Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Off Topic > Off Topic - General


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 10-07-2017, 10:46 PM   #4051
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Even if it did, you'd still say that "scripture proves nothing"! So why ask?

Do you know what logical inferences are? Have you ever in your entire life made any such inferences from books you're read? From movies or plays you've watched? Having said that, however, Paul clearly states that he was a Jew in various places in his epistles. Also, all of Christ's chosen apostles were Jews. None of his apostles were Gentiles. Therefore, Peter, James, John, etc. were Jewish writers of the NT.
So nowhere in the NT does the text specifically identify who the writers were. Correct?
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 02:21 PM   #4052
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
So nowhere in the NT does the text specifically identify who the writers were. Correct?
Good grief! You can't even comprehend simple English. Let me put it to you another way to see if you can connect some dots.

1. Paul identifies himself as a Jew in a few places in the NT.

2. Paul also identifies himself as the writer of several NT books.

3. As for the rest of the writers, they must have been messianic Jews since they extensively quote the OT to support their NT theology. A big bunch of Gentiles would not have had this kind of knowledge of Old Covenant Judaism or the OT. (In case you have a difficult time understanding the implications to this, this means that NT theology is solidly grounded in the OT. In other words, the NT writers didn't pull their NT theology out of their rear ends.)

4. Two more reasons that strongly favor Jewish authorship of the NT (again, save for Luke's two canonical works) is that Jesus was Jewish, was born in Israel and personally chose 12 Jewish men for his apostles at the beginning of his ministry; and He also promised 11 of these 12 very late in his ministry that He would soon send the Holy Spirit to them to receive additional divine revelation after He was gone.

Happy Columbus Day, by the way, in case I forget.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 03:30 PM   #4053
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
1. Paul identifies himself as a Jew in a few places in the NT.
2. Paul also identifies himself as the writer of several NT books.
Paul's existence is even more questionable than Jesus's.

Pseudepigraphic works were common at the time. Even if the author identifies himself as a specific person in the text that does not mean it's true. A. Conan Doyle is not the fictitious Doctor John Watson. Of the 14 traditional Pauline letters scholars attribute, through textual analysis, only 7 to Paul. Even then the analysis only confirms that those seven had a common author who may or may not have been Paul.

Paul and pseudopigrapha aside do any of the authors of the non-Pauline letters identify themselves in the text?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
3. As for the rest of the writers, they must have been messianic Jews since they extensively quote the OT to support their NT theology. A big bunch of Gentiles would not have had this kind of knowledge of Old Covenant Judaism or the OT.
Why not? I know people who have an extensive knowledge of The Lord of the Rings, or of the Harry Potter books, Sherlock Holmes, Agatha Christie books, the Star Wars movies, Star Trek (both generations). All it takes is being passionate about the subject, and a bunch of religious nuts inevitably will be very passionate. So a bunch of Gentiles could very easily have an extensive knowledge of the OT, particularly since (as you point out) it was available in Greek.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
4. Two more reasons that strongly favor Jewish authorship of the NT (again, save for Luke's two canonical works) is that Jesus was Jewish, was born in Israel and personally chose 12 Jewish men for his apostles at the beginning of his ministry; and He also promised 11 of these 12 very late in his ministry that He would soon send the Holy Spirit to them to receive additional divine revelation after He was gone.
Scripture proves nothing.

I am struck by the geography of the letters. With the exception of the letters to the Hebrews are they not all addressed to churches in Italy, Greece and Asia minor? If so that would be a strong indicator that the religion was Greek, partly based on Judaism to be sure, but Greek nonetheless.
__________________
Sapere aude

Last edited by Actor; 10-08-2017 at 03:35 PM.
Actor is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 04:55 PM   #4054
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Paul's existence is even more questionable than Jesus's.

Pseudepigraphic works were common at the time. Even if the author identifies himself as a specific person in the text that does not mean it's true. A. Conan Doyle is not the fictitious Doctor John Watson. Of the 14 traditional Pauline letters scholars attribute, through textual analysis, only 7 to Paul. Even then the analysis only confirms that those seven had a common author who may or may not have been Paul.

Paul and pseudopigrapha aside do any of the authors of the non-Pauline letters identify themselves in the text?
Why not? I know people who have an extensive knowledge of The Lord of the Rings, or of the Harry Potter books, Sherlock Holmes, Agatha Christie books, the Star Wars movies, Star Trek (both generations). All it takes is being passionate about the subject, and a bunch of religious nuts inevitably will be very passionate. So a bunch of Gentiles could very easily have an extensive knowledge of the OT, particularly since (as you point out) it was available in Greek.
Scripture proves nothing.

I am struck by the geography of the letters. With the exception of the letters to the Hebrews are they not all addressed to churches in Italy, Greece and Asia minor? If so that would be a strong indicator that the religion was Greek, partly based on Judaism to be sure, but Greek nonetheless.
Methinks you are struck by much more than geography.

Luke 20:17-18
17 But He looked at them and said, "What then is this that is written,

'The stone which the builders rejected,
This became the chief corner stone'?

18 "Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust."

NASB

Your mind is like fragmented pieces which accounts for all your loonie theories. Christ is such a huge stumbling to you, you have fallen on that Rock and he has destroyed your mind.

Why would the pagan Greeks go to all the trouble to gain such intimate, extensive knowledge of the OT scriptures? Why would a "bunch of guys" who weren't monotheistic in their worldview care a whit about Old Covenant Judaism? What was their motive? What was in it for them?

Again, prove your theory that other people wrote all the Pauline epistles.

Thirdly, the fact that the vast majority of the epistles were written to believers outside ancient Palestine proves the veracity of scripture, since both the OT and New predicted that the Gospel of Salvation would go to the Gentiles. So, it makes perfectly good sense that the vast majority of epistles would be directed to churches outside Palestine. Do not forget, sir, that the kingdom of God was taken from Israel and given to another nation -- this "nation" being the Church consisting largely of Gentile believers. The Gospel originated in Jerusalem, then all of Judea, then spread north to Samaria and eventually to the "remotest part of the earth" (Act 1:8). In other words, it was God-fearing, pious, messianic Jews who initially preached the gospel for the forgiveness of sins; and Paul was specifically designated as the apostle to the Gentiles, his three missionary journeys accounting for a very large percentage of Gentile conversions to Christianity. And if you read the Book of Acts, this is precisely how Christianity spread throughout the whole world per 1:8

Finally, you have to explain how those "bunch of guys" (pagan Greeks) were able to get their message in 100% sync -- to not only agree with each other but to agree with OT theology -- that even most Jews themselves couldn't agree upon. They would have had to conspire and collaborate with each other and they would have had to have had a super-intelligent redactor to get everything to harmonize.

Both scripture and Occam's Razor says the simplest, most straightforward explanation for NT authorship is in all likelihood the best and most coherent explanation.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 05:11 PM   #4055
dnlgfnk
Registered User
 
dnlgfnk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: St. Louis suburb
Posts: 1,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Yeah..."presuppositions" that just happen to be in agreement with the "presuppositions" of several other writers. Okay...gotcha.

By the way...do you know how "religion "come to dominate our species"? Can you shed any light on that "great mystery"? Would the bible, per chance, have anything to say about that?
That you could not deduce that in my statement, I was a qualified ally of yours is my fault. Sorry for the invective in the first sentence.
__________________
"I like to come here (Saratoga) every year to visit my money." ---Joe E. Lewis
dnlgfnk is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 08:20 PM   #4056
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Luke 20:17-18
17 But He looked at them and said, "What then is this that is written,

'The stone which the builders rejected,
This became the chief corner stone'?

18 "Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust."

NASB
Scripture proves nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Your mind is like fragmented pieces which accounts for all your loonie theories. Christ is such a huge stumbling to you, you have fallen on that Rock and he has destroyed your mind.
"Then He is malevolent" - Epicurus

Also an ad hominem attack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Why would the pagan Greeks go to all the trouble to gain such intimate, extensive knowledge of the OT scriptures? Why would a "bunch of guys" who weren't monotheistic in their worldview care a whit about Old Covenant Judaism? What was their motive? What was in it for them?
See #4043.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Again, prove your theory that other people wrote all the Pauline epistles.
Same answer. I listed my sources. So go to work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Thirdly, the fact that the vast majority of the epistles were written to believers outside ancient Palestine proves the veracity of scripture, since both the OT and New predicted that the Gospel of Salvation would go to the Gentiles. So, it makes perfectly good sense that the vast majority of epistles would be directed to churches outside Palestine. Do not forget, sir, that the kingdom of God was taken from Israel and given to another nation -- this "nation" being the Church consisting largely of Gentile believers.
Fallacy of Circular Reasoning. Scripture proves nothing, particular when used to verify itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
The Gospel originated in Jerusalem, ...
How do you know that? The first gospel was Mark, written around 70 C.E. at the earliest by an anonymous author. When and where it was written is unknown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
... then all of Judea, then spread north to Samaria and eventually to the "remotest part of the earth" (Act 1:8). In other words, it was God-fearing, pious, messianic Jews who initially preached the gospel for the forgiveness of sins; ...
Again, how do you know that without invoking circular reasoning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
... and Paul was specifically designated as the apostle to the Gentiles, ...
By whom? If you say "God" then prove it. You can't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
... his three missionary journeys accounting for a very large percentage of Gentile conversions to Christianity.
Do you have numbers? If so from what source?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
And if you read the Book of Acts, this is precisely how Christianity spread throughout the whole world per 1:8
Christian propaganda. There is no reason to believe any of it. There is no reason to believe that Christianity spread more rapidly than Mormonism or Scientology. Do you have numbers? If so, from what source?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Finally, you have to explain how those "bunch of guys" (pagan Greeks) were able to get their message in 100% sync -- to not only agree with each other but to agree with OT theology -- that even most Jews themselves couldn't agree upon.
Their message is not in sync. You admitted as much in Religion I.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
They would have had to conspire and collaborate with each other and they would have had to have had a super-intelligent redactor to get everything to harmonize.
#4043!
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Both scripture and Occam's Razor says the simplest, most straightforward explanation for NT authorship is in all likelihood the best and most coherent explanation.
Fallacy of Argument From Ignorance.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 09:19 PM   #4057
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnlgfnk View Post
That you could not deduce that in my statement, I was a qualified ally of yours is my fault. Sorry for the invective in the first sentence.
Well...here's a chance to make up. Do you believe what Jerry Coyne said, " "We still remain profoundly ignorant of how religion came to dominate our species"? Are you truly a dyed-in-the-wool agnostic on this subject? Are you "profoundly ignorant", as he says you are?
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline  
Old 10-08-2017, 09:32 PM   #4058
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
Scripture proves nothing.
"Then He is malevolent" - Epicurus

Also an ad hominem attack.
See #4043.
Same answer. I listed my sources. So go to work.
Fallacy of Circular Reasoning. Scripture proves nothing, particular when used to verify itself.
How do you know that? The first gospel was Mark, written around 70 C.E. at the earliest by an anonymous author. When and where it was written is unknown.
Again, how do you know that without invoking circular reasoning.
By whom? If you say "God" then prove it. You can't.
Do you have numbers? If so from what source?
Christian propaganda. There is no reason to believe any of it. There is no reason to believe that Christianity spread more rapidly than Mormonism or Scientology. Do you have numbers? If so, from what source?
Their message is not in sync. You admitted as much in Religion I.
#4043!
Fallacy of Argument From Ignorance.
You're lying again. I never admitted any such thing. I have long maintained that the entire bible is one cohesive, homogeneous body of literature with one central story line that revolves around one person, the Lord Jesus Christ.

And, yes, scripture does prove the above! For example, I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim that Jesus Christ failed the two tests of a true prophet that is explained in Deuteronomy 13 and 18.

And, yes, scripture does validate itself through many different writers over many centuries. Therefore, there is no possibility of circular reasoning.

And it you and your sources of "proof" that is guilty of circular reasoning. You don't believe anything scripture says because the supernatural isn't possible. For example, you and your vaunted sources don't believe in the resurrection of Christ becuase of your a priori rejection of the supernautral. So...you should be the last one to accuse anyone on this forum of circualr reasoning.

You are so screwed up in your head that you contradict yourself in this paragraph:

Quote:
How do you know that? The first gospel was Mark, written around 70 C.E. at the earliest by an anonymous author. When and where it was written is unknown.
In the first sentence you tell us that Mark was written "around 70 C.E.", then in the very next breath boldly proclaim that when and were it was written is unknown. You know "when" but you don't know "when"? That Rock has truly done a number on your head!

No, Christ is not malevolent. Christ is the righteous judge of all mankind. If he has given you over to a reprobate mind, it is only because he has given you what you deserve.

Finally, Mark is a biblical character mentioned in other places in the NT. Whatever Mark wrote is in complete agreement with the Old and New Testaments. (Some con-man!) Mark's motivation for writing his Gospel was that he was a believer and the Holy Spirit inspired him to record various events in Christ's life -- most likely a great deal of his material was gleaned from his bosom buddy Peter. (We discussed their relationship once in the old Religion thread.)

You need to provide a coherent argument for how a "bunch of [anonymous, unknown] guys separated by distance" (your phrase in 4043, save for what is in brackets) were able to write all that they did and be in complete agreement with each another, AND also be in total agreement with the OT scriptures that they very often quoted or alluded to in support of their NT theology. Pleading ignorance about how religions are started is not an argument but another lame excuse of yours. Nor do phony timelines explain how all your alleged anonymous NT writers were able to avoid tripping over each other in contradictions or how they avoided contradicting OT theology. (Or maybe they wrote the OT, too?) I know how Judaism started and how Christianity flowed from Old Covenant Judaism by Christ fulfilling all the covenant and prophetic promises contained in the OT, save for the Parousia and all the events that will attend that. Christianity is nothing less than fulfilled Old Covenant Judaism.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 01:34 AM   #4059
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor
You admitted as much in Religion I.
You're lying again. I never admitted any such thing.
Yes, you did. In post #4295 of Religion I you said
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar
The bible has never failed to pass the test of the Law of Non-Contradiction on any doctrinal issues.
You back pedaled on your claim by limiting it to "doctrinal issues." That allows you to dismiss any contradiction as not being a doctrinal issue.
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 01:41 AM   #4060
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
In the first sentence you tell us that Mark was written "around 70 C.E.", then in the very next breath boldly proclaim that when and were it was written is unknown. You know "when" but you don't know "when"? That Rock has truly done a number on your head!
J.M.F.C! Do I have to spell out all the details? O.K. I should have written "was allegedly written." I really thought you were smart enough to figure that out. Happy now?
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 02:55 AM   #4061
dnlgfnk
Registered User
 
dnlgfnk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: St. Louis suburb
Posts: 1,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
Well...here's a chance to make up. Do you believe what Jerry Coyne said, " "We still remain profoundly ignorant of how religion came to dominate our species"? Are you truly a dyed-in-the-wool agnostic on this subject? Are you "profoundly ignorant", as he says you are?
In my reply to Actor (#4043), I responded to the first entry, entitled "Origins of religion...Why do human beings tend to be religious? The answer is found in Darwinian evolution"... by citing champion-of-Darwinism Jerry Coyne ("Why Evolution Is True") from his own blog, which you restated above. You don't need to plant your scriptural flag in the ground. Just have Coyne's "profoundly ignorant" challenge Actor's "the answer is found...".

No, I am not "agnostic about this subject". I am with Augustine...“Thou hast made us for thyself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it finds its rest in thee.” I have found this to be true most of all when experiencing the self-sacrificing, unconditional love I have for my wife and children and them for me, which in my reading (your interlocutor once compared his love ["behavior pattern"] for his wife to his "love" for his car), hearing, comparing and contrasting, most corresponds (analogously) to the inner life of the Trinity, as opposed to the other major core explanations for my existence from Judaism, Islam, the Far East, and materialism, et.al.
__________________
"I like to come here (Saratoga) every year to visit my money." ---Joe E. Lewis
dnlgfnk is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 03:49 AM   #4062
Actor
Librocubicularist
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxcar View Post
I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim that Jesus Christ failed the two tests of a true prophet that is explained in Deuteronomy 13 and 18.
There are two tests:
  • The prophet promises to perform "wonders", i.e., miracles.
  • The prophet calls upon his people to follow other gods.
If the alleged prophet fails either he is a false prophet? Right?
__________________
Sapere aude
Actor is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 11:20 AM   #4063
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnlgfnk View Post
In my reply to Actor (#4043), I responded to the first entry, entitled "Origins of religion...Why do human beings tend to be religious? The answer is found in Darwinian evolution"... by citing champion-of-Darwinism Jerry Coyne ("Why Evolution Is True") from his own blog, which you restated above. You don't need to plant your scriptural flag in the ground. Just have Coyne's "profoundly ignorant" challenge Actor's "the answer is found...".

No, I am not "agnostic about this subject". I am with Augustine...“Thou hast made us for thyself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it finds its rest in thee.” I have found this to be true most of all when experiencing the self-sacrificing, unconditional love I have for my wife and children and them for me, which in my reading (your interlocutor once compared his love ["behavior pattern"] for his wife to his "love" for his car), hearing, comparing and contrasting, most corresponds (analogously) to the inner life of the Trinity, as opposed to the other major core explanations for my existence from Judaism, Islam, the Far East, and materialism, et.al.
Glad to hear you don't buy into Coyne's nonsense. But neither do I buy into Augustine's explanation. It explains a Christian's spiritual experience but not that of a lost and dying, yet very religious world.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 11:28 AM   #4064
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
There are two tests:
  • The prophet promises to perform "wonders", i.e., miracles.
  • The prophet calls upon his people to follow other gods.
If the alleged prophet fails either he is a false prophet? Right?
Did you actually read Deut 18:20-22? As it is, you're only half way there.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline  
Old 10-09-2017, 11:30 AM   #4065
boxcar
Registered User
 
boxcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor View Post
J.M.F.C! Do I have to spell out all the details? O.K. I should have written "was allegedly written." I really thought you were smart enough to figure that out. Happy now?
I'm smart enough to know that when it comes to you, I take nothing for granted. After all, you are The Great Equivocator.
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
boxcar is offline  
Closed Thread




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.