|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2003 : 20:27:47 [Permalink]
|
Oh well... I only wish I had misspelled pizzas. I live for choices.... Kilbonics strikes again.... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
NottyImp
Skeptic Friend
United Kingdom
143 Posts |
Posted - 01/13/2003 : 04:57:19 [Permalink]
|
Going out with pizzas sounds an excellent plan. Something for friends and family to eat whilst they contemplate and celebrate your life. |
"My body is a temple - I desecrate it daily." |
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2003 : 20:49:25 [Permalink]
|
Slater: quote: Yes, the surviving Gospels say they are the truth and the Gnostic (there were other versions than just the Gnostic. I'm including them under the one title for the sake of brevity, and not accuracy) are not. So what? Today's gospel wasn't the original and the Gnostic perversions that came later. Both the Gnostic and the gospels you claim are true date from exactly the same time. There are also claims that the Gnostic are the original and surviving gospels a misunderstanding of the "mysteries" presented in the original causing them to incorrectly be presented as history and not religion.
First,I would like to know what source you used for both dating the NT and the Gnostic pervervisions of them.Secondly, as Imfamous pointed out within the Pauline letters (dated very early by most scholars AD 45-62) he was already refuting doctrines which went against an already establised set of historical criteria for "The Faith" by which the early church could compare to as to whether the new document should be accepted.Third,the existence of both The John Rylands Papyri(AD 125) and the writings of Ignatius,Polycarp all speak of an established orthodoxy before any the Gnostic writings were even in circulation.(edited for ref's.http://ntcanon.org/writings.shtml....http://ntcanon.org/). |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
Edited by - darwin alogos on 01/22/2003 21:46:22 |
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/04/2003 : 20:43:36 [Permalink]
|
Classical Scholar's have a very high regard for Luke's Historic Acts quote: Eyewitness Testimony in the New Testament Luke
Luke was an educated Greek, a doctor by profession. He wrote Luke and Acts which together account for two-fifths of the New Testament. He covers the period from the birth of Christ into the first thirty years of the story of the early church, a period of 60 years. His writing gives a historical context for the rest of the New Testament.
Luke's record as a historian
Luke's ability as a historian has been amply documented. There are numerous instances where he refers to rulers and historical events in his two books. These can be tested from other sources. It is interesting to note the number of times in which Luke has been thought to have been wrong in the particular titles he has given to rulers in certain countries or cities, and which later archaeological and other discoveries have proved to be right. Some examples are: reference to Philippian rulers as praetors, his choice of the word proconsul as the title for Gallio in Corinth, his describing of Publius as "the leading man of the island" in Malta, and his usage of politarchs to denote the civil authorities of Thessalonica. (He gets no less than fifteen Roman governor titles right.) Luke's accurate employment of the various titles used in the Roman Empire has been compared to the easy and confident way in which an Oxford man in ordinary conversation will refer to the Heads of Oxford colleges by their proper titles - the Provost of Oriel, the Master of Balliol, the Rector of Exeter, the President of Magdalen, and so on.
His accuracy in such details extends also to the more general sphere of local colour and atmosphere in such places as Jerusalem, Syrian Antioch, Philippi and Ephesus. He gets the atmosphere right every time. It is worth noting that the description of his sea voyage with Paul to Rome, and their shipwreck on Malta, in Acts 27, has been called "one of the most instructive documents for the knowledge of ancient seamanship" that we possess. There is, in fact, only one other document in existence that gives similar detail as to what sailing was like in those days. The eminent Roman historian A. N. Sherwin-White said of Acts:
Any attempt to reject its basic historicity, even in matters of detail, must now appear absurd.
Classical scholar E. M. Blaiklock said of Luke:
Luke is a consummate historian, to be ranked in his own right with the great writers of the Greeks.
|
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2003 : 03:55:01 [Permalink]
|
later:
quote:
Yes, the surviving Gospels say they are the truth and the Gnostic (there were other versions than just the Gnostic. I'm including them under the one title for the sake of brevity, and not accuracy) are not. So what? Today's gospel wasn't the original and the Gnostic perversions that came later. Both the Gnostic and the gospels you claim are true date from exactly the same time. There are also claims that the Gnostic are the original and surviving gospels a misunderstanding of the "mysteries" presented in the original causing them to incorrectly be presented as history and not religion.
First,I would like to know what source you used for both dating the NT and the Gnostic pervervisions of them.Secondly, as Imfamous pointed out within the Pauline letters (dated very early by most scholars AD 45-62) he was already refuting doctrines which went against an already establised set of historical criteria for "The Faith" by which the early church could compare to as to whether the new document should be accepted.Third,the existence of both The John Rylands Papyri(AD 125) and the writings of Ignatius,Polycarp all speak of an established orthodoxy before any the Gnostic writings were even in circulation.(edited for ref's.http://ntcanon.org/writings.shtml....http://ntcanon.org/). Still no answer Slater? |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2003 : 11:49:20 [Permalink]
|
No need for an answer. Once again you are resorting to lies, obviously you have no intention of taking this topic seriously |
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 02/22/2003 : 16:13:21 [Permalink]
|
Slater: quote: No need for an answer. Once again you are resorting to lies, obviously you have no intention of taking this topic seriously
And once again, old very predictable Slater,COULD YOU AT LEAST NAME ONE THING I LIED ABOUT? Or are you content to just slander at will? |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
|