Evidence for the Bible / God
Critics claim there is no evidence for God or the Bible / New Testament. Many scholars have been refuting that idea for centuries, noting archaeological evidence, fulfilled Messianic prophecies, and so on.
This thread is for debate on those issues.
p.s. This thread is being created again because we can't argue for the existence or non-existence of God in the religion forum. Here in the philosophy forum we can.
Okay, as far as I know, there is evidence for some of the events and people mentioned in the Bible, from the writings of Historians, but there is no evidence for the existence of Jesus outside of the religious scriptures....
and there is every reason to believe a great deal of the Old Testament is etiological in nature.
Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources - bethinking.org
The origins of Christianity are found in the person of one Jesus Christ of Bethlehem / Nazareth, and the Old Testament scriptures.
Adding onto OrphanSlug's questions, what about these so called "fulfilled Messianic prophecies." Because if I remember correctly, the old testament predicted that Egypt would be a barren wasteland.
Care to share with us the "scholars" and the "archaeological evidence" that means direct evidence of God?
Adding onto OrphanSlug's questions, what about these so called "fulfilled Messianic prophecies." Because if I remember correctly, the old testament predicted that Egypt would be a barren wasteland.
p.s. This thread is being created again because we can't argue for the existence or non-existence of God in the religion forum. Here in the philosophy forum we can.
We can and we have and we have settled on it. By "we" I mean the intelligent among us.
No claim for any supernatural being has ever been substantiated. Therefore no claim for any supernatural being is true, call it Bible or Mountain god or spirit god of the pacific seas or anything you want.
There's no poing in arguing the specifics of a book written by goat herders 2,000 years ago. No gods could exist, did exist, do exist, or will ever exist. The idea of a god is a human creation, therefore not real by definition.
Why do people keep on asking the same questions over and over and over and over and over and over and over again?
I wouldn't mind them asking if they had any intention of letting facts into their dialog, but they don't, that's the truly annoying part.
That's a polite way of dealing with this. But the fact is that people are ignorant and they want to impose their will and their fantasies upon everyone else.
Thank the universe for the Greek philosophers that taught us logic and reason and how to separate fiction from statements of true importance.
OMG! I don't think I've ever been pegged as "polite" in this forum. I'm swooning or reeling, I'm not sure which.
That's what I said - all references come from the religious scriptures. I'm just pointing out that there are no outside, contemporary, verifications.
I'd like to remind folks in this thread that in the first century there was no New Testament per se. But there were over two dozen independent Gospels and/or Epistles that either directly or indirectly confirmed Jesus Christ and first century Christianity. And that is independent verification.
NO, it is not independent verification.
The text we have today was created, edited or interpolated in the second century. Most scholars will agree that some of the Epistles were composed in the first century but probably not in the format we presently know. In the academic, non seminary world, those who study the New Testament say that only seven of the Epistles attributed to Paul were written by one person; however, the epistles we know today are in every instance actually amalgamations of several letters which have resulted in the ones we now have.
I'd like to remind folks in this thread that in the first century there was no New Testament per se. But there were over two dozen independent Gospels and/or Epistles that either directly or indirectly confirmed Jesus Christ and first century Christianity. And that is independent verification.
For some odd reason, I can't find OrphanSlug's comments - maybe my settings or something - but it bears note that not all the prophecies were fulfilled. In addition, the person named Jesus in the Bible descends through the cursed king, Jeconiah. God's curse was that NO descendant of Jeconiah could ever sit on the throne of Israel.
That right there bumps Jesus out of the running.
The story of Jesus closely follows the earlier accounts of Dionysos and Mithras. And, to some extent, Osiris.
Christ is not a descendent of Jeconiah.
The bible states that he is in Matthew 1-12.
12 After the deportation to Babylon: Jeconiah became the father of [n]Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel. 13 Zerubbabel was the father of [o]Abihud, Abihud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor. 14 Azor was the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud. 15 Eliud was the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob. 16 Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called the Messiah.
an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been [v]conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.
Bull****. Christ was neither sewn to his fathers leg, a God of oaths, or chopped into pieces and ****ed by his wife.
Christ was of the house of David through the marriage of his mother to Joseph, but Joseph was not his father.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?