Discover Islam

General discussions about Christianity including salvation, heaven and hell, Christian history and so on.
User avatar
atheist
Recognized Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:59 am

Post by atheist »

The author has a right to blame skeptics and liberal Christians. When one uses the same standard for testing the bible's origins on it as they do on other works, the conservatives are right. But skeptics and liberals put the bible to unreasonable "tests" just to prove their point. They think that unless we have the original manuscripts, we're wrong. nobody EVER does that with ancient writings. The oldest writings of Homer that we have are 800 years after he died, yet nobody doubts that he wrote them.
Ask any Ancient Greek scholar, Mastermind. Nobody claims proofs of Homer's existence and the standards for testing are similar. We only mention a "Homer" because Ancient Greeks did and believed in his existence. It's a big difference. My own Greek teacher used to refer to the composer or composers of the Iliad and the Odyssey as "whoever made the poems".
User avatar
atheist
Recognized Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:59 am

Post by atheist »

Keep in mind there are a lot of scholars who set out to definitively disprove the gospels and once they gained the understanding that would be required to do so, they became Christians!
Keep in mind that it often happens the other way around :wink:
User avatar
Mastermind
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1410
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 3:22 pm

Post by Mastermind »

Then those greek scholars are ignorant of the fact that knowledge was transmitted through oral means for most of ancient history, and it has been proven to be extremely reliable. Your Greek teacher should stop assuming that the ancients were similar to us and thought in a similar way because it's far from the truth. People today want a dated document before they admit there is "proof" it exists. Oral transmission in ancient times is proof enough for me.
Are you threatening me Master Skeptic?
User avatar
atheist
Recognized Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:59 am

Post by atheist »

Mastermind, those scholars actually has proven the grade of reliability of oral transmission. But oral transmission only applies to the integrity of the text, and this does not constitute a guarantee of the identity of the author or the events accounted in the text.
User avatar
Mastermind
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1410
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 3:22 pm

Post by Mastermind »

Actually, memorising the name of the author is the easiest part... It's not that difficult. Author writes it. People begin memorising it right away if it really is so important (and the Apostles and Homer were important to their particular faiths), the least they could do is memorise their names.
Are you threatening me Master Skeptic?
Christian2
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 991
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:27 am

Felgar, you are welcome

Post by Christian2 »

At one time I decided to harmonize the resurrection accounts myself. I found that I became cross-eyed very quickly. lol

These sites were a God send to me. What is the quote from the movie 'Philadelphia'? Something like, "For every problem there is a solution." I think that when we are dealing with eyewitness accounts, we can expect some inconsistencies.

God bless.
Anonymous

Post by Anonymous »

Atheist if your gonna argue against something, you could at least have your facts straight. Paul calls himself a Christian and Paul claims he saw Jesus, which I believe considering his transformation. I mean perhaps you should do some research on Paul, instead of trying to "disprove the NT".
If you don't want to believe something go out and say it cause it doesn't matter what you or your Atheist buddies think about the validity of the Texts.
Post Reply