You are arguing, obviously, *against * the early Christians having been backwards people. But one could make the same argument in favor of Islam, yes? Yet, for a Christian, that a religion such as Islam has survived for 13 plus centuries thus far, and has accrued over a billion adherents , doesn’t prove anything.
Portofino:
God bless you too, JDPortofino:
There’s a difference and I think you know where I might be headed. I will not state it though, for fear of reprisal. Nevertheless, it is a HUGE distinction.
God bless,
jd
You’re the first person on this forum that has offered a “God bless.” It is a charitable salutation.Of course you may, but you may need to expand upon that idea a bit for most of us.
Thank you for asking.
Well, next time someone asserts that the bible was compiled by the church - which is a FACT (and not a slur) - I hope you will raise your voice against your fellow brethren. (But I do not hold my breath).
Yes, you are “SURE”. Well, you are wrong. I have no need for atheist websites. What I learned about the church, I learned from you and you fellow posters. And don’t get confused about the apparently short time of this avatar. I have been reading and sometimes (rarely) participating on this forum for well over a decade.
Your knee-jerk reaction is so predictable. If one disagrees with your view, then one must be ill-informed and/or hostile. Never mind that I know probably more about the catechism than the majority of the catholics, I read quite a few of the blogs and books of apologists. Mene, tekel, ufarsin!! Their “arguments” are ridiculous nonsense. But you are “SURE” that I get my information from some atheist website. Well, rest happily and peacefully in your ignorance. Bye.I would put it the other way around - the Church’s teachings come from God - Apostolic Tradition, the Deposit of Faith, etc - and grew over the centuries from the Apostles down!
Of course you would! You might do a little research and study…Seconded
*Perfect answer!
Praise God!
*Please define “Agnostic theist” Portofino.God bless you too, JD
**You have been on these forums for over a decade and have only posted 47 times? No wonder you have advanced very slowly…Well, next time someone asserts that the bible was compiled by the church - which is a FACT (and not a slur) - I hope you will raise your voice against your fellow brethren. (But I do not hold my breath).
Yes, you are “SURE”. Well, you are wrong. I have no need for atheist websites. What I learned about the church, I learned from you and you fellow posters. And don’t get confused about the apparently short time of this avatar. I have been reading and sometimes (rarely) participating on this forum for well over a decade.
*So what? One thing is compiling independent evidence to show what I am stating and the other is making up things to support my statements. The first is the intelligent and ethical way of documenting something, the second is writing false documents. This is the normal approach used by historians. The gospels pass the standard tests used for historic documents.That is not surprising… after all the NT was compiled by the catholic church. If you are in the position to select your own “supporting evidence”, they will always support you.
The point is that the bible is not an independent document to be accepted as a reliable evidence. Except for those who already are believers. But they do not need evidence…
…I have been reading and sometimes (rarely) participating on this forum for well over a decade.
Join date September 9, 2012. By way of illustration – and definition – I offer the following four citations:*Please define “Agnostic theist” Portofino.
God bless you
Cinette
They do NOT pass any test. There is not one contemproary document from that era to substantiate what they describe. Besides, none of them has been written within about 40 years from the events they “describe”. It is simple mythology.
The solution is simple, but you will have to use you reason. “Faith or revelation” do not help here (either
)You can choose to be ignorant of history and historical analysis of documents, that is your prerogative.
My reasoning is simple, probably someone is either lying or unable or unwilling to provide evidence.…The solution is simple, but you will have to use you reason. “Faith or revelation” do not help here (either
Gary Habermas has compiled a list of 39 documents that do precisely what you claim is missing including the Roman writings of Tacitus, Seutonius, Thallus and Pliny, and the Jewish writings of Josephus and the Talmud.
You forgot to mention that no document from the era would pass your stringent test, that is just the nature of the documents written in that era. No other surviving document from the time comes close to being within 40 years of the event it describes. The New Testament has far better textual support than do the works of Plato, Aristotle, Herodotus, or Tacitus, extent works by or about each of these can only be dated to within 900-1300 years of alleged authorship. To have extent writings within 40 years of authorship is an incredible accomplishment for the time. I don’t see you claiming that Plato or Aristotle are myths and completely unacceptable because the only copies we have from them are from about 1000 years after they lived.
As a guest, which in no way confirms your claim. In fact, you are expecting faith from us about a revelation from you that you claim to be true, but for which no confirming evidence exists… Hmmm. Sounds ironically similar to your quandary with the New Testament. Your faith, surely, is that if we are gullible enough to accept the New Testament we must be entirely capable of trusting your unconfirmable claim.The solution is simple, but you will have to use you reason. “Faith or revelation” do not help here (either