Thanked: 171 times in 118 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Quote:
Stahrwe
The answer is simple, many people on BT are saying untrue and baseless things about my family.


Who said what about your family?

Quote:
Stahrwe
Those people are not willing to discuss those things rationally and reasonably and have taken extreme positions which are unsupportable.


This sounds more like you than anyone else here… in fact everyone who challenges the assertions made by you and the church nearly always supports their case with data… You on the other hand won’t even watch the videos you are trying to discredit… and your arguments consist of fallacies and unsupported attacks on peoples credibility more often than facts.

Quote:
stahrwe
People certainly have a right to doubt and to question, but to reject the Bible, claim Jesus never existed, and charge nothing but evil and vileness to Christianity; that is a call to us to stand up to that.


Actually, we like you have the right to believe what we will… if that means that because of a lack of evidence we reject the Bible and the claims made within (Including the historic claim of the church for Jesus) than that is our right… and is a conclusion made on an intellectual level based off of the available evidence and knowledge of history, people and communication… you do not have to agree but attacking our position and blatantly derailing our discussions is immoral at the very least.

Quote:
stahrwe
As long as people like Sam Harris are allowed to make outrageous statements about Christainity should we not have the right to answer those charges in the forums where they are heralded? As I write this there is an ongoing discussion of one of SH's books taking place on BT. A discussion I have been told not to participate in. Now, it is objected to that I participate here.

And I am the one who has been called a hypocrit?

You are a hypocrite; you do not see us disrupting your church service because we disagree with the creationist content… do you?

And make no mistake you do disrupt these conversations, you do not bring anything contrastive to the table in the vast majority of the topics that you post on... heck you will not even watch the video series of this very thread… yet you feel the need to comment on it (rather ignorantly I might add) in what appears to be an attempt to derail any constructive dialog.


Furthermore, you break the rules about preaching and quoting the whole of previous posts with apparently no respect for your fellow BT members, or the owner, who has warned you about such nonsense… furthermore you do not seem capable of learning, you keep regurgitating the same old, tired claims even when they have been refuted beyond all reason… you will not accept the intellectual/academic professional standards of evidence which everyone here but you subscribes to… showing us all that give and take discourse with you is impossible… you want us to accept your side of things but dismiss our information out of hand… even though our information is intellectually sound… unlike yours.

In short everyone here gives (at least) a little in their positions… except you… who apparently has the “ultimate truth”

Yes you are a hypocrite.

Later


_________________
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


The following user would like to thank Frank 013 for this post:
tat tvam asi, Vishnu
Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:29 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
I dumpster dive for books!

BookTalk.org Moderator
Silver Contributor 2

Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1788
Thanks: 154
Thanked: 742 times in 556 posts
Gender: Male

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
tat tvam asi wrote:
If no one ever quoted Stahrwe's posts and ignored him when he quotes the rest of us posting to one another and tries to butt into our posts, the troll will eventually die of starvation. I've seen a few trolls die like that at the Joseph Campbell foundation.


Good idea, I have resisted the temptation to address any more of the nonsense. He will think that means I have run out of arguments -- so be it. After all, to use Richard Dawkins' effective analogy, we wouldn't bother debating someone who insists they have a relationship with Thor, would we?

It's one thing to debate a reasonable theist, but a young earth creationist who thinks the Bible is infallible, all the while posting pages of crap from other sites? Worse than a total waste of time.



Last edited by Dexter on Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.



The following user would like to thank Dexter for this post:
tat tvam asi, Vishnu
Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:18 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Worthy of Worship


Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2021
Location: NY
Thanks: 560
Thanked: 171 times in 118 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Quote:
Quote:
tat tvam asi wrote:
If no one ever quoted Stahrwe's posts and ignored him when he quotes the rest of us posting to one another and tries to butt into our posts, the troll will eventually die of starvation. I've seen a few trolls die like that at the Joseph Campbell foundation.



Good idea, I have resisted the temptation to address any more of the nonsense. He will think that means I have run out of arguments -- so be it. After all, to use Richard Dawkins' effective analogy, we wouldn't bother debating someone who insists they have a relationship with Thor, would we?

It's one thing to debate a reasonable theist, but a young earth creationist who thinks the Bible is infallible, all the whole posting pages of crap from other sites? Worse than a total waste of time.


Ok, I am on board… no more posts to stahrwe… I am done. :up:


_________________
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


The following user would like to thank Frank 013 for this post:
Vishnu
Sat Jan 22, 2011 8:30 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reading Addict


Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1367
Location: Florida
Thanks: 581
Thanked: 549 times in 411 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
The bit about someone believing they have a personal relationship with Thor really drives it home. That really is the same utter nonsense we're facing here. That's the whole mythicist position in a nut shell - there's no reason to treat the Sumerian, Egyptian, Babylonian, Hindu, and Greek Gods and Godmen one way and give special pleading to the biblical myths. Especially considering how blatantly flimsy these gospel myths are in particular. The supernaturalism grew and evolved with time. The evidence shows as much. The editions to the texts completely give it away. And I really do think that there will come a day when people believing they have personal relationship with Jesus will become akin to those who would believe the same of Thor, or Zeus, or Horus, etc. This is a very pivotal time in history in my opinion. The evidence such as what we've seen in this video series (those who actually watched) should only gain in popularity.

I brought it here to BT because of the high level intellectual heavy weights that frequent these forums. Despite Stahrwe BT is a powerhouse in terms of comprehension and I'm glad that Robert turned me and the others from the FTN onto it. Stahrwe isn't strong enough to ruin the good thing you all have going. That's why I've quoted him as "Stahrweak". That about summarizes the arguments he brings. In the case of this thread he's been about the worst representation for the bible that I could imagine. These stupid apologies turn the youth away from the faith. That's what these liar's for the lord fail to understand. They hurt the faith far more than preserve and support it. Imagine some youths reading through this thread after having watched the video series first. What would Stahrwe look like to them? A powerhouse who represents the truth, the light, the strength, or some bumbling idiot blind as hell trying to act as a guide? The youth can see this for what it is. And it's hurting the fundamentalists cause. I was one of those youths whose eyes were opened by observing what happens to our apologists in debate and interogation. They are not wise, not strong, not powerful, and therfore not supported by any all powerful, all knowing, ever present God. It's the very opposite...


_________________
YEC theory put to rest!!!

https://www.ex-christian.net/


The following user would like to thank tat tvam asi for this post:
Frank 013, Vishnu
Sat Jan 22, 2011 10:48 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4898
Location: Florida
Thanks: 177
Thanked: 344 times in 294 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Frank 013 wrote:
Quote:
Stahrwe
The answer is simple, many people on BT are saying untrue and baseless things about my family.


Who said what about your family?

Quote:
Stahrwe
Those people are not willing to discuss those things rationally and reasonably and have taken extreme positions which are unsupportable.


This sounds more like you than anyone else here… in fact everyone who challenges the assertions made by you and the church nearly always supports their case with data… You on the other hand won’t even watch the videos you are trying to discredit… and your arguments consist of fallacies and unsupported attacks on peoples credibility more often than facts.


What data, what information? Lies and misinformation about Mithraism and Marcion? I don't even see much if any support for the gnostic position promoted by this discussion. We can't discuss the videos because there it no text provided to base the discussion on. On the other hand, I have provided references showing that the ideas about Marcion and Mithra promoted by Murdock et al, is false. You suggest I have not provided data, how many more citations would you like. I understand why Tat and RT expend effort defending Murdock but I don't understand why you do. Her position is so far from mainstream that supporters risk being ignored.

Quote:
stahrwe
People certainly have a right to doubt and to question, but to reject the Bible, claim Jesus never existed, and charge nothing but evil and vileness to Christianity; that is a call to us to stand up to that.


Frank013 wrote:
Actually, we like you have the right to believe what we will… if that means that because of a lack of evidence we reject the Bible and the claims made within (Including the historic claim of the church for Jesus) than that is our right… and is a conclusion made on an intellectual level based off of the available evidence and knowledge of history, people and communication… you do not have to agree but attacking our position and blatantly derailing our discussions is immoral at the very least.


Who is 'our'?
What a charmingly myopic chauvinistic attitude, awesome.

Quote:
stahrwe
As long as people like Sam Harris are allowed to make outrageous statements about Christainity should we not have the right to answer those charges in the forums where they are heralded? As I write this there is an ongoing discussion of one of SH's books taking place on BT. A discussion I have been told not to participate in. Now, it is objected to that I participate here.

And I am the one who has been called a hypocrit?


frank013 wrote:
You are a hypocrite; you do not see us disrupting your church service because we disagree with the creationist content… do you?


Many of you have expressed an opinion that you hate Christianity, long for the time when the world will be rid of it, and have expressed a desire to help that day come. In my view, that is reason enough to stand up ane point out your errors, and since when is doing so, in a discussion disruptive?

By the way, come on to church and disrupt if you wish. You would be welcome to stand up and say your piece.


frank013 wrote:
And make no mistake you do disrupt these conversations, you do not bring anything contrastive to the table in the vast majority of the topics that you post on... heck you will not even watch the video series of this very thread… yet you feel the need to comment on it (rather ignorantly I might add) in what appears to be an attempt to derail any constructive dialog.


I don't know what to say to this. I have hundreds of pages where I have proposed contrasting information about creationism, epistemology, TEoG, Genesis, Exodus. I take exception to your statement and, in fact, most of my arguments are met not with contrasting argument but with, "is not," repeated over and over. This discussion is a good example. I posted two articles challenging the views expressed here about Marcion and the movie Zeitgeist. The response was not a discussion but another, 'is not,'


frank013 wrote:
Furthermore, you break the rules about preaching and quoting the whole of previous posts with apparently no respect for your fellow BT members, or the owner, who has warned you about such nonsense… furthermore you do not seem capable of learning, you keep regurgitating the same old, tired claims even when they have been refuted beyond all reason… you will not accept the intellectual/academic professional standards of evidence which everyone here but you subscribes to… showing us all that give and take discourse with you is impossible… you want us to accept your side of things but dismiss our information out of hand… even though our information is intellectually sound… unlike yours.


You mean reproducing this post in its entirety? Fact is, I don't know how to respond other than point by point which requies the reproduction. And, once again, my claims have not bee refuted, in fact I have been told several times that it is up to me to produce evidence. When I produce evidence it is immediately deemed not acceptable evidence. That is not refutation it is EVASION especially when no explanation of what acceptable evidence would be is proffered though such a definition is requested.

frank013 wrote:
In short everyone here gives (at least) a little in their positions… except you… who apparently has the “ultimate truth”

Yes you are a hypocrite.

Later


I never said I wasn't a hypocrite. I merely accused you of being one. I don't understand what about my participation in BT would qualify me for that appelation while in your case it is claiming to be a free thinker when you are not.


_________________
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.


Sat Jan 22, 2011 11:31 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4898
Location: Florida
Thanks: 177
Thanked: 344 times in 294 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Dexter wrote:
tat tvam asi wrote:
If no one ever quoted Stahrwe's posts and ignored him when he quotes the rest of us posting to one another and tries to butt into our posts, the troll will eventually die of starvation. I've seen a few trolls die like that at the Joseph Campbell foundation.


Good idea, I have resisted the temptation to address any more of the nonsense. He will think that means I have run out of arguments -- so be it. After all, to use Richard Dawkins' effective analogy, we wouldn't bother debating someone who insists they have a relationship with Thor, would we?

It's one thing to debate a reasonable theist, but a young earth creationist who thinks the Bible is infallible, all the while posting pages of crap from other sites? Worse than a total waste of time.


How many hospitals were founded in honor of Thor,
How many charities?
How many orphanages?
How many univerisities?
How many Churches?
How many Contatas?
How many great works of art?
How many alcoholics lives turned around?
How many Gospels?
...


_________________
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.


Sat Jan 22, 2011 11:35 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4898
Location: Florida
Thanks: 177
Thanked: 344 times in 294 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
tat tvam asi wrote:
The bit about someone believing they have a personal relationship with Thor really drives it home. That really is the same utter nonsense we're facing here. That's the whole mythicist position in a nut shell - there's no reason to treat the Sumerian, Egyptian, Babylonian, Hindu, and Greek Gods and Godmen one way and give special pleading to the biblical myths. Especially considering how blatantly flimsy these gospel myths are in particular. The supernaturalism grew and evolved with time. The evidence shows as much. The editions to the texts completely give it away. And I really do think that there will come a day when people believing they have personal relationship with Jesus will become akin to those who would believe the same of Thor, or Zeus, or Horus, etc. This is a very pivotal time in history in my opinion. The evidence such as what we've seen in this video series (those who actually watched) should only gain in popularity.

I brought it here to BT because of the high level intellectual heavy weights that frequent these forums. Despite Stahrwe BT is a powerhouse in terms of comprehension and I'm glad that Robert turned me and the others from the FTN onto it. Stahrwe isn't strong enough to ruin the good thing you all have going. That's why I've quoted him as "Stahrweak". That about summarizes the arguments he brings. In the case of this thread he's been about the worst representation for the bible that I could imagine. These stupid apologies turn the youth away from the faith. That's what these liar's for the lord fail to understand. They hurt the faith far more than preserve and support it. Imagine some youths reading through this thread after having watched the video series first. What would Stahrwe look like to them? A powerhouse who represents the truth, the light, the strength, or some bumbling idiot blind as hell trying to act as a guide? The youth can see this for what it is. And it's hurting the fundamentalists cause. I was one of those youths whose eyes were opened by observing what happens to our apologists in debate and interogation. They are not wise, not strong, not powerful, and therfore not supported by any all powerful, all knowing, ever present God. It's the very opposite...


The Thor thing is weak as shown above. The intellectual heavy weight is a dream as shown by the restriction on participation on book discussion to only those people who won't point out obvious errors in books. The fact that TEoG ignored THE foundational event in Jewish history, an event that provided a different, and contradictory explanation to the premise of the book, and that the author of the book punted the question when asked, IMHO shows the .... well, nevermind.


_________________
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.


Sat Jan 22, 2011 11:40 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor
Book Discussion Leader

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 5880
Location: Canberra
Thanks: 2335
Thanked: 2256 times in 1705 posts
Gender: Male
Country: Australia (au)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
I would like to restate and add to two main arguments that I have made earlier in this thread.

1. Christianity has a hidden cosmic sub-text that provides a high level of explanatory power for the documents and the history. The idea of Jesus Christ as the avatar of the Age of Pisces has a simple empirical foundation in the observation that the spring equinox precessed from the constellation of Aries into the constellation of Pisces at the time of Christ. Astrology was very widespread in the ancient Roman world, and provides the empirical and symbolic basis for the Christian Gnostic idea of the Aeon, or age, that pervades the New Testament. This empirical vision of Ages of the Zodiac has an elegant, simple, systematic and parsimonious match to the vision of Jesus Christ as the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end. We do not need to buy into any astrological claims to see that this is the most persuasive scientific explanation of why the Bible writers thought as they did. If we start from this empirical cosmic framework we can start to see how an original Docetic faith in Christ as cosmic redeemer was corrupted into literal history by the church. Docetism, the ancient heresy that Jesus is just a spirit, was systematically eliminated from view and from history by the power of the church, but provides a compelling explanation of the hidden cosmic foundations of Christian faith. Once the church had climbed to the top of the Docetic ladder they kicked it away as it no longer served their purpose.

2. Fraudulent revision of history is rife. I have referred to the classic novel Don Quixote by Cervantes and his mocking claim that the fictional romances of medieval chivalry, where knights in shining armour save damsels in distress, are just as true as holy scripture. The fictional method that was so wildly popular in the Middle Ages contained as a major element the claim that its stories were historically true, and had often been found in some dusty cupboard by the writer. This method did not come from nowhere, but builds upon the foundation of 'holy scripture', and the observation that the success of the Bible rested on its purported authenticity. If you admit you are making it up no one will listen, except as entertainment like science fiction. As Orwell says, 'who controls the present controls the past; who controls the past controls the future." The claim that fictional texts are historically accurate is an immensely powerful means of exercising social control. The decisive innovation in the New Testament was the realisation that a purely mythic or Docetic account of a saving Christ lacked popular traction as a basis for a new mass religion. By including as part of the myth that the story was historically factual, the church suddenly found a political power that an accurate account would have lacked. This is why Saint Paul's epistles, if read as the founding texts, are basically compatible with a Docetic spiritual reading of Christ, but readers of Paul, buying into the cosmic vision of Colossians 1:16 ("For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth") saw that this cosmic Christ was impotent until he was historized. As a result they elaborated the entirely fictional accounts of Jesus Christ that we have in the Gospels.

These points illustrate the complexity of understanding and discussing this material. You could say that my account here is entirely atheistic, as it seeks to explain Christian origins in purely natural terms. However, that is too simplistic. I feel that many atheists have a big chip on their shoulder about Christian faith, an anger about themselves and others being deceived, leading to the popular atheist agenda of saying that Christianity is entirely wrong and baseless. I prefer to argue that the Bible allows us to see "through a glass darkly", dimly groping towards an actual cosmic vision that has been forgotten and suppressed but in truth sits at the foundation and origin of Christian faith as the ultimate source of its power and truth.



The following user would like to thank Robert Tulip for this post:
Frank 013, Penelope, tat tvam asi, Vishnu
Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:35 am
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reading Addict


Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1367
Location: Florida
Thanks: 581
Thanked: 549 times in 411 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Yeah Robert, it does appear that a symbolic gnostic oriented teaching was given historical trappings over time which resulted in the pauline epistles, Marcions gospel, and then the Gospels all showing up into the historical record during the second century. The cosmic symbols are there and the Gnostics used cosmic symbolism based on old teachings from the Babylonians, Greeks, Egyptians, and Vedic Yugas. John for instance, appears to be an Alexandrian creation aimed at bringing Gnostics into the orthodoxy. And it appears into history during the second century. That's Stahrwe's great evangelical roots. The roots are grounded in lies and corruption. And so how surprising was it in the Joe Coffey thread when I took out the bible and challenged Stahrwe's boastful evangelical claims, all of which boiled down to taking the bible out of context to promote a lie. The whole evangelical movement amounts to nothing short of a corrupt agenda from the very beginning. A tough pill to swallow for boastful evangelicals no doubt...


_________________
YEC theory put to rest!!!

https://www.ex-christian.net/


The following user would like to thank tat tvam asi for this post:
Frank 013, Vishnu
Sun Jan 23, 2011 12:31 pm
Profile Email
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Genuinely Genius

Silver Contributor

Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 800
Location: Maine
Thanks: 45
Thanked: 178 times in 129 posts
Gender: Female
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Just to remind us where we are at, Tat posted this start to the thread:

"Here's an excellent video series outlining the problem of first century Gospel dating. I'm posting the 25 part series and it's well worth watching for those interested in understanding the ins and outs of why first century dating is based on wishful thinking at best:"

The very first response to this was from Stahrwe and this is what he said:
"More trash?"

Who is bullying who here?



The following user would like to thank lady of shallot for this post:
Frank 013, tat tvam asi
Sun Jan 23, 2011 12:37 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
pets endangered by possible book avalanche

Diamond Contributor

Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 4898
Location: Florida
Thanks: 177
Thanked: 344 times in 294 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
lady of shallot wrote:
Just to remind us where we are at, Tat posted this start to the thread:

"Here's an excellent video series outlining the problem of first century Gospel dating. I'm posting the 25 part series and it's well worth watching for those interested in understanding the ins and outs of why first century dating is based on wishful thinking at best:"

The very first response to this was from Stahrwe and this is what he said:
"More trash?"

Who is bullying who here?


Lady,

I am going to give you the 'benefit of the doubt' that your quoting me out of context was innocent, rather than the continuation of a tendency common to posts. What I actully said was;

Quote:
Stahrwe post

More trash?

Jerusalem was destroyed in 70AD.
70 AD is during the First Century
Why is there no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in the NT if it was written in the
Second Century?

This ought to be good.


The post is not bullying. It is not directed at Tat but at the premise. Understand that Tat's MO is to continue a discussion until he is cornered, then to take a tangent and begin a new thread. Normally the thread has a provocative title, (like, The End of Creationism) or something like that. It is an attempt to bait me to a new discussion. Usually it is successful but sometimes I'll choose to ignore them liked the multiple examples of such posts which recently appeared.

In the case of this discussion, Tat has no proof as to when the NT was written, but to date it to late second century is not tennable and is opposed by all mainstream scholars. Unfortunately, we can't discuss the subject seriously since there is no transcript of the videos he posted. This is a tactic so he can post outrageos claims and not have to defend them. It is something he has done before and what amazes me is that the participants let him get away with it.

Finally, I have been criticized for posting full posts I am responding to. Your truncated version of my first post is an example of why I do that. It is only fair to let the full post I am responding to be considered while by response is read.

Who is complaing about bullying? I am complaining about the lack of rigor.


_________________
n=Infinity
Sum n = -1/12
n=1

where n are natural numbers.


Sun Jan 23, 2011 2:36 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Worthy of Worship


Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2021
Location: NY
Thanks: 560
Thanked: 171 times in 118 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Quote:
Tat
I'm sure that with time there won't be very many people left who would even think the NT was written in the first century. Especially not with all of the evidence out there that GodAlmighty provided in the series which is out there and available.

It’s funny but when I talk to most Christians about the Bible they don’t generally even know what was happening in the first century… and when shown the available evidence readily accept a second century dating of the scripture… it simply makes no difference to most common Christians from what I have seen… of course they almost always also admit that their belief is one of faith so the particulars of dating and lack of evidence in the 1st century do not bother them in the least either.

I also have to admit the way that GodAlmighty handles the “Q” document was masterly… I really did enjoy the series… and was pleased to see that his sources all checked out… he really did do his homework on this one…

Later


_________________
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


The following user would like to thank Frank 013 for this post:
tat tvam asi, Vishnu
Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:21 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Worthy of Worship


Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2021
Location: NY
Thanks: 560
Thanked: 171 times in 118 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Quote:
Tat
It does appear that a symbolic Gnostic oriented teaching was given historical trappings over time which resulted in the Pauline epistles, Marcions gospel, and then the Gospels all showing up into the historical record during the second century. The cosmic symbols are there and the Gnostics used cosmic symbolism based on old teachings from the Babylonians, Greeks, Egyptians, and Vedic Yugas. John for instance, appears to be an Alexandrian creation aimed at bringing Gnostics into the orthodoxy. And it appears into history during the second century. That's Stahrwe's great evangelical roots. The roots are grounded in lies and corruption.


You know, looking back I wondered why these facts were not brought to light and challenged earlier in modern history… then I looked at the credentials of most of the historians and scholars in the biblical field of study…

As I am sure you already know the vast majority of them are religious and many are high members of the Christian church… of course they would not question the lack of evidence… they already believed… in essence these claims never left the authority of the church who made them.


It is only now when less biased eyes look at their “evidence” is the real picture being brought to light.


So yes I agree “The roots are grounded in lies and corruption.” and would have remained so had secular scholars not taken a second look at the claims and evidence made by the obviously prejudiced biblical supporters.

I am glad I am alive to see these antiquated and false claims steadily being shown the door out of the historical record.

Later


_________________
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


The following user would like to thank Frank 013 for this post:
Robert Tulip, tat tvam asi, Vishnu
Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:51 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Reading Addict


Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1367
Location: Florida
Thanks: 581
Thanked: 549 times in 411 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Yes Frank, that's a real strong point. And that sort of grains into what I was saying about the pivotal times we're living in. Stahrwe has been mentioning that a lie doesn't last, as if that's evidence for the truth of Christianity. The problem is that Christianity is in decline. The churches are emptying out. If a lie doesn't last, and Christianity has long since peaked and is now in decline, then the lie isn't lasting. Stahrwe's both right and wrong - a lie doesn't last, but Christianity is the lie that won't last. Quite the double edged sword in that sense.

I think that more freethinkers need to flood the field of NT scholarship. It would be refreshing to see more and more Robert Prices showing up in years to come. There's many younger kids taking an interest in this debate that it's quite possible to start seeing atheist and agnostic's getting involved in NT scholarship. It would certainly bring more of a balance to what has generally been an extremely biased Christian dominated field.


_________________
YEC theory put to rest!!!

https://www.ex-christian.net/


The following user would like to thank tat tvam asi for this post:
Frank 013, Vishnu
Sun Jan 23, 2011 4:43 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Worthy of Worship


Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2021
Location: NY
Thanks: 560
Thanked: 171 times in 118 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The NT was written in the 2nd century
Quote:
Tat
I think that more freethinkers need to flood the field of NT scholarship. It would be refreshing to see more and more Robert Prices showing up in years to come. There's many younger kids taking an interest in this debate that it's quite possible to start seeing atheist and agnostic's getting involved in NT scholarship. It would certainly bring more of a balance to what has generally been an extremely biased Christian dominated field.

It’s funny you should mention that… it seems that atheists/rationalists are coming out of the woodwork lately… several admitted as much to me when my views went public at work… and I am in good company… they are extremely smart people… every one.

And several are young as you mention… they all have a keen interest in the claims made in the biblical literature and history in general… and they also all see the fact that those claims are lacking by academic/intellectual standards… They have also voiced wonder as to why no one has taken a serious look at the problems with Christian doctrine in the past… but they have little experience with the stigma of being on the outside of the flock... I guess it must be nice to live in a more tolerant generation...

I’ll say this though, the lack of honesty and integrity concerning the evidence from scholars in the past is mind boggling... to them and to me.

At any rate the young do seem to want religion less and less, just like in the western European countries… it just seems to be taking longer here… but at least it is happening. Let’s just hope the churches do not get too stupid before they die entirely.

Later


_________________
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


The following user would like to thank Frank 013 for this post:
Vishnu
Sun Jan 23, 2011 5:07 pm
Profile Email
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 522 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 ... 35  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:



Site Resources 
HELPFUL INFO:
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!

IDEAS FOR WHAT TO READ:
Bestsellers
Book Awards
• Book Reviews
• Online Books
• Team Picks
Newspaper Book Sections

WHERE TO BUY BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

BEHIND THE BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

PROMOTE YOUR BOOK!
Advertise on BookTalk.org
How To Promote Your Book





BookTalk.org is a thriving book discussion forum, online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a community. Our forums are open to anyone in the world. While discussing books is our passion we also have active forums for talking about poetry, short stories, writing and authors. Our general discussion forum section includes forums for discussing science, religion, philosophy, politics, history, current events, arts, entertainment and more. We hope you join us!


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSOUR BOOKSAUTHOR INTERVIEWSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICYSITEMAP

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism Books

Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2019. All rights reserved.
Display Pagerank