Do you believe that 2007 will have the second coming of Jesus Christ?

[Bono]

English "Canel"  now we are even in the spelling wars.

Canel?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Canal

Anyways, you provided no rebuttal to my argument.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Every Christian seems to want to believe that he is living in the End of Days.

Not me.

Besides, you have to draw a line between the sort of historical groups that thought they were living in the End of Days (such as the Taborites) and modern groups that think the same.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

No, and I know this will sound weird, but ... the world isn't in enough turmoil yet in my mind.

[RRB]

As if any of that actually happened.  Accession into heaven while angles danced around him and dudes in white, and on and on.  Makes for a good movie,  but face it, that's a story.   Jesus died a violent death due to his liberal views toward humanity which were wonderful views even if they were filled with the supernatural.  His followers told the story over and over.  It got bigger and bigger.  After time went by, there was all of this wild stuff about rising from the dead, etc, etc.

English "Canel"  now we are even in the spelling wars.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Jesus most definitely did not have a "liberal" view of humanity; you are either ignorant of what He said on the matter, or what a liberal view on it is.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

After time went by, there was all of this wild stuff about rising from the dead, etc, etc.

How long after the death of Jesus do you believe this "wild story" about rising from the dead started?

[Bono]

As if any of that actually happened.  Accession into heaven while angles danced around him and dudes in white, and on and on.  Makes for a good movie,  but face it, that's a story.   Jesus died a violent death due to his liberal views toward humanity which were wonderful views even if they were filled with the supernatural.  His followers told the story over and over.  It got bigger and bigger.  After time went by, there was all of this wild stuff about rising from the dead, etc, etc.

English "Canel"  now we are even in the spelling wars.

No proof.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Every Christian seems to want to believe that he is living in the End of Days.

Not me.

^^^^^^^^^^

Of course, I don't even believe in the "End Times", at least not in a literal sense and the way fundies do.

[Gabu]

No proof.

Of course, those who assert that the Biblical account is 100% accurate have roughly equal proof.

The only people who are not required to give any are the smart ones who simply assert that we don't know.

[Bono]

No proof.

Of course, those who assert that the Biblical account is 100% accurate have roughly equal proof.

The only people who are not required to give any are the smart ones who simply assert that we don't know.

You are misinterpreting me. I am not asserting that there is no proof for his assertions--not that there could be, because his assertions are merely that he finds it funny--but that he didn't present any. I cannot refute an argument that doesn't exist, because nothing is being argued, he is just saying things absolutely proof-free.

And actually, if that statement if merely personal, e.g. "I don't know", I agree that no proof is necesary. However, if the statement is categorical, e.g. "We can't know", then proof is required of just why can't "we" know.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No proof.

Of course, those who assert that the Biblical account is 100% accurate have roughly equal proof.

The only people who are not required to give any are the smart ones who simply assert that we don't know.

actually, there is proof:

The book of Acts, believed to have been written by Luke, describes: 54 various cities… 9 various islands in the Mediterranean Sea…32 various countries…and 95 various people including 62 who are not mentioned by any other New Testament book and 27 who are unbelievers including civil and military leaders.

No discrepancies between Acts and the historical record have been found.  Such accuracy of the 1st Century world could have only come from a 1st Century eyewitness.

Where discrepancies have once thought to have existed, archeological evidence has proven the accuracy of the Book of Acts. 

Examples:

Titles used in Acts to describe various authorities have been proven to be correct. McDowell observes how some scholars assumed that Luke's use of the word 'politarchs' (17:6), as a title for civil authorities in Thessalonica was thought to be an inaccurate description since the word was not known to exist in classical literature.31 However, more recent discoveries have shown Luke to be perfectly accurate in his use of this word, since some nineteen inscriptions were discovered that make use of the title, five of which are used in specific reference to Thessalonica.32 The title "chief man" is also an accurate description used by Luke to describe the Roman governor (Publius) of Malta where Paul was shipwrecked (28:7). This official title has been archaeologically attested with the discovery of two Maltese inscriptions, one in Greek and the other in Latin.33
 
Acts specifically mentions individuals by name and is accurate in describing their positions in society as well as their surrounding circumstances. For example, the proconsul, Gallio is named in Acts 18:12-16. He governed over Achaia and was also known as the brother of Seneca, the famous Roman philosopher and tutor of Nero.34 In ancient Delphi a letter of the Emperor Claudius indicates that Gallio must have become Proconsul of Achaia in A.D. 51.35 Achaia was a Senatorial province from 27 B.C. to A.D. 15, and also from A.D. 44 onward.36 It is particularly interesting to note that Luke accurately calls Gallio by his official title, "proconsul of Achaia." By doing this, Luke departs from his usual custom of calling countries by their general titles and instead of referring to the province of Achaia by the more ordinary name of Greece he does not call Gallio the proconsul of Greece but of Achaia.37 Luke's mention of the Agabus' prophecy of a great famine extending over all the world, being fulfilled in the days of Claudius Caesar (11:27-30) has also been proven to be an historically correct reference when compared with other ancient writings. For example, the historian Suetonius spoke of frequent famines transpiring under Claudius (A.D. 41-54), Eusebius speaks of famine in Greece, and Tacitus, along with Dion Cassius, both make reference to two famines in Rome at this particular time.38 In addition to these sources, Marshall notes that Josephus describes how Helena of Adiabene contributed towards helping the hungry of Jerusalem by sending corn in A.D. 46.39

Archaeology has shown the book of Acts to be accurate in its references to commerce. For example, Acts 16:11-15 records how at Philippi, Paul and his companions converse with some of the cities local women, one of whom is specifically named as "Lydia...a purple merchant from the city of Thyatira..." The womans name is a reminder that Thyatira was situated in the ancient kingdom of Lydia; a place that was well known for the manufacturing of purple dyes extracted from the juice of the madder root.40 In addition to this, there is also inscriptural evidence to show that the trading in purple dye was prevalent in Philippi at this time.41

McDowell has noticed how Luke has often been accused, by some, of presenting inaccurate information. The statement that Lystra and Derbe were in Lycaonia and Iconium was not (Acts 14:6) was considered to be wrong by archaeologists and consequently unreliable as an historical source.42 Their reasons for coming to these conclusions were based primarily on the writings of Cicero and the elder Pliny who refer to Iconium as being in Lycaonia.43 Although Xenophon, writing in 401 B.C. does say that Iconium was "the last city of Phrygia" the earlier statements by Cicero and Pliny were given more serious consideration on account of them living much nearer to apostolic times.44 However, archaeologists were eventually led to conclude that Luke's implication in Acts was indeed correct. This change of thought occurred when Sir William Ramsay (who originally held to the Tubingen theory)45 discovered inscriptions that clearly revealed that Phrygian was spoken in Iconium right up to the end of the second century. The statements by earlier writers were simply speaking of Iconium as being in Lycaonia in a general sense on account of it being situated near the Lycaonian frontier and therefore partook in the fortunes of that region.46 Luke was therefore correct in referring to Iconium as a Phrygian city in the first century.

The book of Acts proves itself to be historically reliable from archaeology when presenting various religious activities and practices that were common to Luke's first century environment. While at Athens Paul makes reference to the people being "very religious" (Acts 17:22). Thompson notes how other ancient writers such as Sophocles, Pausanias, and Josephus also made similar observations.47 The idol that bore the inscription "to an unknown god" (v. 23) is of interest. Although this inscription has not yet been discovered in Athens,48 Pauanias, who visited the city in 150 A.D. gives a thorough account of the religious activity of the Athenasians in his book Description of Greece and mentions "alters of the gods named unknown."49 The practice of exorcism is another area for consideration. Thomson observes how Luke's description of attempted exorcism by the Jewish Seven Sons of Sceva in Acts 19:13-16 is in accordance with Jewish practices prevalent in the first century.50 Often, the practice was associated with various magical rites and practices whereby the sacred name of God would be pronounced.51

Probably one of the most significant archaeological discoveries supporting the historical reliability of Acts was unearthed by the architect, J.T. Wood. Inspired by the story of the silversmiths of the Ephesian goddess Artemis in Acts 19:23-41, Wood began a work of excavation in May 1863 which eventually led to the discovery of the Temple of Artemis. Beneath 25 feet of soil and rubble Wood's first significant discovery was a magnificent pavement, the bases of colossal pillars, and cylinders adorned with sculptures in honour of Artemis.52 From the remains of the temple itself, it has been calculated that it was about 343 feet long and 164 feet wide, and contained one hundred columns over six feet in diameter.53 During excavation, evidence was unearthed that revealed that the interior of the temple (measuring seventy feet wide) was lavishly decorated with brilliant colours, gold and silver.54 The altar, where it was thought the principal statue of Artemis stood behind, was twenty feet square.55 It was beneath this altar that one of Wood's own countrymen, David G. Hogarth, discovered a large array of statues of the goddess made from bronze, gold, ivory, and silver, thirty five years after Wood's initial discovery.56 It is quite possible that these were the very statues that were crafted by the silversmith's of Artemis as described by Luke in Acts 19: 23-41.57 Luke records how these craftsmen, influenced by Demetrius, were led to respond to the threat that Paul's preaching had on their livelihood with the words: "Great is Artemis of the Ephesians" (vv. 28, 34). There are in existence several ancient inscriptions proving that these particular words were commonly used in the practice of devotion and prayer.58 The great theatre where the Ephesian people rioted was situated on the slope of Mount Pion and capable of holding about 24,500 people.59 The ruins that can be seen today represent a later reconstruction than what existed in New Testament times although the basic structure was essentially the same as what existed in Paul's day.60

http://www.spotlightministries.org.uk/acts.htm

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Only dumbs care, jmfcst.

[Gabu]

The book of Acts, believed to have been written by Luke, describes: 54 various cities… 9 various islands in the Mediterranean Sea…32 various countries…and 95 various people including 62 who are not mentioned by any other New Testament book and 27 who are unbelievers including civil and military leaders.

No discrepancies between Acts and the historical record have been found.  Such accuracy of the 1st Century world could have only come from a 1st Century eyewitness.

[snip]

And... that proves that Jesus died and was resurrected how?  I don't know why I would dispute the fact that there was a guy named Luke who wrote some stuff in the first century.

The fact that Luke was good at describing stuff does not exactly prove that Jesus was the Son of God who came back to life three days after being crucified, etc.

[Joe Republic]

I've just written down on a piece of paper that I just ran five miles in under five minutes.  This is surely a miracle of epic proportions, especially since I'm disabled.  Perhaps if this piece of paper survives for two thousand years, people living then will believe it to be true.

[Bono]

I've just written down on a piece of paper that I just ran five miles in under five minutes.  This is surely a miracle of epic proportions, especially since I'm disabled.  Perhaps if this piece of paper survives for two thousand years, people living then will believe it to be true.

Well, that is what an historian 2000 years in the future would have to believe, unless there was contradictory records. If there is a problem, it's not with christianity, but with the method of history.

Did you know that we only have one biography of Mohammed, written 212 years after his death, which used a source from about 100 years after his death, and yet "the historical scepticism of critical European scholarship is substantially less" where Muhammed is concerned! Are you going to put into doubt the records of the activities of Mohammed too? Perhaps in a while, you'll be arguing that we cannot know anything about what happened before we were born.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

The book of Acts, believed to have been written by Luke, describes: 54 various cities… 9 various islands in the Mediterranean Sea…32 various countries…and 95 various people including 62 who are not mentioned by any other New Testament book and 27 who are unbelievers including civil and military leaders.

No discrepancies between Acts and the historical record have been found.  Such accuracy of the 1st Century world could have only come from a 1st Century eyewitness.

[snip]

And... that proves that Jesus died and was resurrected how?  I don't know why I would dispute the fact that there was a guy named Luke who wrote some stuff in the first century.

The fact that Luke was good at describing stuff does not exactly prove that Jesus was the Son of God who came back to life three days after being crucified, etc.

But there lies the trap…

Since the book of Acts could only have been written in the 1st Century by an eyewitness of those events, for what other reason would they have had opportunity to experience so many different places and meet with so many civil/military leaders…if not for preaching the Gospel?

And if they did indeed preach the Gospel to all these places and people during the middle of the 1st Century, for what reason would they have conspired to make up the story of Jesus’ resurrection?

[RRB]

Joey!!!!!! Great example.

[Joe Republic]

I've just written down on a piece of paper that I just ran five miles in under five minutes.  This is surely a miracle of epic proportions, especially since I'm disabled.  Perhaps if this piece of paper survives for two thousand years, people living then will believe it to be true.

Well, that is what an historian 2000 years in the future would have to believe, unless there was contradictory records. If there is a problem, it's not with christianity, but with the method of history.

Did you know that we only have one biography of Mohammed, written 212 years after his death, which used a source from about 100 years after his death, and yet "the historical scepticism of critical European scholarship is substantially less" where Muhammed is concerned! Are you going to put into doubt the records of the activities of Mohammed too? Perhaps in a while, you'll be arguing that we cannot know anything about what happened before we were born.

I'm well aware of the issues surrounding historical accuracy, and the verification thereof.  The problem is that I simply cannot believe in the accuracy of an account of any event that is simply unbelievable.  Hence my anecdotal example.

[Bono]

I've just written down on a piece of paper that I just ran five miles in under five minutes.  This is surely a miracle of epic proportions, especially since I'm disabled.  Perhaps if this piece of paper survives for two thousand years, people living then will believe it to be true.

Well, that is what an historian 2000 years in the future would have to believe, unless there was contradictory records. If there is a problem, it's not with christianity, but with the method of history.

Did you know that we only have one biography of Mohammed, written 212 years after his death, which used a source from about 100 years after his death, and yet "the historical scepticism of critical European scholarship is substantially less" where Muhammed is concerned! Are you going to put into doubt the records of the activities of Mohammed too? Perhaps in a while, you'll be arguing that we cannot know anything about what happened before we were born.

I'm well aware of the issues surrounding historical accuracy, and the verification thereof.  The problem is that I simply cannot believe in the accuracy of an account of any event that is simply unbelievable.  Hence my anecdotal example.

Maybe you need to revise your presupositions.

[Joe Republic]

Why?  Is it such a terrible thing that I disbelieve the Biblical accounts of miracles and such for the same reason that I would disbelieve the 'account' of my own physical feat?

[Bono]

Why?  Is it such a terrible thing that I disbelieve the Biblical accounts of miracles and such for the same reason that I would disbelieve the 'account' of my own physical feat?

The problem with your pressuposition is that you disregard supernatural events a priori, and thus even if you are presented with evidence for a supernatural event, you can never consider it unbiasedly because your pressupositions exclude them a priori. However, that pressuposition is completely arbitrary.

[afleitch]

I've just written down on a piece of paper that I just ran five miles in under five minutes.  This is surely a miracle of epic proportions, especially since I'm disabled.  Perhaps if this piece of paper survives for two thousand years, people living then will believe it to be true.

Actually thats a good example. If people followed the 'Almighty Joe' in his lifetime and after his death they would collect as much information about him. Much of that would be lost or change hands or be edited throughout the years or would be collected by people who had never met him, including that scrap of paper, into a book. The people would then say Joe ran a mile a minute. Anything to the contrary would be deemed as heresy and any references to his disability would be destroyed.

In two thousand years people would no doubt say that Joe existed and have evidence for his existance, but certain people would say it was physically impossible at the time (who knows about the future) to run a mile a minute yet still believe in the Almighty Joe while other would insist to their dying breath that Joe did what he or others said he did.

[Gabu]

But there lies the trap…

Since the book of Acts could only have been written in the 1st Century by an eyewitness of those events, for what other reason would they have had opportunity to experience so many different places and meet with so many civil/military leaders…if not for preaching the Gospel?

And if they did indeed preach the Gospel to all these places and people during the middle of the 1st Century, for what reason would they have conspired to make up the story of Jesus’ resurrection?

I don't know, but there are an awful lot of possibilities given the fact that all of that was 2000 years ago, and I don't exactly think that "Jesus was the Son of God and everything they said was 100% true" is the likeliest.  It's entirely possible that they all saw something, but were mistaken about what they saw, or perhaps only one person saw something and the others didn't want to admit that they hadn't seen it, or whatever.

It's entirely possible that all of them did indeed earnestly believe in everything, but even if they did, that doesn't mean that everything actually was as it was written.

[Bono]

I've just written down on a piece of paper that I just ran five miles in under five minutes.  This is surely a miracle of epic proportions, especially since I'm disabled.  Perhaps if this piece of paper survives for two thousand years, people living then will believe it to be true.

Actually thats a good example. If people followed the 'Almighty Joe' in his lifetime and after his death they would collect as much information about him. Much of that would be lost or change hands or be edited throughout the years or would be collected by people who had never met him, including that scrap of paper, into a book. The people would then say Joe ran a mile a minute. Anything to the contrary would be deemed as heresy and any references to his disability would be destroyed.

In two thousand years people would no doubt say that Joe existed and have evidence for his existance, but certain people would say it was physically impossible at the time (who knows about the future) to run a mile a minute yet still believe in the Almighty Joe while other would insist to their dying breath that Joe did what he or others said he did.

There is no evidence for said editing. All copies we have of new Testament Texts say the same, except for three small passages (1 John 5:7-8; John 7:53-8:11 and Mark 16:9-20). All you have left is appeal to conspiracy theory.

[afleitch]

I've just written down on a piece of paper that I just ran five miles in under five minutes.  This is surely a miracle of epic proportions, especially since I'm disabled.  Perhaps if this piece of paper survives for two thousand years, people living then will believe it to be true.

Actually thats a good example. If people followed the 'Almighty Joe' in his lifetime and after his death they would collect as much information about him. Much of that would be lost or change hands or be edited throughout the years or would be collected by people who had never met him, including that scrap of paper, into a book. The people would then say Joe ran a mile a minute. Anything to the contrary would be deemed as heresy and any references to his disability would be destroyed.

In two thousand years people would no doubt say that Joe existed and have evidence for his existance, but certain people would say it was physically impossible at the time (who knows about the future) to run a mile a minute yet still believe in the Almighty Joe while other would insist to their dying breath that Joe did what he or others said he did.

There is no evidence for said editing. All copies we have of new Testament Texts say the same, except for three small passages (1 John 5:7-8; John 7:53-8:11 and Mark 16:9-20). All you have left is appeal to conspiracy theory.

Actually there is considerable historiographial evidence that there has been editing, both of the greek text and of course examples of papal edicts resulting in changes in translation alongside numerous existing and losts texts that never made the 'final cut' so to speak of the NT. And it is ludicrous and historically false to suggest otherwise (I have earned a qualification in historiography from a biblical context this gained at Jesuit college so I'm not saying this for the sake of argument!)