Why no straight answers?

[Zzyzx]

.
After eight years debating here I have YET to encounter a defender of fundamentalism / literalism / traditionalism (or the Bible in general) who will openly, accurately, honestly answer fundamental questions about Christian beliefs " including the following (with truthful answers in bold font)

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that:

Jesus was anything more than human? None

Humans possess a soul? None

An afterlife exists? None

Miracles described in Bible tales actually occurred? None

Any of the claimed events such as floods, earthquakes, darkening sky, star stopping, Earth ceasing rotation, etc occurred as described? None

God intercedes in human affairs or life events? None

Bible writers were actually inspired by God? None



Why no answers? Could it be refusal to admit that in the absence of verifiable information, accepting the basic beliefs of Christianity must be based on "Take my (or his) word for it" and that doing so is not a rational basis for making decisions on matters of importance?

[atheist buddy]

The Bible writers would have had much the same motives for making it all up that the authors of the millions of religious books YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN had.
What motives did the authors of Egyptian mythology have? What about Greek Mythology? What about the author of the koran? Book of mormon? Scientology?

To their credit, the ancient Greeks and Egyptians were spiritually aware enough to sense that there was "something out there", so they invented a bunch of gods and carved statues and stuff of them.
Mohammed claimed Allah had told him to write the Koran, and Joseph Smith claimed God had given him the Book of Mormon.
But only Jesus said he was the Son of God, which gives a lot more weight to him than anybody else..

First, we don't know if Jesus ever said that.

We know that some anonymous scribe in 300AD copied some text written by another anonymous scribe, who copied some text written by another anonymous scribe, etc, for several layers of a game of telephone, based on something some anonymous person who never met Jesus allegedly said, having heard it said by some other person who never met jesus, having heard it from some other person, etc. So you should take the notion that Jesus ever said that himself with a grain of salt the size of a humvee.

Secondly, so what? Are you saying that the more outrageous and unfounded the claim is, the more seriously it should be taken? By that token, claims ot be GOD HIMSELF, as opposed to being the SOn of God, should be taken even more seriously, right? In which case, I assume you worship all the Pharaohs, who were deemed living Gods, as well as these ten people who claim to be God, right? http://www.oddee.com/item_98878.aspx

Lastly, in the age of easy information access, how dare you make the outlandish claim that Jesus is the only one that claimed to be the Messiah/son of god. That's the most ignorant claim anybody could ever make, short of 2+2=5.

Here's a short and inccomplete list of people who claim to some kind of celestial paternity, which doesn't include the hundreds of mythological people that were the result of Zeus, Thor, Odin and others:

Simon of Peraea (c. Unknown " 4 BCE), a former slave of Herod the Great who rebelled and was killed by the Romans.[3]
Jesus of Nazareth (c. 5 BCE " 30 CE), leader of a Jewish sect who was crucified by the Romans at the instigation of Jewish leaders; Jews who believed him to be the Messiah were the first Christians, also known as Jewish Christians.[4] Muslims,[5] Christians[6] and Messianic Jews[7] believe him to be the real Messiah.
Athronges (c. 3 CE),[8] a shepherd turned rebel leader.
Menahem ben Judah (?), allegedly son of Judas of Galilee, partook in a revolt against Agrippa II before being slain by a rival Zealot leader.
Simon bar Kokhba (died c. 135), founded a short-lived Jewish state before being defeated in the Second Jewish-Roman War.
Moses of Crete (?), who in about 440"470 persuaded the Jews of Crete to walk into the sea, as Moses had done, to return to Israel. The results were disastrous and he soon disappeared.
Ishak ben Ya'kub Obadiah Abu 'Isa al-Isfahani (684"705), who led a revolt in Persia against the Umayyad Caliph 'Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan.
Yudghan (?), a disciple of Abu 'Isa who continued the faith after Isa was slain.[9][10]
David Alroy (?), born in Kurdistan, who around 1160 agitated against the caliph before being assassinated.
Nissim ben Abraham (?), active around 1295.[9]
Moses Botarel of Cisneros (?), active around 1413; claimed to be a sorcerer able to combine the names of God.
Asher Lmmlein (?), a German near Venice who proclaimed himself a forerunner of the Messiah in 1502.
David Reubeni (1490"1541?) and Solomon Molcho (1500"1532), messianic adventurers who travelled in Portugal, Italy and Turkey; Molcho, who was a baptised Catholic, was tried by the Inquisition, convicted of apostasy and burned at the stake.
A mostly unknown Czech Jew from around the 1650s.[11]
Sabbatai Zevi (1626"1676), an Ottoman Jew who claimed to be the Messiah, but then converted to Islam; still has followers today in the Donmeh.
Jacob Querido (?"1690), claimed to be the new incarnation of Sabbatai; later converted to Islam and led the Donmeh.
Miguel Cardoso (1630"1706), another successor of Sabbatai who claimed to be the "Messiah ben Ephraim."
Lbele Prossnitz (?"1750), attained some following amongst former followers of Sabbatai, calling himself the "Messiah ben Joseph."
Jacob Joseph Frank (1726"1791), who claimed to be the reincarnation of King David and preached a synthesis of Christianity and Judaism.
Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902"1994), the seventh Chabad Rabbi who tried to "prepare the way" for the Messiah. An unidentifiable number of his followers believe him to be the Messiah, though he himself never said this and actually scoffed at such claims which were made during his lifetime.[12][13]
Christian messiah claimants[edit]

Mirza Husayn 'Ali Nuri, Baha'u'llah

Mirza Ghulam Ahmed

Simon Magus
See also: List of people claimed to be Jesus and Second Coming
Verses in the Christian Bible tell that Jesus will come again in some fashion; various people have claimed to, in fact, be the second coming of Jesus. Others have been styled a new messiah still under the umbrella of Christianity.
Simon Magus (early 1st century), was a Samaritan, and a native of Gitta; he was considered a god in Simonianism; he "darkly hinted" that he himself was Christ, calling himself the Standing One.
Dositheos the Samaritan (mid 1st century), was one of the supposed founders of Mandaeanism. After the time of Jesus he wished to persuade the Samaritans that he himself was the Messiah prophesied by Moses.[14] Dositheus pretended to be the Christ (Messiah), applying Deuteronomy 18:15 to himself, and he compares him with Theudas and Judas the Galilean.[14][15]
Tanchelm of Antwerp (c. 1110), who violently opposed the sacrament and the Eucharist.
Ann Lee (1736"1784), a central figure to the Shakers,[16] who thought she "embodied all the perfections of God" in female form and considered herself to be Christs female counterpart in 1772.[17]
Bernhard Mller (c. 1799"1834) claimed to be the Lion of Judah and a prophet in possession of the Philosopher's stone.
John Nichols Thom (1799"1838), a Cornish tax rebel.
Arnold Potter (1804"1872), Latter Day Saint schismatic leader; called himself "Potter Christ"
Hong Xiuquan (1814"1864), Hakka Chinese; claimed himself to be the younger brother of Jesus Christ; started the Taiping Rebellion and founded the Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace. Committed suicide before the fall of Tianjing (Nanjing) in 1864.
Mirza Husayn 'Ali Nuri, Bah'u'llh (1817"1864), born Shiite, adopting Bbism later in life, he claimed to be the promised one of all religions, and founded the Bah' Faith.
Jacobina Mentz Maurer (1841 or 1842-1874) was a German-Brazilian woman who lived and died in the state of Rio Grande do Sul who emerged as a messianic prophetess, a representation of God, and later declared the very reincarnation of Jesus Christ on earth by her German-speaking community called Die Muckers (or the false saints) by her enemies, Die Spotters (or the mockers). After a number of deadly confrontations with outsiders, Jacobina was shot to death together with many of her followers by the Brazilian Imperial Army.
William W. Davies (1833"1906), Latter Day Saint (Mormon) schismatic leader; claimed that his infant son Arthur (born 1868) was the reincarnated Jesus Christ.
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, India (1835"1908), claimed to be the awaited Mahdi as well as (Second Coming) and likeness of Jesus the promised Messiah at the end of time, being the only person in Islamic history who claimed to be both. He claimed to be Jesus in the metaphorical sense; in character. He founded the Ahmadiyya Movement in 1889 envisioning it to be the rejuvenation of Islam, and claimed to be commissioned by God for the reformation of mankind.[18] He declared that Jesus survived crucifixion and died a natural death having migrated towards the east.[19]
Cyrus Reed Teed (October 18, 1839 - December 22, 1908, erroneously Cyrus Tweed) was a U.S. eclectic physician and alchemist turned religious leader and messiah. In 1869, claiming divine inspiration, Dr. Teed took on the name Koresh and proposed a new set of scientific and religious ideas he called Koreshanity.
Father Divine (George Baker) (c. 1880 " September 10, 1965), an African American spiritual leader from about 1907 until his death who claimed to be God.
Andr Matsoua (1899"1942), Congolese founder of Amicale, proponents of which subsequently adopted him as Messiah in the late 1920s.
Samael Aun Weor (1917"1977), born Vctor Manuel Gmez Rodrguez, Colombian citizen and later Mexican, was an author, lecturer and founder of the 'Universal Christian Gnostic Movement', according to him, 'the most powerful movement ever founded'. By 1972, he referenced that his death and resurrection would be occurring before 1978.[citation needed]
Ahn Sahng-hong (1918"1985), founder of the World Mission Society Church of God and worshiped by the members as the messiah.[20]
Sun Myung Moon (1920"2012), founder and leader of the Unification Church established in Seoul, South Korea, who considered himself the Second Coming of Christ, but not Jesus himself.[21] Although it is generally believed by Unification Church members ("Moonies") that he was the Messiah and the Second Coming of Christ and was anointed to fulfill Jesus' unfinished mission.[21]
Yahweh ben Yahweh (1935"2007), born as Hulon Mitchell, Jr., a black nationalist and separatist who created the Nation of Yahweh and allegedly orchestrated the murder of dozens of persons.
Laszlo Toth (1940-2012) claimed he was Jesus Christ as he battered Michelangelo's Pieta with a geologist hammer.
Wayne Bent (born 1941), also known as Michael Travesser of the Lord Our Righteousness Church, also known as the "Strong City Cult", convicted December 15, 2008 of one count of criminal sexual contact of a minor and two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor in 2008.[22]
Iesu Matayoshi (born 1944), in 1997 he established the World Economic Community Party based on his conviction that he is God and the Christ.
Jung Myung Seok (born 1945), a South Korean who was a member of the Unification Church in the 1970s, before breaking off to found the dissenting group[23] now known as Providence Church in 1980.[24][25] He also considers himself the Second Coming of Christ, but not Jesus himself in 1980.[26] He believes he has come to finish the incomplete message and mission of Jesus Christ, asserting that he is the Messiah and has the responsibility to save all mankind.[27] He claims that the Christian doctrine of resurrection is false but that people can be saved through him.[28]
Claude Vorilhon now known as Ral "messenger of the Elohim" (born 1946), a French professional test driver and former automobile journalist became founder and leader of UFO religion the Ral Movement in 1972, which teaches that life on Earth was scientifically created by a species of extraterrestrials, which they call Elohim. He claimed he met an extraterrestrial humanoid in 1973 and became the Messiah.[29] Then devoted himself to the task he said was given by his "biological father", an extraterrestrial named Yahweh.[30]
Jos Luis de Jess (1946"2013), founder and leader of Creciendo en Gracia sect (Growing In Grace International Ministry, Inc.), based in Miami, Florida. He claimed to be both Jesus Christ returned and the Antichrist, and exhibited a "666" tattoo on his forearm. He has referred to himself as Jesucristo Hombre, which translates to "Jesus Christ made Man".
Inri Cristo (born 1948) of Indaial, Brazil, a claimant to be the second Jesus.[31]
Apollo Quiboloy (born 1950), founder and leader of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ religious group, who claims that Jesus Christ is the "Almighty Father," that Quiboloy is "His Appointed Son," and that salvation is now completed. Proclaims himself as the "Appointed Son of the God" not direct to the point as the "Begotten Son of the God" in 1985.[32]
David Icke (born 1952), of Great Britain, has described himself as "the son of God", and a "channel for the Christ spirit".
Brian David Mitchell was born on October 18, 1953 in Salt Lake City, Utah, he believed himself the fore-ordained angel born on earth to be the Davidic "servant" prepared by God as a type of Messiah who would restore the divinely led kingdom of Israel to the world in preparation for Christ's second coming. (Mitchell's belief in such an end-times figure " also known among many fundamentalist Latter Day Saints as "the One Mighty and Strong" " appeared to be based in part on a reading of the biblical book of Isaiah by the independent LDS Hebraist, Avraham Gileadi, with which Mitchell became familiar from his former participation with Stirling Allan's American Study Group.)[33][34]
David Koresh (Vernon Wayne Howell) (1959"1993), leader of the Branch Davidians.
Maria Devi Christos (born 1960), founder of the Great White Brotherhood.
Sergey Torop (born 1961), who started to call himself "Vissarion", founder of the Church of the Last Testament and the spiritual community Ecopolis Tiberkul in Southern Siberia.
Alan John Miller (born 1962), founder of Divine Truth, a new religious movement based in Australia. Alan John Miller, also known as A.J., who claims to be Jesus of Nazareth through reincarnation. Miller was formerly an elder in the Jehovah's Witnesses.
David Shayler (born 1965), former MI5 agent and whistleblower who declared himself the Messiah on 7 July 2007.[35]
Muslim messiah claimants[edit]
Main article: People claiming to be the Mahdi
Islamic tradition has a prophecy of the Mahdi, who will come alongside the return of Isa (Jesus).
Muhammad Jaunpuri (1443"1505), who traveled Northeastern India; he influenced the Mahdavia and the Zikris.
Bb (1819"1850), who declared himself to be the promised Mahdi in Shiraz, Iran in 1844. (Related to Baha'i claims.)
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835"1908) of Qadian, 'the Promised Messiah' return of Jesus as well as the 'Mahdi', founder of the Ahmadiyya religious movement. He preached that Jesus Christ had survived crucifixion and died a natural death. He was the only person in Islamic history to have claimed to be both the promised return of Jesus as well as the promised Mahdi.
Muhammad Ahmad ("The Mad Mahdi") (1844"1885), who declared himself the Mahdi in 1881, defeated the Ottoman Egyptian authority, and founded a short-lived empire in Sudan.
Sayyid Mohammed Abdullah Hassan (1864"1920), who led the Dervish State in present-day Somalia in a two-decade long resistance movement between 1900 and 1920.
Rashad Khalifa (1935"1990), an Egyptian-American biochemist who claimed that he had discovered a mathematical code in the text of the Qur'an involving the number 19; he later claimed to be the "Messenger of the Covenant" and founded the "Submitters International" movement before being murdered.
Juhayman al-Otaibi (1936"1980), who seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca in November 1979 and declared his son-in-law the Mahdi.
Other/combination messiah claimants[edit]

Haile Selassie
This list features people who are said, either by themselves or their followers, to be some form of a messiah that do not easily fit into only Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Haile Selassie of Ethiopia (1892"1975), Messiah of the Rastafari movement. Never claimed himself to be Messiah, but was thus proclaimed by Leonard Howell, amongst others.
Andr Matsoua (1899"1942), Congolese founder of Amicale, proponents of which subsequently adopted him as Messiah.
Samael Aun Weor (1917"1977), born Vctor Manuel Gmez Rodrguez, Colombian citizen and later Mexican, was an author, lecturer and founder of the 'Universal Christian Gnostic Movement', according to him, 'the most powerful movement ever founded'. By 1972, Samael Aun Weor referenced that his death and resurrection would be occurring before 1978.
Nirmala Srivastava (1923"2011), guru and goddess of Sahaja Yoga, proclaimed herself to be the Comforter promised by Jesus (that is, the incarnation of the Holy Ghost / Adi Shakti).[36][37]
Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda (born 1946 - died 2013), a Puerto Rican preacher who had claimed to be both "the Man Jesus Christ" and the Antichrist at the same time. He claimed he was indwelled with the same spirit that dwelled in Jesus, however, Miranda also contradicted his claims of being Christ incarnate by also claiming he was the Antichrist, even going as far as tattooing the number of the beast (666) on his forearm, a behavior his followers also adopted. Founder of the "Growing in Grace" ministries, Miranda died on August 14, 2013 due to liver cancer.
Riaz Ahmed Gohar Shahi (born 25 November 1941) is a spiritual leader and the founder of the spiritual movements Messiah Foundation International (MFI) and Anjuman Serfaroshan-e-Islam.[38][39] He is controversial for being declared the Mehdi, Messiah, and Kalki Avatar by the MFI.[40][41][42]
Ral, leader of the International Ralian Movement (born 30 September 1946); Rael claimed he met an extraterrestrial being in 1973 and became the Messiah.
World Teacher (unknown), a being claimed to be the Theosophical Maitreya and the Messiah (promised one) of all religions. He is said to have descended from the higher planes and manifested a physical body in early 1977 in the Himalayas, then on 19 July 1977 he is said to have taken a commercial airplane flight from Pakistan to England. He is currently said to be living in secret in London;[43][44][45] promoted by New Age activist Benjamin Creme and his organization, Share International (See Maitreya (Benjamin Creme)).
Ryuho Okawa (born 7 July 1956), is the founder of Happy Science in Japan. Okawa claims to channel the spirits of Muhammad, Christ, Buddha and Confucius and claims to be the incarnation of the supreme spiritual being called El Cantare.
Goel Ratzon (1951-), from Tel Aviv, claims to have supernatural healing powers and reportedly lived with 32 women who believed he was the Messiah. He also fathered 89 children, who were all given names that were variants of his own, but was arrested in 2010 on suspicions that he was abusing his "wives" and children.[46]

[H.sapiens]

...

With the content of the New Testament being solely written in letter form, from one party to the next, these letters can become, "verifiable evidence" of at least one or two things. These two things are, either the author of the letter was lying to the other party, or they were reporting the truth.

You seem to want to suggest, the authors may have been writing, generations after the fact, and were simply reporting what they had heard past down to them, which would be myth, or folk lure, and this would sort of, protect them from the accusation of lying. But this notion will not fly at all with the New Testament writers, who claimed to have been there to witness certain events. When this occurs, (and it does) the author, no matter when he is writing, cannot be protected, by simply saying he was reporting events passed down through generations. Rather, this means, these letters become, "verifiable evidence" of a lie, or the truth!

The author of, "2 Peter" actually addresses your concerns, about these reports being myth, folk lure, etc., when he writes in 2 Peter 1:16

16 For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

This statement alone, makes the author out to be either telling the truth, or lying, and it does not matter who the author happens to be, or the time of the writing. If he did not witness said event, then the author is a liar. This letter then becomes, "verifiable evidence" of the truth, or a lie.

Since the authorship of II Peter has been in question at least since the thrird century assuming that it is a lie is likely a prudent starting point.

If you continue on in 2 Peter, you will discover, the event the author is describing is what has been called the, "Transfiguration of Christ" when Jesus is said to have taken, Peter, James, and John, up onto an mountain, where this event is said to have occurred.

Well guess what? There just so happens to be, three other authors of New Testament letters, writing to completely different audiences, who record this same exact event. This certainly seems to mean, these other three letters become, "verifiable evidence" confirming the truth of the event, or it becomes, "verifiable evidence" of collusion between the authors.

But, we could continue on. We are just getting started here. Let's consider the author of what has been called, "The Gospel of Luke," and "The Actions of the Apostles." If this author was simply reporting what had been passed down to him, and was writing these things generations later, then he is without a doubt, a liar, and this letter becomes, "verifiable evidence" of this fact.

The evidence is that Luke was written by an anonymous author (not a companion of Paul) between 80 and 100 CE, and substantially revised from then into the second century by other anonymous authors. "Liar" again is a pretty good starting assumption.

You see, this author from the beginning, tells his audience, who is someone by the name of, "Theophilus" how he obtained his information, and he claims it is through "careful investigation of everything from the beginning." Now, we could debate what he claims is "careful investigation" but that is really beside the point. The point would be, if in fact the author was there at the time, to perform any sort of investigation.

The author certainly claims to have been alive, and among the Apostles, because you see, in the second letter, the author actually refers to the first letter, and the second letter, is addressed to the same person as the first. This is "verifiable evidence" the author of these two letters, are one and the same.

But then, as we have seen, the author is likely a liar.

In the second letter, the author begins to claim to be present to witness certain events, some of which were extraordinary. This means this letter becomes, "verifiable evidence" against the author, if he did not in fact witness, said events, or it becomes "verifiable evidence" the author is recording the truth.

But then, as we have seen, the author is likely a liar.

At any rate, the author goes on to claim to actually be present with Paul, on his journey to Rome, in order to stand trial there. The second letter ends with Paul being under house arrest, where he is said to have, "welcomed all who came to see him. 31 He proclaimed the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ"with all boldness and without hindrance!"

But then, as we have seen, the author is likely a liar.

This is a claim by the author, to be present with Paul, during his house arrest. Well now, it just so happens, in one of his letters written to Timothy, which is 2 Timothy, Paul tells Timothy, there are those who have deserted him, and goes on to say, "only LUKE, is with me." So then, what we have is, Luke writing 2 letters to someone named, Theophilus. In the second letter, Luke claims to have been with Paul during his house arrest in Rome. Next, we have Paul, writing to a completely different audience, with different concerns altogether, incidentally verifying Luke is with him. This is at least, "verifiable evidence" that, 1. Paul was under house arrest in Rome, and 2. Luke was present with Paul. It also lends credence to Luke's reports of being along with Paul during his journeys.

But then, as we have seen, the author was not with Paul and is likely a liar.

All the above, is at the very least, "verifiable evidence!" Does it, "prove" the reports are true? It absolutely does not, however, it can be used as, "evidence" in support of the claims.

"Evidence" in support of the claims? Quite the contrary.

Well, let's continue on. ...

And so on, and so forth, bringing you no closer to dependable, documentable, real evidence. This is classic and shows you how you can not built a tower of truth on a shakey foundation of what is likely lies.

[beeswax]

I often make the same point and its not nice to say but when people made stuff up that they KNEW wasn't true and altered text or added text to suit their OWN agenda and to almost enforce and reinforce their OWN prejudice on an innocent congregation then today we wouldn't call them honest brokers doing their best but telling..Lies.

...and so they don't deserve any credit but ALL scripture is like this and as Thomas Paine will tell you in his book, the age of reason. Its not incumbent on anyone to believe in revelation from God UNLESS that has been revealed to them personally. As the bible is called the word of God and thus revealed by God, then the same thing applies. You should dismiss ALL of it..Unless you too have had a revelation from God. By all means tell that to others but the same principle applies and must apply. Because who knows what you have made up or on drugs as John of Patmos seemed to be..

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 235 by Realworldjack]

Luke claims to have been with Paul during his house arrest in Rome. Next, we have Paul, writing to a completely different audience, with different concerns altogether, incidentally verifying Luke is with him. This is at least, "verifiable evidence" that, 1. Paul was under house arrest in Rome, and 2. Luke was present with Paul. It also lends credence to Luke's reports of being along with Paul during his journeys.

So...by proving that Luke and Paul hung out together, this somehow lends credence to the magical events described in their written works?

A careful reading of what you wrote there suggests to me that you're thinking of the trifecta of Lunatic, Liar or Lord. You don't consider the fourth possibility, Legend. Look it up and tell me your thoughts.

[Zzyzx]

.

At any rate, now that I have this clarification, I would like to ask, who exactly is it, that determines the Bible is not, "verifiable evidence?" Really? Who is it that makes this determination?

For these debates C&A Guidelines make it clear that "3. For factual claims like the existence of individuals, places, and events, the Bible can be considered as providing evidence, but not necessarily conclusive evidence.

4. Unsupported Bible quotations are to be considered as no more authoritative than unsupported quotations from any other book.

I can tell you this, it is not determined by reason, and logic, and seems to demonstrate a lack of knowledge of what the Bible actually is.

The lack of verification is what demonstrates lack of verification . . .

You can easily prove me wrong RWJ by simply providing evidence that bible tales about "miracles" and "resurrection" and "soul" and "afterlife" are true using sources that can be verified by anyone interested.

Regardless what the Bible is called it cannot be used (rationally) to verify itself. Verify means "confirm the truth of".

Thus, confirming the truth of Bible tales rationally requires evidence OTHER than the tales themselves.

This is simply a tactic on the part of those opposed to Christianity, that may work on those who may not have a true knowledge of what the Bible actually contains, but in the end, it really does not wash at all.

The "tactic" of seeking truth often offends those who cannot show that what they say is truthful and accurate.

Before we go any further, let's establish that there is a huge difference between, "verifiable evidence," as opposed to "verifiable proof." Certainly there are those Christians who act as if the Bible is, "proof." From this attitude we have Christians saying such things as, "the Bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it." I will agree, this is a weak minded position, in that it simply assumes the Bible is proof. But again, there is a huge difference between, "proof," and "evidence," and you chose the word, "evidence."

Yes, we are discussing VERIFIABLE evidence, not proof " evidence that can be checked. "Jesus told me personally" may be considered "evidence" by some but it is not verifiable.

In real life, RWJ, do we accept "Take my word for it" regarding important decisions (such as buying expensive real estate) or do we check (verify) what we are told?

To say the Bible is not at least, "verifiable evidence," is to either demonstrate, a lack of knowledge of what, "evidence" actually is, and what the Bible actually contains, or it is to deliberately ignore the two.

Evidence "broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion. This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence."

The Bible contains stories by many unidentifiable writers telling of events and conversations that they cannot be shown to have direct personal knowledge. When a person writes accounts of events that were told to them by others that is known as hearsay (that heard from others).

First off, the Bible is not a book, period!

Common use dictionaries of the English language seem to disagree " "a handwritten or printed work of fiction or nonfiction, usually on sheets of paper fastened or bound together within covers." Doesn't that seem to include the Bible?

In other words, the Bible is not something someone sat down to author from start to finish. It is also not multiple authors getting together, and deciding to author a book together, from start to finish.

Notice that the definition of book does not require being written "from start to finish" by an individual or group. For instance, Readers Digest Condensed BOOKS contain stories written by several different authors who did not write the whole thing and did not "get together and decide to author a book."

The stories contained in Readers Digest Condensed Books may be true or may be fiction.

If one of those stories tells about ghosts building a house (or doing anything else), do we believe that actually happened in real life? If two or three stories tell something similar is that indication that the stories are truthful and accurate?

Would we NOT be wise to ask for verifiable evidence before we accepted the stories as true?

Would we NOT be wise to say "Show me the house" for starters? Would we accept the stories as truthful and accurate if instead of showing us the house or anything else the person claimed "It really did happen long ago and far away"? Would we accept "Take my word (or his, or that other story) for it"?

Rather, the Bible is more of a composition, and when I use the word, "composition," I am not using it in the literary sense. Words have different meanings, and the word, "composition" has a literary meaning, but it also has an alternative meaning and this is the meaning I have in mind,

Perhaps it is most accurate to consider the Bible an anthology " "a book or other collection of selected writings by various authors, usually in the same literary form, of the same period, or on the same subject:"

So then, the Bible is composed of different writings, over thousands of years, in which the authors never intended, and had no idea, their writings would be later composed, to form a whole. This is, "verifiable," and it would also be what is defined as, "evidence."

Okay, I do not dispute that the Bible was written by people who likely had no notion that their works would be compiled into an anthology. So what?

Before we go any further, let's define evidence.

As stated previously, evidence is that presented in support of an assertion. Verifiable evidence is evidence that itself can be checked for accuracy and truth.

It is evident, the content of the Bible was written over thousands of years. It is evident, the authors, had no idea, what they were writing would later be composed into what we now call the Bible. So then, "verifiable evidence," (evident).

Yes, the Bible shows evidence of containing writings of people who were not personally acquainted and who wrote during hundreds or thousands of years. So what?

At this point, let us narrow our focus from the whole of the Bible, to what is called the New Testament. Again, the New Testament, is not a book. It is not even, part of a book. The New Testament, does not even contain books.

That may be a bit difficult to defend, but go ahead.

Rather, what is contained in the New Testament, from start to finish is letters.

RWJ, that is dead wrong as anyone can VERIFY. The NT contains

The New Testament consists of
four narratives of the life, teaching, death and resurrection of Jesus, called "gospels" (or "good news" accounts);
a narrative of the Apostles' ministries in the early church, called the "Acts of the Apostles", and probably written by the same writer as the Gospel of Luke, which it continues;
twenty-one letters, often called "epistles" in the biblical context, written by various authors, and consisting of Christian doctrine, counsel, instruction, and conflict resolution; and
an Apocalypse, the Book of Revelation, which is a book of prophecy, containing some instructions to seven local congregations of Asia Minor, but mostly containing prophetical symbology, about the end times.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_testament

Does this indicate that the NT contains material other than, and in addition to, letters?

These letters were written from one person to another person, or group of people. Some of these letters contain not only theological content, they also contain the personal concerns, and needs of the author.

Yes, some NT letters (or epistles) appear to have been written to individuals or groups. So what?

With the content of the New Testament being solely written in letter form,

If (since) this is wrong, what else in the post is wrong?

from one party to the next, these letters can become, "verifiable evidence" of at least one or two things. These two things are, either the author of the letter was lying to the other party, or they were reporting the truth.

False dichotomy. A person can write a letter that contains information that they believe and claim is accurate even though they are mistaken in what they say. For instance, someone can write a letter detailing an automobile accident they heard about (sincerely believing it was true) but later it is discovered that no such accident occurred " was the letter writer LYING (which means "to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive" " notice intent to deceive. If one makes an untrue statement without realizing it is untrue they cannot legitimately be accused of lying.

You seem to want to suggest, the authors may have been writing, generations after the fact, and were simply reporting what they had heard past down to them, which would be myth, or folk lure, and this would sort of, protect them from the accusation of lying.

Agreed

But this notion will not fly at all with the New Testament writers, who claimed to have been there to witness certain events. When this occurs, (and it does) the author, no matter when he is writing, cannot be protected, by simply saying he was reporting events passed down through generations. Rather, this means, these letters become, "verifiable evidence" of a lie, or the truth!

The author of, "2 Peter" actually addresses your concerns, about these reports being myth, folk lure, etc., when he writes in 2 Peter 1:16

16 For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

This statement alone, makes the author out to be either telling the truth, or lying, and it does not matter who the author happens to be, or the time of the writing. If he did not witness said event, then the author is a liar. This letter then becomes, "verifiable evidence" of the truth, or a lie.

It would appear as though whoever wrote 2 Peter was not telling the truth about being an "eyewitness of his majesty" OR that the phrase was not intended to indicate an actual event (but rather a "spiritual" witnessing) OR the phrase was added later by others to improve the text. We do not know which, if any of these apply or if there are other unidentified alternatives.

It is interesting to note:

Of all the epistles accepted into the New Testament canon, the book of 2 Peter remains the most difficult. Understanding with certainty the epistles complex issues feels like trying to untie a tightly woven knot"only to find more little knots to untie. However, if the issue of authorship can be reasonably determined, most of the knots considerably loosen themselves.

The rejection of Peter as the writer of 2 Peter is by far the most common opinion today. In fact, the view of the pseudonymity of the epistle is almost universal.1 The term pseudonymity refers to an author assuming the name of another, writing supposedly on his or her behalf"or in his or her name. The prefix pseudo means false. Scarcely anyone nowadays doubts that 2 Peter is pseudonymous, although it must be admitted of the few who do that they defend their case with an impressive combination of learning and ingenuity.2
https://bible.org/article/2-peter-peter%E2%80%99s

Does this affect what is said in 2 Peter?

If you continue on in 2 Peter, you will discover, the event the author is describing is what has been called the, "Transfiguration of Christ" when Jesus is said to have taken, Peter, James, and John, up onto an mountain, where this event is said to have occurred.

Well guess what? There just so happens to be, three other authors of New Testament letters, writing to completely different audiences, who record this same exact event. This certainly seems to mean, these other three letters become, "verifiable evidence" confirming the truth of the event, or it becomes, "verifiable evidence" of collusion between the authors.

There IS evidence that the NT gospel writers copied from one another or from another common source. We are all aware of the "The Synoptic Problem" in which ". . . textual analysis of Matthew, Mark and Luke show large portions so strikingly similar, not only in content but even the language used, that it is generally agreed they have drawn upon common source material, either oral or written: hence these three are generally referred to as the synoptic gospels. http://life.liegeman.org/historymaker/ntdocs/ntdocs6/

But, we could continue on. We are just getting started here.

Let's deal with the above before continuing.

[Faithful One]

[Replying to post 245 by Zzyzx]

Would we NOT be wise to ask for verifiable evidence before we accepted the stories as true?

No you would not . I explained why to you in depth already. You do not have to understand anything not understandable in the bible, as far as things like how Jesus walked on water , how water turned to wine , we do not understand this . The message these events teach is what is what is important , you also do not have to deny them.

I even showed you verse of how Jesus in the bible preached against looking for "evidence" to prove these events true. This is not a necessity , nor do you deny them. Accept that you do not understand how they could happen and then you will know (if you believe the message) after the rapture .

One more time , it is not wise to try to prove Gods perfection, or understand it perfectly . The Pharisees were rebuked for this , then Jesus stated , and I am paraphrasing here , that in their quest to understand things perfectly that they have lost sight of the true message about compassion and love , as they could not understand why Jesus was hanging with the non believers .

[Faithful One]

[Replying to post 244 by rikuoamero]

There IS evidence that the NT gospel writers copied from one another or from another common source. We are all aware of the "The Synoptic Problem" in which ". . . textual analysis of Matthew, Mark and Luke show large portions so strikingly similar, not only in content but even the language used, that it is generally agreed they have drawn upon common source material, either oral or written: hence these three are generally referred to as the synoptic gospels. http://life.liegeman.org/historymaker/ntdocs/ntdocs6/

This is a prime example of concentrating on something you do not understand , missing the constant message that is being sent.

Why is this a " problem"? This might be a problem to you , but not a problem in general .

Of course they were drawing from the same source . I mean that is pretty obvious , is it not ? That " common source " was God in the bible.

Your source further down goes against your premise . Did you not read the whole source ? I believe you are cherry picking to fit your narrative , but once again , so what if they are synoptic as they do draw from a common source in the bible.

[Dropship]

..But only Jesus said he was the Son of God, which gives a lot more weight to him than anybody else..

First, we don't know if Jesus ever said that..

If you're going to say that about Jesus you're going to have to say it about every historical figure who ever lived!
For example I never heard Elvis say "Stay offa my blue suede shoes", but my commonsense tells me he did say it..
Likewise, the High Priest went ballistic and started ripping his own clothes off (below) when he asked Jesus if he was the Son of God, and Jesus replied "I am", (Mark 14:61) and sent shockwaves reverberating throughout the world to this very day..

[Zzyzx]

.

One more time , it is not wise to try to prove Gods perfection, or understand it perfectly .

Believe what the book says because the book says to believe what the book says so you can to to heaven after you die like the book says. Leave your brain behind and BELIEVE. If you think about it you may discover that it does not make sense.

No thanks. That may appeal to some people but not to those who prefer to think for themselves.

Of course they were drawing from the same source . I mean that is pretty obvious , is it not ? That " common source " was God in the bible.

Christian scholars and theologians acknowledge that gospel writers copied from each other or copied from what someone else wrote. They do not claim that information came directly from God. Of course, many self-appointed "experts" and proselytizers claim to KNOW better than real experts after hearing sermons and forming opinions.

..But only Jesus said he was the Son of God, which gives a lot more weight to him than anybody else.

First, we don't know if Jesus ever said that..

If you're going to say that about Jesus you're going to have to say it about every historical figure who ever lived!

Correct: We do not know for sure what Lincoln said in the Gettysburg Address 150 years ago (there are five versions attributed to Lincoln himself), let alone what people thousands of years ago may have said about what people said people said decades or generations earlier.

[Faithful One]

[Replying to post 249 by Zzyzx]

Believe what the book says because the book says to believe what the book says so you can to to heaven after you die like the book says. Leave your brain behind and BELIEVE. If you think about it you may discover that it does not make sense.

No thanks. That may appeal to some people but not to those who prefer to think for themselves.

Believing is not just about going to heaven for Christians. The messages are about overcoming adversity and building integrity by showing compassion and understanding of others, matching life's problems and solving them with the philosophies of the bible.



As a Christian I do not concentrate on the reward of heaven. I concentrate on leaning more about my God and the message that is given , a message of showing compassion while being strong, as the problems of the world come upon you.

So it is more "learn "learn " learn ", more than believe , believe , believe . The learning strengthens your belief , the worldly outcomes when you come out of a storm unscathed strengthen your belief. Belief that the bibles messages will help you through ,,not just a belief to get to heaven , that should never be your only reason to believe , as far as God is concerned , the walk in the faith is also involved . The learning and understanding the messages , not just the "believing ".