Could someone explain me evolution & Big Bang?

[Justatruthseeker]

You have been told lies and you believe them because you want to believe them.

As you have been told lies about mutations and evolution and you believe them because you want to believe them.

 

[Golan]

And yet for a book you claim is only .01% true, archeologists rely on the Bible to date finds and artifacts, to find new dig sites, etc, etc. it is the most historically accurate book in existence. The only history book that told the good and the bad. All other history books rarely tell you of the bad things they did, only the good.

As it's the most historically accurate book in existence...........
If you would just point out ONE piece of confirmable history in the bible I will retract what I wrote and apologise.

 

[Golan]

As you have been told lies about mutations and evolution and you believe them because you want to believe them.

I do not live my life on those things being true or false, I don't care either way.

 

[stevevw]

You have been told lies and you believe them because you want to believe them.

What do you mean i just told you they have found archeology proof of some of the towns mentioned in the bible and some of the people mentioned. Its there in black and white the same as if they found king tuts tomb.

I just told you that Jesus is verified by non biblical sources. Are you living in the dark ages everyone knows that even non believers. Josephus,Phinly the younger and Tacitus all mention Jesus.


Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources - Probe Ministries

Biblical archaeology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archeology Proves The Bible - YouTube

Biblical Archaeology: Factual Evidence to Support the Historicity of the Bible | Christian Research Institute

 

[Golan]

What do you mean i just told you they have found archeology proof of some of the towns mentioned in the bible and some of the people mentioned. Its there in black and white the same as if they found king tuts tomb.

I just told you that Jesus is verified by non biblical sources. Are you living in the dark ages everyone knows that even non believers. Josephus,Phinly the younger and Tacitus all mention Jesus.


Ancient Evidence for Jesus from Non-Christian Sources - Probe Ministries

Biblical archaeology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archeology Proves The Bible - YouTube

Biblical Archaeology: Factual Evidence to Support the Historicity of the Bible | Christian Research Institute

What do you expect Christian web site to say? they are going to tell their usual lies.
Try reading what people who not care either way have to say?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Yes, an obvious double standard.

So your answers to my post were included in my quotes, so now I am going to have to go back and get each one to respond.

What is your evidence that people wrote down what Jesus was saying in real time and copies were sent around to be used to write the gospels?

The culture for one. Important events and and the fact that the first lines of communication were letters from those following Jesus to others in other areas that they wished to convey the gospel to.

For instance, Luke. HE says:

1:1 Since many have undertaken to arrange in proper order an account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as from the beginning the eyewitnesses and those becoming ministers of the Word handed down to us, 3 so also it seemed good to me, accurately following and investigating everything from the first, to write to you in order (an account), most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the words (of the gospel) you have been taught.*

As you can see this person he is writing to knew who Luke was and Luke claims there have been those who set forth to write down what was believed among them. He was among those that had events being fulfilled and had access to the eyewitness accounts from the beginning.



Luke is considered to be a accurate historian. He has given names of 32 countries, 54 cities and 9 islands without error. There have been Bible scholars that claimed that some of the names he had used were wrong but then later were proved correct by new evidence. IF a man who was so careful about historic information about those things we can be sure that if he says he witnessed some events and had access to the beginning testimonies of eye witnesses there is every reason to believe that he was.


We also have the early church writings that claim that the authors are who they say they are as well.

How does the evidence prove the copying was exact?

One of the most respected Old Testament scholars, the late Gleason Archer, examined the two Isaiah scrolls found in Cave 1 and wrote, "Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The five percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling."{7}
Despite the thousand year gap, scholars found the Masoretic Text and Dead Sea Scrolls to be nearly identical. The Dead Sea Scrolls provide valuable evidence that the Old Testament had been accurately and carefully preserved.


http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223603/k.B3EE

/The_Dead_Sea_Scrolls_Shed_Light_on_the_Accuracy_of_our_Bible.htm



No, I don't believe it would be possible to accurately verbally communicate a story over 40-70 years with a multitude of people being involved and having what was written after all that time, be accurate.

Do you believe that the Jewish historian Josephus and the Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius reflect an accurate history of their times?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Oh wow......

You have a lot invested in that book and it's messages,right...? So, have you ever taken the trouble to actually research it, or have you just accepted whatever has been told you by pastors, parents, whatever...?

I have researched it.

The gospels were not written by the apostles. None of them. They were written decades after the supposed death of Jesus. This has been well established by biblical scholars.

Prove it.

If the truth is important to you, as opposed to pretending to know things, do yourself a favour and undertake some research....

Well if you have done the research you will not mind presenting me with the proof you claim exists that what you claim is true.

 

[Oncedeceived]

With every word of it being a record of what actually happened, that's not exactly 100% true,
in fact less than 0.1% is true other than the place names.

The people who told you the bible is true only want your money.

It is more than obvious that you have not done any research on your own. Luke was a great historian and has been shown to be accurate in all the countries, cities, names, and islands that he has spoken of in his gospel.

 

[Oncedeceived]

What do you expect Christian web site to say? they are going to tell their usual lies.
Try reading what people who not care either way have to say?

Are you kidding. Time to apologize.

 

[mzungu]

It is more than obvious that you have not done any research on your own. Luke was a great historian and has been shown to be accurate in all the countries, cities, names, and islands that he has spoken of in his gospel.

I can name thousands of fictional novels that contain real places, city names, countries, etc. What makes you think that because the Bible contains real place names makes the flood, genesis, real too?

 

[bhsmte]

So your answers to my post were included in my quotes, so now I am going to have to go back and get each one to respond.



The culture for one. Important events and and the fact that the first lines of communication were letters from those following Jesus to others in other areas that they wished to convey the gospel to.

For instance, Luke. HE says:

1:1 Since many have undertaken to arrange in proper order an account of the events that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as from the beginning the eyewitnesses and those becoming ministers of the Word handed down to us, 3 so also it seemed good to me, accurately following and investigating everything from the first, to write to you in order (an account), most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the words (of the gospel) you have been taught.*

As you can see this person he is writing to knew who Luke was and Luke claims there have been those who set forth to write down what was believed among them. He was among those that had events being fulfilled and had access to the eyewitness accounts from the beginning.



Luke is considered to be a accurate historian. He has given names of 32 countries, 54 cities and 9 islands without error. There have been Bible scholars that claimed that some of the names he had used were wrong but then later were proved correct by new evidence. IF a man who was so careful about historic information about those things we can be sure that if he says he witnessed some events and had access to the beginning testimonies of eye witnesses there is every reason to believe that he was.


We also have the early church writings that claim that the authors are who they say they are as well.






One of the most respected Old Testament scholars, the late Gleason Archer, examined the two Isaiah scrolls found in Cave 1 and wrote, "Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The five percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling."{7}
Despite the thousand year gap, scholars found the Masoretic Text and Dead Sea Scrolls to be nearly identical. The Dead Sea Scrolls provide valuable evidence that the Old Testament had been accurately and carefully preserved.


http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4223603/k.B3EE

Do you believe that the Jewish historian Josephus and the Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius reflect an accurate history of their times?

Well, I hate to say this (considering your screen name) but you have been deceived.

Very few scholars and historians would agree with your position and there is NO CREDIBLE evidence to support your claim. The only folks who would be in your camp, would be the most conservative evangelical christian scholars.

The followers of Jesus, were illiterate and not only couldn't write, but they couldn't read either and they spoke aramaic. The NT, was written in Greek and decades (I repeat decades) after Jesus died. Yet, you claim they were keeping copious notes of Jesus all along.

Do yourself a favor, and do some OBJECTIVE review of the historical and scholarly aspect of the NT. You have obviously latched onto the opinions of a fringe group of scholars to confirm what you want to believe, without credible evidence.

Lastly, if you are of the position that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the true authors of the 4 gospels, you are really out over your skis. Even most conservative scholars will acknowledge, the authors of the 4 gospels were anonymous and were written decades after Jesus died.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Well, I hate to say this (considering your screen name) but you have been deceived.

Very few scholars and historians would agree with your position and there is NO CREDIBLE evidence to support your claim. The only folks who would be in your camp, would be the most conservative evangelical christian scholars.

The followers of Jesus, were illiterate and not only couldn't write, but they couldn't read either and they spoke aramaic. The NT, was written in Greek and decades (I repeat decades) after Jesus died. Yet, you claim they were keeping copious notes of Jesus all along.

Do yourself a favor, and do some OBJECTIVE review of the historical and scholarly aspect of the NT. You have obviously latched onto the opinions of a fringe group of scholars to confirm what you want to believe, without credible evidence.

Lastly, if you are of the position that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the true authors of the 4 gospels, you are really out over your skis. Even most conservative scholars will acknowledge, the authors of the 4 gospels were anonymous and were written decades after Jesus died.

Ok lets start with the scholars and historians. Please provide those sources that you make your claims from.

 

[Golan]

Ok lets start with the scholars and historians. Please provide those sources that you make your claims from.

Why not do it for yourself? or are you not allowed to do that? you are the one who needs convincing no one else,
why not find out the flaws and use them against the unbelievers? information is power so use it for your God.

 

[bhsmte]

Ok lets start with the scholars and historians. Please provide those sources that you make your claims from.

You made the claim that the followers of Jesus were taking notes and provided those notes to others.

So, back up that claim with evidence. Also, back up the claim that the authors of the 4 gospels were indeed Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

 

[bhsmte]

Ok lets start with the scholars and historians. Please provide those sources that you make your claims from.

This page provides a boatload of references to scholars/historians in regards to the gospels.

You will find, that the vast majority of these scholars (christian or not) will agree on the following:

-the authors of the 4 gospels are anonymous and the names attached to them were added centuries after they were written
-Mark was the first gospel, written about 40 years after Jesus died and John was the last, finished about 70 years after Jesus died.
-Matthew and Luke, basically copied much of Mark and John is a gospel that gives historians and scholars the greatest pause and they feel is the least reliable
-The NT was written in Greek and Jesus' followers spoke aramaic and were illiterate

Do your own research into these opinions. Read conservative, moderate and liberal scholars/historians and look to what they use as their support for their claims (is it theologically based, or based on facts supported by the evidence).


Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[EternalDragon]

Well, I hate to say this (considering your screen name) but you have been deceived.

Very few scholars and historians would agree with your position and there is NO CREDIBLE evidence to support your claim. The only folks who would be in your camp, would be the most conservative evangelical christian scholars.

The followers of Jesus, were illiterate and not only couldn't write, but they couldn't read either and they spoke aramaic. The NT, was written in Greek and decades (I repeat decades) after Jesus died. Yet, you claim they were keeping copious notes of Jesus all along.

Do yourself a favor, and do some OBJECTIVE review of the historical and scholarly aspect of the NT. You have obviously latched onto the opinions of a fringe group of scholars to confirm what you want to believe, without credible evidence.

Lastly, if you are of the position that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the true authors of the 4 gospels, you are really out over your skis. Even most conservative scholars will acknowledge, the authors of the 4 gospels were anonymous and were written decades after Jesus died.

Jewish boys started learning in school at age 5 and then at age 10 started learning Greek. All Jews knew how to read and write more than one language and were very well educated.

Everyone knows that the NT were copies of copies and there are no originals. Kind of hard to say when they were written then, I would guess. Or if they had been passed down from the time of Jesus throughout the churches. If they can't figure out who wrote them then how can they know when an exact date of an original, that doesn't exist, was written?

Think.

https://sites.google.com/site/educationinjesustime/

 

[biggles53]

I have researched it.



Prove it.


Well if you have done the research you will not mind presenting me with the proof you claim exists that what you claim is true.

What is it with creationists...?

Why do you always expect others to do your homework for you...?

Library : Who Wrote the Gospels? - Catholic Culture

Who wrote the Gospels in the New Testament - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

Who Wrote the Gospels?

Gospels Not Written By Matthew, Mark, Luke or John « The Church Of Truth™

Can I also suggest that you read some of the work done by people like Bart Ehrmann.....

 

[Oncedeceived]

Why not do it for yourself? or are you not allowed to do that? you are the one who needs convincing no one else,
why not find out the flaws and use them against the unbelievers? information is power so use it for your God.

You all seem to think that you make claims and not have to back those claims and that is false. You can't just throw anything out there and not expect to have to bring in sources for your claims.

 

[bhsmte]

Jewish boys started learning in school at age 5 and then at age 10 started learning Greek. All Jews knew how to read and write more than one language and were very well educated.

Everyone knows that the NT were copies of copies and there are no originals. Kind of hard to say when they were written then, I would guess. Or if they had been passed down from the time of Jesus throughout the churches. If they can't figure out who wrote them then how can they know when an exact date of an original, that doesn't exist, was written?

Think.

https://sites.google.com/site/educationinjesustime/

Historians have methods to determine when something is written as they have methods to determine what is likely credible or not. The summary I attached, with the sources, explains what the majority of historians agree on in regards to the same.

 

[Oncedeceived]

What is it with creationists...?

Why do you always expect others to do your homework for you...?

Library : Who Wrote the Gospels? - Catholic Culture

Who wrote the Gospels in the New Testament - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

Who Wrote the Gospels?

Gospels Not Written By Matthew, Mark, Luke or John « The Church Of Truth™

Can I also suggest that you read some of the work done by people like Bart Ehrmann.....

What is it about you unbelievers that you always think you have some stunning unknown material that we have either dismissed or do not know about? The links (two of which are on my bookmarks) are completely in line with what I've said. Yes, the authors are not named, however the church has long felt they were who they said they were. While there is no evidence either way as to the proof of the authors identity, there are mention of the gospels which attribute the gospels to the said authors in out side sources some 25 years after the fact. There is a multitude of reasons to believe that these people are who they say they are or they are reporting the actual information given by them to supply the information.

Bart Ehrmann is regurgitating what his mentor examined prior to him. It is nothing new and in fact makes no difference to the doctrinal integrity of the gospels.