What would you have done?

[Sherlock Holmes]

If you had lived 2,000 years ago and if you had witnessed a "miracle" (like those described in the Gospels, e.g. turning vats of water into wine) I put it to you that you would have no option other than to create a written record of the event or ask someone else to do so, or do nothing, ignore the information.

So then when some claim "there's no evidence" that Jesus did such things, this is an illogical position because it is clear the only evidence we could expect is some preserved written record.

Furthermore because the events were so shocking, a great effort would need to be devoted to ensuring this information is preserved, tremendous value would be attached to the preservation of such incredible information.

Now it is pretty obvious to me that because such huge significance would be attached to this information and written copies were the only way to preserve this for future generations, a practice of making meticulous copies would be strongly emphasized from the outset knowing that many copies would be inevitably lost due to their fragility.

In addition, due to the very obvious risk of the information being lost forever, as many copies as could be created would be created.

The above is a very reasonable expectation if and only if such incredible events were observed, that the events were true and did occur.

And what do we actually find when we explore this subject?

From wikipedia:

and



From a Bible information site:



and



These statistics, charts and numbers are easily verified facts.

The facts do indeed fit the expectation of what we'd find if a herculean effort were made by the initial observers to preserve the information with the technology available at the time, and this in turn strongly supports the belief that these events must have been true and were genuinely witnessed, no other explanation makes any real sense.

There are really no grounds for the atheists oft heard claim that there's no evidence Jesus existed, no evidence Jesus performed miracles, the data - when honestly analyzed in light of the prevailing technologies of the time - is exactly what one would expect to find.

Therefore - what is written in the New Testament is very very likely true.

 

[Dragonfly]

Therefore - what is written in the New Testament is very very likely true.

How about what's written in the Vedas? Very very likely true as well?

Also, why did you neglect the Old Testament? Is that likely true too?

 

[watsup]

Full of "ifs". Nuff said.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

How about what's written in the Vedas? Very very likely true as well?

Do you think the Vedas compares with the New Testament in terms of antiquity of oldest manuscripts and number of manuscripts and fragments and in terms of the time difference between the events and the earliest copies of the manuscripts?

Also, why did you neglect the Old Testament? Is that likely true too?

I did not neglect anything, I'm exploring the question that appears as the title of this thread.

 

[tosca1]

How about what's written in the Vedas? Very very likely true as well?

Also, why did you neglect the Old Testament? Is that likely true too?

What's there to witness in the Vedas?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

How about what's written in the Vedas? Very very likely true as well?

Also, why did you neglect the Old Testament? Is that likely true too?

Ooh before I forget, you never took a stab at answering the question.

 

[devildavid]

I would have communicated it verbally, just like I would today.

 

[watsup]

If you had lived 2,000 years ago and if you had witnessed a "miracle" (like those described in the Gospels, e.g. turning vats of water into wine) I put it to you that you would have no option other than to create a written record of the event or ask someone else to do so, or do nothing, ignore the information.

So then when some claim "there's no evidence" that Jesus did such things, this is an illogical position because it is clear the only evidence we could expect is some preserved written record.

Furthermore because the events were so shocking, a great effort would need to be devoted to ensuring this information is preserved, tremendous value would be attached to the preservation of such incredible information.

Now it is pretty obvious to me that because such huge significance would be attached to this information and written copies were the only way to preserve this for future generations, a practice of making meticulous copies would be strongly emphasized from the outset knowing that many copies would be inevitably lost due to their fragility.

In addition, due to the very obvious risk of the information being lost forever, as many copies as could be created would be created.

The above is a very reasonable expectation if and only if such incredible events were observed, that the events were true and did occur.

And what do we actually find when we explore this subject?

From wikipedia:

and



From a Bible information site:

View attachment 67300517

and

View attachment 67300518

These statistics, charts and numbers are easily verified facts.

The facts do indeed fit the expectation of what we'd find if a herculean effort were made by the initial observers to preserve the information with the technology available at the time, and this in turn strongly supports the belief that these events must have been true and were genuinely witnessed, no other explanation makes any real sense.

There are really no grounds for the atheists oft heard claim that there's no evidence Jesus existed, no evidence Jesus performed miracles, the data - when honestly analyzed in light of the prevailing technologies of the time - is exactly what one would expect to find.

Therefore - what is written in the New Testament is very very likely true.

This is all pure conjecture and as a result the last statement has no merit.

 

[blarg]

If you had lived 2,000 years ago and if you had witnessed a "miracle" (like those described in the Gospels, e.g. turning vats of water into wine) I put it to you that you would have no option other than to create a written record of the event or ask someone else to do so, or do nothing, ignore the information.

So then when some claim "there's no evidence" that Jesus did such things, this is an illogical position because it is clear the only evidence we could expect is some preserved written record.

Furthermore because the events were so shocking, a great effort would need to be devoted to ensuring this information is preserved, tremendous value would be attached to the preservation of such incredible information.

Now it is pretty obvious to me that because such huge significance would be attached to this information and written copies were the only way to preserve this for future generations, a practice of making meticulous copies would be strongly emphasized from the outset knowing that many copies would be inevitably lost due to their fragility.

In addition, due to the very obvious risk of the information being lost forever, as many copies as could be created would be created.

The above is a very reasonable expectation if and only if such incredible events were observed, that the events were true and did occur.

And what do we actually find when we explore this subject?

From wikipedia:

and



From a Bible information site:

View attachment 67300517

and

View attachment 67300518

These statistics, charts and numbers are easily verified facts.

The facts do indeed fit the expectation of what we'd find if a herculean effort were made by the initial observers to preserve the information with the technology available at the time, and this in turn strongly supports the belief that these events must have been true and were genuinely witnessed, no other explanation makes any real sense.

There are really no grounds for the atheists oft heard claim that there's no evidence Jesus existed, no evidence Jesus performed miracles, the data - when honestly analyzed in light of the prevailing technologies of the time - is exactly what one would expect to find.

Therefore - what is written in the New Testament is very very likely true.

id not show off to only handful of people who belong to a species that makes up and alters story's some times with out even knowing they have done so id reveal myself personally to all people who ever exist if i wanted to be known

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

id not show off to only handful of people who belong to a species that makes up and alters story's some times with out even knowing they have done so id reveal myself personally to all people who ever exist if i wanted to be known

I never asked what you wouldn't do.

 

[rickc]

If you had lived 2,000 years ago and if you had witnessed a "miracle" (like those described in the Gospels, e.g. turning vats of water into wine) I put it to you that you would have no option other than to create a written record of the event or ask someone else to do so, or do nothing, ignore the information.

So then when some claim "there's no evidence" that Jesus did such things, this is an illogical position because it is clear the only evidence we could expect is some preserved written record.

Furthermore because the events were so shocking, a great effort would need to be devoted to ensuring this information is preserved, tremendous value would be attached to the preservation of such incredible information.

Now it is pretty obvious to me that because such huge significance would be attached to this information and written copies were the only way to preserve this for future generations, a practice of making meticulous copies would be strongly emphasized from the outset knowing that many copies would be inevitably lost due to their fragility.

In addition, due to the very obvious risk of the information being lost forever, as many copies as could be created would be created.

The above is a very reasonable expectation if and only if such incredible events were observed, that the events were true and did occur.

And what do we actually find when we explore this subject?

From wikipedia:

and



From a Bible information site:

View attachment 67300517

and

View attachment 67300518

These statistics, charts and numbers are easily verified facts.

The facts do indeed fit the expectation of what we'd find if a herculean effort were made by the initial observers to preserve the information with the technology available at the time, and this in turn strongly supports the belief that these events must have been true and were genuinely witnessed, no other explanation makes any real sense.

There are really no grounds for the atheists oft heard claim that there's no evidence Jesus existed, no evidence Jesus performed miracles, the data - when honestly analyzed in light of the prevailing technologies of the time - is exactly what one would expect to find.

Therefore - what is written in the New Testament is very very likely true.

Call Ghost Busters?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I would have communicated it verbally, just like I would today.

Which is your right of course, but what if you wanted to ensure some kind of evidence was propagated down the generations.

 

[blarg]

I never asked what you wouldn't do.

good news if you keep reading i say what i would do

 

[blarg]

Which is your right of course, but what if you wanted to ensure some kind of evidence was propagated down the generations.

id tell every member of every generation all about myself and show them all that i control the universe if i wanted them to know about me and what i do .

maybe id just make every one all at once if i wanted to show off

 

[devildavid]

Which is your right of course, but what if you wanted to ensure some kind of evidence was propagated down the generations.

I already answered the question. I am intelligent enough to know that writing something is not evidence of the thung. Writing down that I saw something is not evidence of what I saw. I would tell people verbally in the hope that someone saw the same thing. I would not be concerned about anyone in the future. So stop dishonestly pretending that this is nothing but a rhetorical question for which you will only accept one answer.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I already answered the question. I am intelligent enough to know that writing something is not evidence of the thing. Writing down that I saw something is not evidence of what I saw. I would tell people verbally in the hope that someone saw the same thing. I would not be concerned about anyone in the future. So stop dishonestly pretending that this is nothing but a rhetorical question for which you will only accept one answer.

More ad-hominem, very well, if you must, you are who you are I suppose.

This is a very poor argument for the case that written records have no evidential value David, there are rather a lot of historians, archeologists and Egyptologists who'd be surprised to hear your view on this.

(Incidentally "evidence" is not the same as "proof" David, perhaps this is where you came off the rails?)

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

id tell every member of every generation all about myself and show them all that i control the universe if i wanted them to know about me and what i do .

maybe id just make every one all at once if i wanted to show off

Seems you misunderstood the question.

 

[blarg]

Seems you misunderstood the question.

this is complementary to it strange events recorded by humans would be hard to distinguish from myth and exaggerations

but what a god who wants to be known would probably do if it were real compared to what myths made by humans would look like can tell us a lot

 

[can2man]

I picture one of Mel Brooks ancestors writing the story.
‘Water, wine, if you write it down people will believe anything. Who knew!,

 

[watsup]

I picture one of Mel Brooks ancestors writing the story.
‘Water, wine, if you write it down people will believe anything. Who knew!,

*L*

 

[can2man]

*L*

Is this me catching an L?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I picture one of Mel Brooks ancestors writing the story.
‘Water, wine, if you write it down people will believe anything. Who knew!,

Sure and there are countless ways to see humor in this, but my question was serious what would you actually do if you found yourself in that position?

 

[rahl]

If you had lived 2,000 years ago and if you had witnessed a "miracle" (like those described in the Gospels, e.g. turning vats of water into wine) I put it to you that you would have no option other than to create a written record of the event or ask someone else to do so, or do nothing, ignore the information.

So then when some claim "there's no evidence" that Jesus did such things, this is an illogical position because it is clear the only evidence we could expect is some preserved written record.

Furthermore because the events were so shocking, a great effort would need to be devoted to ensuring this information is preserved, tremendous value would be attached to the preservation of such incredible information.

Now it is pretty obvious to me that because such huge significance would be attached to this information and written copies were the only way to preserve this for future generations, a practice of making meticulous copies would be strongly emphasized from the outset knowing that many copies would be inevitably lost due to their fragility.

In addition, due to the very obvious risk of the information being lost forever, as many copies as could be created would be created.

The above is a very reasonable expectation if and only if such incredible events were observed, that the events were true and did occur.

And what do we actually find when we explore this subject?

From wikipedia:

and



From a Bible information site:

View attachment 67300517

and

View attachment 67300518

These statistics, charts and numbers are easily verified facts.

The facts do indeed fit the expectation of what we'd find if a herculean effort were made by the initial observers to preserve the information with the technology available at the time, and this in turn strongly supports the belief that these events must have been true and were genuinely witnessed, no other explanation makes any real sense.

There are really no grounds for the atheists oft heard claim that there's no evidence Jesus existed, no evidence Jesus performed miracles, the data - when honestly analyzed in light of the prevailing technologies of the time - is exactly what one would expect to find.

Therefore - what is written in the New Testament is very very likely true.

circular argument. The bible can not be the source of a claim, and the evidence for the claim as well. There is nothing, outside the bible which demonstrates the character jesus existed.

 

[can2man]

Sure and there are countless ways to see humor in this, but my question was serious what would you actually do if you find yourself in that position?

Sure and there are countless ways to see humor in this, but my question was serious what would you actually do if you found yourself in that position?

I have never witnessed a miracle. However, if I did, I would take out my phone and videotape it.
But that is not really the question. I think the question is: can the bible be used as a historical document? I don’t know the answer - many a person has put in far more research into this subject than myself.

 

[blarg]

Sure and there are countless ways to see humor in this, but my question was serious what would you actually do if you found yourself in that position?

what would you actually do to let every one know about you if you were all powerful and knew about all people and wanted all people to know you?