The No true Scotsman Fallacy

Architeuthus · May 21, 2015

smaneck said:
Except Paul didn't write 2 Timothy

I think he did.

There has been debate over the Pastoral Epistles, but the evidence against Pauline authorship is extremely weak. Polycarp cites 1 Timothy; the Muratorian Canon lists the Pastorals as Pauline; minor vocabulary differences are explained by their different genre; and to use Marcion as an authority on this issue (given the way he tossed out so much of the NT) is just insane.

bhsmte · May 21, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
Try the sermon on the mount (Matthew chapters 5 through 7) and the passage I mentioned before Matthew 25:31-48.

Cool. Still looking for how you would go about testing an individual, with this easy method you described and have it produce reliable results.

MoreCoffee · May 21, 2015

bhsmte said:
Cool. Still looking for how you would go about testing an individual, with this easy method you described and have it produce reliable results.

Like I said, watch what they do and say and compare to what Jesus teaches. Those passages (the sermon on the mount and the other passage) will give you the specifics about behaviour, if you need more then read more of the gospel of saint Matthew.

morningstar2651 · May 21, 2015

A New Dawn said:
No. Jesus wouldn't have done the same. The Jews were slaves to Rome the entire time Jesus was alive on earth, and He never once ordered jihad. In fact, Jesus told his people to "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's". Jesus restored the guard's ear after Peter cut it off when Jesus was arrested. Jesus would have done NOTHING similar. Nothing.

And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain. Deuteronomy 2:34
And we utterly destroyed them, ... utterly destroying the men, women, and children, of every city. Deuteronomy 3:6
And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them. Deuteronomy 7:2
And thou shalt consume all the people which the LORD thy God shall deliver thee; thine eye shall have no pity upon them. Deuteronomy 7:16
Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. Deuteronomy 13:15
But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth. Deuteronomy 20:16-17
And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword. Joshua 6:21
So smote all the country ... he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. Joshua 10:40
Thus saith the LORD of hosts ... go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. 1 Samuel 15:2-3

"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you ... Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die." -- Dt.13:6-10

bhsmte · May 21, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
Like I said, watch what they do and say and compare to what Jesus teaches. Those passages (the sermon on the mount and the other passage) will give you the specifics about behaviour, if you need more then read more of the gospel of saint Matthew.

You can't get around reality. It is all open to subjective interpretation and people will have varying opinions.

smaneck · May 21, 2015

Architeuthus said:
I think he did.

There has been debate over the Pastoral Epistles, but the evidence against Pauline authorship is extremely weak. Polycarp cites 1 Timothy; the Muratorian Canon lists the Pastorals as Pauline; minor vocabulary differences are explained by their different genre; and to use Marcion as an authority on this issue (given the way he tossed out so much of the NT) is just insane.

Marcion is being referred to because heretical or not, he tried to come up with the first New Testament canon. That's what finally got other Christians to realize they'd better come up with one themselves! He was also very partial to the Paul's writings and included all of them but the pastoral letters. This, along with the fact that second Timothy cited by anyone else until 170 A.D. strongly suggests that they either did not exist or were not well known when the Marcion canon was made in 140 A.D.
In any case, he is not being cited as an 'authority' he is being cited as evidence for dating, nothing more. As for Polycarp, while he may have cited 1 Timothy, it is not at all clear he cited II Timothy.

morningstar2651 · May 21, 2015

bhsmte said:
Cool. Still looking for how you would go about testing an individual, with this easy method you described and have it produce reliable results.

Mk.16:17-18 "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."
Lk.10:19 "Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you."

bhsmte · May 21, 2015

morningstar2651 said:
Mk.16:17-18 "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

Lk.10:19 "Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you."

Now we are getting somewhere.

MoreCoffee · May 21, 2015

bhsmte said:
Now we are getting somewhere.

I understand why you like those passages better than the sermon on the mount

smaneck · May 21, 2015

morningstar2651 said:
Mk.16:17-18 "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."

Lk.10:19 "Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you."

That's it! The snake handlers are the true Christians

Been to one of those, but I must admit I didn't touch the snakes.

MoreCoffee · May 21, 2015

smaneck said:
That's it! The snake handlers are the true Christians

Been to one of those, but I must admit I didn't touch the snakes.

Somehow that was predictable

morningstar2651 · May 21, 2015

Hammster said:
Not confused. Two names used to identify the same person.

No, they're not.

There was a sect of Christians in early Christianity that strongly opposed Arianism. They were known as the Luciferians. Lucifer is never used in the Bible as a proper noun (i.e. the name of someone) and it is even used in revelations in reference to Jesus.

Naming Satan "Lucifer" is non-Biblical. The use of Lucifer as a name for Satan didn't exist until at least the year 1526. As I have learned from this thread, you have to be very careful about believing things that aren't in the Bible, or you might go to Hell.

Does anyone here read Latin well enough to translate?

Nondum Luna nothos agitabat candida currus,
Nec stellis sulfere poli, nec Appoline pulchro,
Puniceo ille Satan surgebat Lucifer ortu.

Datak · May 21, 2015

morningstar2651 said:
No, they're not.

There was a sect of Christians in early Christianity that strongly opposed Arianism. They were known as the Luciferians. Lucifer is never used in the Bible as a proper noun (i.e. the name of someone) and it is even used in revelations in reference to Jesus.

Naming Satan "Lucifer" is non-Biblical. The use of Lucifer as a name for Satan didn't exist until at least the year 1526. As I have learned from this thread, you have to be very careful about believing things that aren't in the Bible, or you might go to Hell.

Does anyone here read Latin well enough to translate?

Nondum Luna nothos agitabat candida currus,
Nec stellis sulfere poli, nec Appoline pulchro,
Puniceo ille Satan surgebat Lucifer ortu.

Can't translate but I've read a bit in the past on the whole lucifer issue, I'm sure it's been suggested that lucifer would be more fitting of Jesus than of Satan.

Architeuthus · May 22, 2015

smaneck said:
Marcion is being referred to because heretical or not, he tried to come up with the first New Testament canon.

Yes, a canon that left out many of the books existing in his time, because he didn't agree with them. He just had a butchered version of Luke (but no Acts), and butchered versions of some of the epistles.

smaneck said:
This, along with the fact that second Timothy cited by anyone else until 170 A.D. strongly suggests that they either did not exist or were not well known when the Marcion canon was made in 140 A.D.

Polycarp cited 1 Timothy before Marcion's canon, so that argument doesn't fly.

smaneck said:
As for Polycarp, while he may have cited 1 Timothy, it is not at all clear he cited II Timothy.

Yes, but it demolishes arguments made against the Pastoral Epistles as a group.

Architeuthus · May 22, 2015

morningstar2651 said:
and it is even used in revelations in reference to Jesus

Not quite.

In the Greek, the linked verse is ἐγὼ Ἰησοῦς ἔπεμψα τὸν ἄγγελόν μου μαρτυρῆσαι ὑμῖν ταῦτα ἐπὶ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις. ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ῥίζα καὶ τὸ γένος Δαυεί, ὁ ἀστὴρ ὁ λαμπρὸς ὁ πρωϊνός.

KJV: I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

NIV: I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.

Vulgate: ego Iesus misi angelum meum testificari vobis haec in ecclesiis ego sum radix et genus David stella splendida et matutina.

No "Lucifer" to be found there in any version (in contrast to Isaiah 14:12, where "lucifer" does occur in the Vulgate: quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes -- as it also does in 2 Peter 1:19 with a different meaning: et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem cui bene facitis adtendentes quasi lucernae lucenti in caliginoso loco donec dies inlucescat et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris).

Possibly a Pagan such as yourself is not the ideal authority on the Christian Scriptures.

seekingsolace · May 22, 2015

morningstar2651 said:
As I have learned from this thread, you have to be very careful about believing things that aren't in the Bible, or you might go to Hell.

Wouldn't have thought that would be a concern to you.

Hetta · May 22, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
Like I said, watch what they do and say and compare to what Jesus teaches. Those passages (the sermon on the mount and the other passage) will give you the specifics about behaviour, if you need more then read more of the gospel of saint Matthew.

Do you spend much of your time watching people?

I'll tell you what, I have seen more hypocrisy in supposed Christians over the past few months than I've seen in my lifetime, including "Christian" politicians who spew anti-gay propaganda being outed for sending nude photos to men on gay websites, and the most visible Christian family being outed for failing to protect young girls from their son. I now firmly believe that the more someone protests their Christian credentials, the less they are to be trusted. I believe in the small people who just go out there and get it done. The people who work silently and unobserved in their churches, praying for others as they carry out the small duties that never get praised. And those many who work in dangerous places, with no camera crew and no comforts, to bring aid to the truly hurting. Those are the Christians to which I look. Public, loud Christians are the noisy gongs and clanging cymbals and I have no time for them at all.

GoingByzantine · May 22, 2015

Too much fighting in this thread.

LoAmmi · May 22, 2015

GoingByzantine said:
Too much fighting in this thread.

Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room!

A New Dawn · May 22, 2015

morningstar2651 said:
Different denominations accept different books as canon.

This wikipedia page has a handy dandy table that shows which books are accepted by which denominations.

Are Catholics not Christian because they consider the Book of Wisdom to be canon?

Do they have teachings that are based solely on the Book of Wisdom, and if so, what are they?

The No true Scotsman Fallacy

Squid

Newbie

Repentance works.

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Baha'i

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Repentance works.

Baha'i

Repentance works.

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Squid

Squid

Bah

I'll find my way home

Seeking the Narrow Road

Dispassionate

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency