Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.

Status
Not open for further replies.

DOC

Philosopher
D
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
7,959
In the "Do Most Atheists know that Science..." thread I mentioned Norman Geisler and Frank Turek's book called "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist" a few times because of its clear explanations of scientific theories. But, yes, they did talk about more than science.

In chapter 11 of their book they give the top 10 reasons we know the New Testament writers told the truth. I'll mention some of those reasons and maybe expound on them as time permits.

Reason #1

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves.

For example some passages portray the disciples as dim-witted, uncaring, and cowards.

Reason #2

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings of Jesus.

For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.

Reason #3

The NT Writers Left in Very Demanding Sayings of Jesus.

For example: (Matthew 5:28) "I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart".

And (Matt. 5:44-45) "I tell you Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you...

As the book says "They certainly didn't make up a story that made life easier for themselves."

Reason #9

The New Testament Writers Describe Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple, Unembellished Accounts.

If they made them up it would be likely that they would have used grandiose and extravagant images. The book says the gospels talk about the Resurrection in a matter of fact almost bland way.

Reason #10

The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death
 
Last edited:
It's good to see that their logical reasoning is of the same standard as their scientific theories.
 
Mashuna said:
It's good to see that their logical reasoning is of the same standard as their scientific theories.
Click to expand...

Posts like these mean nothing without a clear explanation. And if you want to talk "specifically" about their science explanations please do so in the other thread.
 
DOC said:
In chapter 11 of their book they give the top 10 reasons we know the New Testament writers told the truth. I'll mention some of those reasons and maybe expound on them as time permits.

*snip*

For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.
Click to expand...

So Jesus was a lying, drunken, demon-vessel?
 
You have surely been told before that putting words in capitals adds nothing to your arguments. The reverse if anything.
 
sphenisc said:
I dpn't think Emily Bronte ever claimed he was the Messiah, more a very naughty boy really.
Click to expand...

Fine point. However, I can't remember the ancient Gods doing much better, with all that whoring and incest.

One wonders why DOC doesn't support the family of Zeus, given their Jerry Springer status.
 
Hokulele said:
These are all reasons to believe the NT authors wrote what they believed was true, but it is not evidence that it was true.
Click to expand...

Here is the first definition of evidence according to answers.com:

"A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment"

The things posted in my first post are helpful in my forming a judgment that the NT writers were telling the truth.

And the more evidence we have that the NT authors were telling the truth, the more likely it is that the Resurrection was true.
 
This is not, strictly speaking, evidence; It's just a series of observations concerning the New Testament's coherency.

And given the process of translation, and the time that has passed since it was written, I doubt that present standards can be applied.
 
DOC said:
Here is the first definition of evidence according to answers.com:

"A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment"

The things posted in my first post are helpful in my forming a judgment that the NT writers were telling the truth.

And the more evidence we have that the NT authors were telling the truth, the more likely it is that the Resurrection was true.
Click to expand...

Do you have an understanding of the varying quality evidence can possess?
 
I'm reminded of the scene in "Tin Men" where Danny deVito's character secretly drops a five-dollar bill on the floor while he's trying to make a sale to a prospective aluminum siding buyer, then claims no knowledge of it when the customer notices it. Since only an honest man would do such a thing, this is intended to provide evidence to the customer that the salesman is honest. All the examples cited in the OP could potentially be used in exactly the same way by an intelligent con man seeking to provide evidence, internal to his testimony, that his testimony is reliable. The big difference is that most of the measures cited in the OP are five dollars cheaper.

Dave
 
Lothian said:
Doc,

Do the other 5 reasons provide any evidence or are they opinion as well ?
Click to expand...

Other than the last half of Reason # 9 the 5 reasons I gave in post #1 include all facts and no opinions.

ETA: and the other 5 reasons include all facts as well.
 
Last edited:
Hokulele said:
These are all reasons to believe the NT authors wrote what they believed was true, but it is not evidence that it was true.
Click to expand...

I'm convinced that some members of Heaven's Gate believed what they said they believed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(cult)

Six of the male members of the group, including Applewhite, voluntarily underwent castration as an extreme means of maintaining the ascetic lifestyle.
Click to expand...

And 38 committed suicide.

However, regardless of their strength of belief, they did not know the truth. Which is a pity. Because they were honest people and, if they had known the truth, I'm sure they would have shared it.
 
Last edited:
If these are the "TOP" reasons, Christian Apolegetics are sadly still pathetic.
All of these so called reasons are just reasons why the writers "believed" what they wrote was true, NOT a single thing about what being written about is true.

If you use these absurd criteria, the Koran and whole host of other religious texts must be true as well.
 
DOC said:
Other than the last half of Reason # 9 the 5 reasons I gave in post #1 include all facts and no opinions.
Click to expand...

Facts about what? That the authors believed what they were writing? So? How does that make the Bible true?
 
DOC said:
Reason #1

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves.

For example some passages portray the disciples as dim-witted, uncaring, and cowards.
Click to expand...
Not only that, this is the same reason I believe everything you post.
 
FireGarden said:
I'm convinced that some members of Heaven's Gate believed what they said they believed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(cult)



And 38 committed suicide.

However, regardless of their strength of belief, they did not know the truth. Which is a pity. Because they were honest people and, if they had known the truth, I'm sure they would have shared it.
Click to expand...

Well the bible does say that there will be false prophets that will deceive many.
 
DOC said:
Reason #1

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves.

For example some passages portray the disciples as dim-witted, uncaring, and cowards.
Click to expand...

More realistically this was to portray themselves as being inferior to Jesus. Hardly anyone would have believed in Christ's story if they portrayed themselves as being Christ's superiors.

DOC said:
Reason #2

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings of Jesus.

For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.
Click to expand...

Where are these embarrassing details at? No seriously you stated that we would see embarrassing details about Jesus not the opinions of non-believers with a stake in maintaining the current social order. Now maybe if you included a story from one of the non-canon Gospels about Jesus as a child in which he became alarmed at another child who accidentally bumped him in which he proceeded to use his powers to strike the other child dead and return him to life we'd have something juicy to sink our teeth into.

DOC said:
Reason #3

The NT Writers Left in Very Demanding Sayings of Jesus.

For example: (Matthew 5:28) "I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart".

And (Matt. 5:44-45) "I tell you Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you...

As the book says "They certainly didn't make up a story that made life easier for themselves."
Click to expand...

Jesus' message of peace and love is hardly "difficult" when compared to his father's all to oft calls of genocide and religious murder or miniscule demands such as not mixing fibers or crops.

DOC said:
Reason #9

The New Testament Writers Describe Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple, Unembellished Accounts.

If they made them up it would be likely that they would have used grandiose and extravagant images. The book says the gospels talk about the Resurrection in a matter of fact almost bland way.
Click to expand...

Yes; that's exactly what the bible says. "Yeah you know how the Romans crucified that guy Jesus? Yeah well he came back to life. Crazy I know I mean yeah its just crazy...so Paul buddy has your sister said anything about me yet? I mean no offense but she could su...hey you're not still writing this are you?"

DOC said:
Reason #10

The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death
Click to expand...

Totally unlike people who leave behind their old religions today and join dangerous new cults that have them kill themselves to hitch a ride on a UFO or stab a group of people to death and write on the walls in their victims’ blood.
 
DOC, how is it that you've been posting here since January of 2007 and you don't know what the words "evidence" and "know" mean?
 
Gravy said:
DOC, how is it that you've been posting here since January of 2007 and you don't know what the words "evidence" and "know" mean?
Click to expand...

I'd say for the same reason Kirk Cameron still refers to the banana using the words "atheist" and "nightmare".
 
DOC said:
In the "Do Most Atheists know that Science..." thread I mentioned Norman Geisler and Frank Turek's book called "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist" a few times because of its clear explanations of scientific theories. But, yes, they did talk about more than science.

In chapter 11 of their book they give the top 10 reasons we know the New Testament writers told the truth. I'll mention some of those reasons and maybe expound on them as time permits.

Reason #1

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves.

For example some passages portray the disciples as dim-witted, uncaring, and cowards.

Reason #2

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings of Jesus.

For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.

Reason #3

The NT Writers Left in Very Demanding Sayings of Jesus.

For example: (Matthew 5:28) "I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart".

And (Matt. 5:44-45) "I tell you Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you...

As the book says "They certainly didn't make up a story that made life easier for themselves."

Reason #9

The New Testament Writers Describe Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple, Unembellished Accounts.

If they made them up it would be likely that they would have used grandiose and extravagant images. The book says the gospels talk about the Resurrection in a matter of fact almost bland way.

Reason #10

The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death
Click to expand...

How is any of this evidence? It's just some blokes opinion. At least the bible is useful in one respect: that it seperates people who don't know what the word "evidence" means from those who do.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
And the more evidence we have that the NT authors were telling the truth, the more likely it is that the Resurrection was true.
Click to expand...

It's really not. The Resurrection is extremely unlikely, as unlikely as Jesus giving birth to a diplodocus.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If an Elvis obsessive saw The King looking like a hobo, would his unflattering description mean that he had actually seen Elvis?
 
DOC said:
...
Reason #2

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings of Jesus.

For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.

...

Reason #9

The New Testament Writers Describe Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple, Unembellished Accounts.

If they made them up it would be likely that they would have used grandiose and extravagant images. The book says the gospels talk about the Resurrection in a matter of fact almost bland way.
Click to expand...

Then, as many former 1M$ challenge applicants describe their superpowers unembellished as embarrassingly simple, with no practical application whatsoever (e.g., quoting from memory here: Being able to correctly pick one bottle out of ten in a year, being able to very slightly influence the movement of a pendulum already in motion, make the flame of a candle tremble slightly, etc) their powers are actually true?

If they were bluffing, they would of course have invented something just a little more spectacular, something people would maybe pay money to learn about? Like waterwalking, raising dead, curing of deadly diseases and stuff?
 
Last edited:
Let's take on number one first.

It was primarily the author of Mark who characterized the disciples as dim. First, Mark (even if he were the author of this gospel, and there is no contemporary evidence to support that claim -- only a much later ascription)was not a witness of these events, and he was not a disciple. He certainly didn't characterize himself as dim. Second, the characterization of the disciples as somewhat dim was a literary device to help argue the point of that gospel -- that no human knew that Jesus was the Messiah.

The other prime example of a dim or faithless disciple is the characterization of Thomas in John's gospel. This was another rhetorical device used to argue that those who believe without sticking their hands into Jesus' wounds are superior.

Number one cannot even be used as evidence that the gospel writers believed the information to be true. It can be used as evidence of how they wrote their confessional pieces.
 
DOC said:
Reason #9

The New Testament Writers Describe Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple, Unembellished Accounts.

If they made them up it would be likely that they would have used grandiose and extravagant images. The book says the gospels talk about the Resurrection in a matter of fact almost bland way.
Click to expand...

OK, now let's take on number 9. The way of writing about miracles does nothing to prove their correctness or incorrectness, but the real issue, especially as it relates to the first gospel written (Mark), is that many of the miracles are written specifically to show that no one understands who Jesus is (which, again, is the theme of that gospel). Not only do many of the miracles display a literary character (the blind man gradually learning to see immediately before Peter finally recognizes that Jesus is the Messiah; Jesus walking on water -- like a ghost -- in a long section that repeatedly mentions the Spirit in oblique terms; the miracle of the loaves to which Jesus tells the disciples "do you not yet understand about the bread..."; etc.), they are also most definitely not all portrayed in a matter of fact way (the Transfiguration). Many of these miracles (probably not all) have a clear literary character, and were very likely metaphors rather than actual occurrences, even in the mind of the author.

Another example is in John's gospel -- the first miracle is the turning of water into wine; the last thing that happens to Jesus while alive is that he is given vinegar (wine), then the soldiers try to see if he is dead and poke his side from which pours water and blood. The miracles are not relayed in a matter of fact manner. They are highly literary.

Reason #10

The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death
Click to expand...


As has been mentioned frequently, so did David Koresh. I suspect that Marshall Applewhite and Jim Jones would have done the same. Countless people have died for their beliefs. That is not proof of the truth. It is proof of certainty. There is a large difference between certainty and truth.
 
DOC said:
Reason #2

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings of Jesus.

For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.

Reason #3

The NT Writers Left in Very Demanding Sayings of Jesus.

For example: (Matthew 5:28) "I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart".

And (Matt. 5:44-45) "I tell you Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you...

As the book says "They certainly didn't make up a story that made life easier for themselves."
Click to expand...


Now for 2 and 3. These are actually pretty good arguments that some of what we have in the gospels relate back to the historical Jesus.
 
Hokulele said:
These are all reasons to believe the NT authors wrote what they believed was true, but it is not evidence that it was true.
Click to expand...

Oh come now! You know that someone being willing to die for X proves that X is the truth.
 
Kthulhut Fhtagn said:
Originally Posted by DOC View Post
Reason #1

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves.

For example some passages portray the disciples as dim-witted, uncaring, and cowards.
More realistically this was to portray themselves as being inferior to Jesus. Hardly anyone would have believed in Christ's story if they portrayed themselves as being Christ's superiors.
Click to expand...
More realistically this was to portray themselves as being inferior to Jesus. Hardly anyone would have believed in Christ's story if they portrayed themselves as being Christ's superiors.
Click to expand...

I just wanted to add, that the first so called "evidence" relies on an assumption that the authors of The New Testament were Christ's disciples when in fact there is little evidence in support of this claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom