• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

My Documentation Challenge

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Because many people who reject evolution because certain *ahem* "documentation" contradicts it, I think it's high time we put the accuracy of that "documentation" under scrutiny.

When the women went to Jesus' tomb following his resurrection, was Jesus there?
 

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
This has nothing to do with the topic of this forum.

I beg to differ.

Many people choose to accept the reliability of certain documentation over actual science. Some even go so far as to call such documentation "infallible."

That being the case, the reliability of that documentation should be examined, so as to determine whether or not it is a substitute for scientific research.
 
Upvote 0

dysert

Member
Feb 29, 2012
6,233
2,238
USA
✟120,484.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Because many people who reject evolution because certain *ahem* "documentation" contradicts it, I think it's high time we put the accuracy of that "documentation" under scrutiny.

When the women went to Jesus' tomb following his resurrection, was Jesus there?
Surely you know what the documentation says.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Surely you know what the documentation says.

But of course -- but who else does? That's what makes this a challenge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larniavc
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Because many people who reject evolution because certain *ahem* "documentation" contradicts it, I think it's high time we put the accuracy of that "documentation" under scrutiny.

When the women went to Jesus' tomb following his resurrection, was Jesus there?
Your approach is basically flawed. You have bought into the "evolution rejectors'" dogma that the "documentation" is a unitary work by a single author, and that the level of historical accuracy in one part has a necessary relation to the level of historical accuracy in some other part.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Your approach is basically flawed. You have bought into the "evolution rejectors'" dogma that the "documentation" is a unitary work by a single author, and that the level of historical accuracy in one part has a necessary relation to the level of historical accuracy in some other part.

I'm humoring them.... willing to play the game by their rules for the sake of discussion.

Besides, according to many of those "evolution rejectors," the documentation in question is the work of a single author... or should I say Author?
 
Upvote 0

CLAVDIVS

Member
Oct 26, 2016
19
6
50
Oceania
✟29,384.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
I don't think Jesus was at the tomb, but he was nearby.

"And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word. And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him." Matthew 28:8-9
 
Upvote 0

juvenissun

... and God saw that it was good.
Apr 5, 2007
25,452
805
73
Chicago
✟138,626.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I'm humoring them.... willing to play the game by their rules for the sake of discussion.

Besides, according to many of those "evolution rejectors," the documentation in question is the work of a single author... or should I say Author?

Why is a document written by ONE person with no witness around has to be NOT reliable?

Do you know if we do not know the reliability of an important document, what should we do? Should you just reject it?

Pretty low level challenge.
 
Upvote 0

Kenny'sID

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 28, 2016
18,194
6,997
71
USA
✟585,424.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Many people choose to accept the reliability of certain documentation over actual science.

But of course -- but who else does? That's what makes this a challenge.

I'm sure some are as tired of hearing me say, "here we go with the actual science stuff again", at least as tired as I am of hearing you all call a scientists opinion of what actual science proves, science, when it's not, it's opinion.

So what really makes this a a challenge, is getting you to realize you haven't a leg to stand on before you even put your argument on the table.
 
Upvote 0

GazzaStott

Active Member
Dec 22, 2016
43
18
35
United KIngdom
✟1,222.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Because many people who reject evolution because certain *ahem* "documentation" contradicts it, I think it's high time we put the accuracy of that "documentation" under scrutiny.

When the women went to Jesus' tomb following his resurrection, was Jesus there?
I thought that Christians might find this interesting so I took this from here: http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/...-of-mark-and-why-it-makes-all-the-difference/

Most general Bible readers have the mistaken impression that Matthew, the opening book of the New Testament, must be our first and earliest Gospel, with Mark, Luke and John following. The assumption is that this order of the Gospels is a chronological one, when in fact it is a theological one. Scholars and historians are almost universally agreed that Mark is our earliest Gospel–by several decades, and this insight turns out to have profound implications for our understanding of the “Jesus story” and how it was passed down to us in our New Testament Gospel traditions.

The problem with the Gospel of Mark for the final editors of the New Testament was that it was grossly deficient. First it is significantly shorter than the other Gospels–with only 16 chapters compared to Matthew (28), Luke (24) and John (21). But more important is how Mark begins his Gospel and how he ends it.

He has no account of the virgin birth of Jesus–or for that matter, any birth of Jesus at all. In fact, Joseph, husband of Mary, is never named in Mark’s Gospel at all–and Jesus is called a “son of Mary,” see my previous post on this here. But even more significant is Mark’s strange ending. He has no appearances of Jesus following the visit of the women on Easter morning to the empty tomb!

Like the other three Gospels Mark recounts the visit of Mary Magdalene and her companions to the tomb of Jesus early Sunday morning. Upon arriving they find the blocking stone at the entrance of the tomb removed and a young man–notice–not an angel–tells them:

“Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen; he is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.” And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing (Mark 16:6-8)

And there the Gospel simply ends!

Mark gives no accounts of anyone seeing Jesus as Matthew, Luke, and John later report. In fact, according to Mark, any future epiphanies or “sightings” of Jesus will be in the north, in Galilee, not in Jerusalem.
This original ending of Mark was viewed by later Christians as so deficient that not only was Mark placed second in order in the New Testament, but various endings were added by editors and copyists in some manuscripts to try to remedy things. The longest concocted ending, which became Mark 16:9-19, became so treasured that it was included in the King James Version of the Bible, favored for the past 500 years by Protestants, as well as translations of the Latin Vulgate, used by Catholics. This meant that for countless millions of Christians it became sacred scripture–but it is patently bogus. You might check whatever Bible you use and see if the following verses are included–the chances are good they will be, since the Church, by and large, found Mark’s original ending so lacking. Here is that forged ending of Mark:

Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons. She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it. After these things he appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country. And they went back and told the rest, but they did not believe them. Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover. So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by accompanying signs.

Even though this ending is patently false, people loved it, and to this day conservative Christians regularly denounce “liberal” scholars who point out this forgery, claiming that they are trying to destroy “God’s word.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,176
52,652
Guam
✟5,149,441.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Most general Bible readers have the mistaken impression that Matthew, the opening book of the New Testament, must be our first and earliest Gospel, with Mark, Luke and John following.
You're supposed to combine the Gospels to get the whole story.

My favorite example is what is written on the sign placed on Jesus' cross.

To get the whole sign, simply combine the four Gospels.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,176
52,652
Guam
✟5,149,441.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Is that what the writers intended or did you make that up yourself?
That is a basic tenet of Bible interpretation.

Isaiah 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Here it is, demonstrated:

Question: What was written and placed on the Cross?

Matthew 27:37 And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Mark 15:26 And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Luke 23:38 And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

John 19:19 And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.


Answer: THIS IS JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS.
 
Upvote 0

Vaccine

Newbie
Oct 22, 2011
425
40
✟19,166.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Because many people who reject evolution because certain *ahem* "documentation" contradicts it

Got any polls that show that 'many' people think that way?

Anyway, if you make the point the Bible is inaccurate, so what's it to you some people reject a scientific theory on flawed philosophical ground?
 
Upvote 0

Jimmy D

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2014
5,147
5,995
✟277,099.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Got any polls that show that 'many' people think that way?

Oh come on...

Answers in Genesis statement of faith:

By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

Creation.com about us:

Facts are always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information. By definition, therefore, no interpretation of facts in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record.

Insitute for Creation Research what we do:

The Institute for Creation Research is unique among scientific research organizations. Our research is conducted within a biblical worldview, since ICR is committed to the absolute authority of the inerrant Word of God. The real facts of science will always agree with biblical revelation because the God who made the world of God inspired the Word of God.

I could go on but I resent giving those type of sites any more clicks.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Got any polls that show that 'many' people think that way?

Anyway, if you make the point the Bible is inaccurate, so what's it to you some people reject a scientific theory on flawed philosophical ground?

The first part of your post has been shown to be wrong. So what are the supposed flaws in the theory of evolution?
 
Upvote 0