The terminal decline of Christianity in New Zealand

S

Sectio Aurea

Guest
That's what I expected you to say.


Then you obviously know my claim is correct.

Hence my post 51.

Dissecting post 51 will not produce a contemporary historical document. So I'm not going to waste my time.


Until you show some appreciation of the nature of historical evidence and how that is evaluated I remain utterly sceptical of your basic stance.

John, I have spent many years evaluating the historical evidence, it seem it is you who is ignorant of the facts. If the evidence that I requested existed, I wouldn't need to request it, and you wouldn't be skeptical of my request. I will show you some appreciation when you admit my claim is correct.

You will debunk and disagree with whatever doesn't fit your existing conclusions, rather than engage in genuine debate which requires quality information as I have already indicated.

John, you are projecting your own behaviour on to me here. I asked you for evidence which you have failed to supply despite making claims you have supplied it. Do you really consider that a genuine debate?



John, the facts stand-

There are no contemporary historical documents for Jesus.

Don't go making claims that such documents exist if you can not produce evidence of such documents.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
S

Sectio Aurea

Guest
What do you wish to achieve?

You accused me of ignoring John's so called evidence.

I rejected it as it did not provide evidence for contemporary records.

I just want you to understand and acknowledge the information he provided failed to provide anything contemporary and for the two of you to accept that any contemporary record is absent.

Thats all.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,002
82
New Zealand
✟74,521.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Then you obviously know my claim is correct.

Wrong. I am suggesting that you are not interested in genuine debate. That requires acceptance of te basic principles of historical and literary research. I have not one scrap of evidence that you what that entails.

Dissecting post 51 will not produce a contemporary historical document. So I'm not going to waste my time.

Nor am I. with you. Those are the grounds I accept that NT writings as reliable. Tell me why you don't accept the Gospels as having contemporary authorship?

John, I have spent many years evaluating the historical evidence, it seem it is you who is ignorant of the facts. If the evidence that I requested existed, I wouldn't need to request it, and you wouldn't be skeptical of my request. I will show you some appreciation when you admit my claim is correct.

So, show me where N T Wright has got at all wrong. He publishes and debates in recognised academic circles, and thereby subjects his views to suitable peer evaluation.

Given your responses so far please excuse my scepticism of the genuineness of your openness to any materials contrary to what you want to believe.

John, you are projecting your own behaviour on to me here. I asked you for evidence which you have failed to supply despite making claims you have supplied it. Do you really consider that a genuine debate?

No I don't, as you duck establishing any recognsied 'ground rules' for the materiasl to question.

John, the facts stand-

There are no contemporary historical documents for Jesus.
Facts are 5 histotical NT documents that have a high degree of reliabilty for assessing any ancient historical documents. There are no contemporary documents for Soctrates. Did Socrtaes exist?

Don't go making claims that such documents exist if you can not produce evidence of such documents.

See above

John
NZ
 
Upvote 0
S

Sectio Aurea

Guest
Tell me why you don't accept the Gospels as having contemporary authorship?

Because most biblical scholars don't accept the Gospels as having contemporary authorship.

So, show me where N T Wright has got at all wrong. He publishes and debates in recognised academic circles, and thereby subjects his views to suitable peer evaluation.

First of all, show me where I claimed N T Wright has got at all wrong?

Given your responses so far please excuse my scepticism of the genuineness of your openness to any materials contrary to what you want to believe.

Any materials contrary to what most biblical scholars believe, will also be contrary to what I believe, so please excuse my skepticism.

There are no contemporary documents for Soctrates. Did Socrtaes exist?

I'm not disputing the existence of Jesus here...

I'm disputing the existence of contemporary historical documents for Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Alithis

Disciple of Jesus .
Nov 11, 2010
15,750
2,180
Mobile
✟94,492.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I will ask you again...

Is it even possible for you to choose that?

Of course it is possible,your stance is evidence to me.

And my question ,what do you wish to achieve - is in relation to you gaining the writings you want or not gaining them. What do you you want to achieve ?
Niether would or could disprove God.
He is there for those who do believe and for those who refuse to ,he is not there.
That is to say ,he is life.believe in him and you continue in life increasingly.refuse to and only an end to all that is life awaits.

Of course you know this.
 
Upvote 0

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,002
82
New Zealand
✟74,521.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Because most biblical scholars don't accept the Gospels as having contemporary authorship.

Please elaborate.

First of all, show me where I claimed N T Wright has got at all wrong?

Have you read his books on the NT?

I'm not disputing the existence of Jesus here...

I'm disputing the existence of contemporary historical documents for Jesus.

No contemporary documents for Socrates - so do we discount his thinking? If Jesus did exist who was he and on what do you base your assessment of Him?

John
NZ
 
Upvote 0
S

Sectio Aurea

Guest
Please elaborate.

OK, most biblical scholars agree Jesus existed between 746AUC (7BC) and 789AUC (36 CE).

Also, most biblical scholars agree the four gospels were written many decades after this period.

Starting with Mark in aprox 818-822 AUC (66–70 CE)

This obviously rules the gospels out as being contemporary.

Have you read his books on the NT?

Not entirely.

No contemporary documents for Socrates - so do we discount his thinking?

No contemporary documents for Socrates?? Who says?

Johnnz said:
If Jesus did exist who was he and on what do you base your assessment of Him?

If Jesus did exist (which I personally believe is plausible) he was a man of great moral teaching's, however, I reject his divinity, miracles and any other supernatural events attributed to him.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,002
82
New Zealand
✟74,521.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
OK, most biblical scholars agree Jesus existed between 746AUC (7BC) and 789AUC (36 CE).

Also, most biblical scholars agree the four gospels were written many decades after this period.

Starting with Mark in aprox 818-822 AUC (66–70 CE)

This obviously rules the gospels out as being contemporary.

No contemporary documents for Socrates?? Who says?

Socrates (/ˈsɒkrətiːz/;[2] Greek: Σωκράτης Sōkrátēs, [sɔːkrátɛːs]; 470/469 BC – 399 BC)[1] was a classical Greek (Athenian) philosopher credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy. He is an enigmatic figure known chiefly through the accounts of later classical writers, especially the writings of his students Plato and Xenophon and the plays of his contemporary Aristophanes. Plato's dialogues are among the most comprehensive accounts of Socrates to survive from antiquity, though it is unclear the degree to which Socrates himself is "hidden behind his 'best disciple', Plato".[3]

We have no originals of Plato's writings.

If Jesus did exist (which I personally believe is plausible) he was a man of great moral teaching's, however, I reject his divinity, miracles and any other supernatural events attributed to him.

It is commonly accepted by scholars that the synoptic gospels were derived from earlier documents. They, and any underlying sources were also in circulation amongst eyewitnesses of Jesus who had their own memories and sources to judge them against. The Gospels are standard historical documents according to any non biblical criteria.

Hence your conclusions about Jesus simply ignore the historical records as you bring your post-Enlightenment worldview screen into your analysis. That was the framework that debunked the entire bible by the mid 18th Century, but as stated previously, it failed under the accumulating evidence of secular studies in archaeology and ancient history.

John
NZ
 
Upvote 0

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,002
82
New Zealand
✟74,521.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
OK, most biblical scholars agree Jesus existed between 746AUC (7BC) and 789AUC (36 CE).

Also, most biblical scholars agree the four gospels were written many decades after this period.

Starting with Mark in aprox 818-822 AUC (66–70 CE)

This obviously rules the gospels out as being contemporary.

No contemporary documents for Socrates?? Who says?

Socrates (/ˈsɒkrətiːz/;[2] Greek: Σωκράτης Sōkrátēs, [sɔːkrátɛːs]; 470/469 BC – 399 BC)[1] was a classical Greek (Athenian) philosopher credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy. He is an enigmatic figure known chiefly through the accounts of later classical writers, especially the writings of his students Plato and Xenophon and the plays of his contemporary Aristophanes. Plato's dialogues are among the most comprehensive accounts of Socrates to survive from antiquity, though it is unclear the degree to which Socrates himself is "hidden behind his 'best disciple', Plato".[3]

We have no originals of Plato's writings.

If Jesus did exist (which I personally believe is plausible) he was a man of great moral teaching's, however, I reject his divinity, miracles and any other supernatural events attributed to him.

It is commonly accepted by scholars that the synoptic gospels were derived from earlier documents. They, and any underlying sources were also in circulation amongst eyewitnesses of Jesus who had their own memories and sources to judge them against. The Gospels are standard historical documents according to any non biblical criteria.

Hence your conclusions about Jesus simply ignore the historical records as you bring your post-Enlightenment worldview screen into your analysis. That was the framework that debunked the entire bible by the mid 18th Century, but as stated previously, it failed under the accumulating evidence of secular studies in archaeology and ancient history.

John
NZ
 
Upvote 0
S

Sectio Aurea

Guest
It is commonly accepted by scholars that the synoptic gospels were derived from earlier documents. They, and any underlying sources were also in circulation amongst eyewitnesses of Jesus who had their own memories and sources to judge them against. The Gospels are standard historical documents according to any non biblical criteria.

Hence your conclusions about Jesus simply ignore the historical records as you bring your post-Enlightenment worldview screen into your analysis. That was the framework that debunked the entire bible by the mid 18th Century, but as stated previously, it failed under the accumulating evidence of secular studies in archaeology and ancient history.

John
NZ

There are no contemporary historical documents for Jesus.

A fact that most biblical scholars agree with.

Are you going to acknowledge this fact, debunk it with evidence or just continue denying it?
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
To be honest, I don't think it's true that God's church is in decline. If -i'm- going to church...it must be on the upswing. ;)

So override a survey showing stats for an entire country with one anecdote? Sounds like just the sort of fuzzy thinking that leads one to religion
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
Tell me, what criteria do you use to evaluate any historical document?

John
NZ

One obvious test is does it fit with what we know and can prove is true about the world around us and how it works? Does it mesh with reality?

If we found a document from 100 years ago that meshed with everything we know about that era in which a man claimed to have a pet dog then we'd prob be happy to accept that as true.

If we found an identical document that claimed a pet dragon, we would not accept that claim and would also have good reason to doubt any other claims that we couldn't independently verify.

There's a few too many talking snakes, global floods and 900 year old men for rational adults to accept the claims of the bible in 2014.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
I do not believe you are being honest in what your saying .
I choose to disbelieve you .(see what I did there?)

we see this principle at work every day .
a mother has her child arrested .. all the evidence and facts display the child's guilt . the mother chooses to believe her child is innocent regardless .

belief is a choice .
it is simply dishonest to deny that .
the gospel tells us the requirements of eternal life BELIEVE in the lord Jesus and REPENT of not believing .

your presently hold to your choice . no more , no less .

Can you choose to believe that you can walk on air? You can easily demonstrate this 'choice' for us by walking from the roof of your house to another as calmly as I'd walk over a bridge.

Please post the video of the above?
 
Upvote 0

mathclub

Newbie
May 15, 2011
597
6
Switzerland
✟15,838.00
Faith
Atheist
No contemporary documents for Socrates - so do we discount his thinking? If Jesus did exist who was he and on what do you base your assessment of Him?

John
NZ

I don't care if Socrates actually existed. If he did not then someone still has those brilliant thoughts and communicated them down through the ages.

Likewise with jesus and his teachings.

Even if a man called jesus existed you'd still have to prove the virgin birth, walking on water, rising from the dead and all those other supernatural claims. Can you?
 
Upvote 0

faroukfarouk

Fading curmudgeon
Apr 29, 2009
35,902
17,177
Canada
✟279,058.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't care if Socrates actually existed. If he did not then someone still has those brilliant thoughts and communicated them down through the ages.

Likewise with jesus and his teachings.

Even if a man called jesus existed you'd still have to prove the virgin birth, walking on water, rising from the dead and all those other supernatural claims. Can you?

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good report.
3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
...
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."


(Hebrews chapter 11.)


The onus is thus on you to note that you have come to a faith based environment, and that no one here owes it to anyone to try to prove the Bible.


The Bible is a given, and with respect I would prefer not to enter into a debate.
 
Upvote 0

faroukfarouk

Fading curmudgeon
Apr 29, 2009
35,902
17,177
Canada
✟279,058.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
By 'decline' I suppose the OP refers to 'institutional religion'.

The fact remains that 2 or 3 believers in the Lord Jesus and in the power of His resurrection, meeting in His Name anywhere in the world for prayer and Scripture reading, form a majority with God.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,002
82
New Zealand
✟74,521.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
There are no contemporary historical documents for Jesus.

A fact that most biblical scholars agree with.

Are you going to acknowledge this fact, debunk it with evidence or just continue denying it?

That's not quite to black and white question you think it is.

a) No contemporary documents. This can mean either there never were any or we don't have any. If the first, that is supposition or argument from silence. If the second then that leads to:

b) From what we know from accepted standards for evaluating historical data can we take the Gospel accounts as reliable records of the life and teaching of Jesus? My answer is "Yes we can".

John
NZ
 
Upvote 0