Philo tells how to cherry pick the NT

"...I suggest a reading of the NT text and note its emphasis. The emphasis is upon character, attitudes, actions, wisdom and aspirations etc. It is these aspects that define the purity of a person and identify him as God, to be admired and followed."

And ignore all the bits where women are to be treated as second class citizens, homosexuals are to be treated as vermin....virgin births, walking on water.... cannibalism - 'drink my blood' 'eat my flesh' and other primitive notions.

FRACTELLE asked – “Roch – Where are you getting your information from?” As I said in the “Creator of Heaven and Earth” thread started by Peter Sellick, “Humans are able to be INFORMED not only from the PAST and the PRESENT or world OUTSIDE us, but also from the FUTURE or world WITHIN us” - by way of hearts and minds open [especially in prayer and meditation] to that “double-edged sword” of the WORD and SPIRIT of GOD. In other words – “Man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Dt.8:3; Mt.4:4). Likewise to his disciples Jesus said, “I have food to eat that you don’t know about” (Jn.4:32). So they said, “Lord – teach us to pray!” He replied, “When you pray – withdraw to your private room [the innermost part of your being], shut the door and pray to your Father [your spiritual Father] who is in that secret place. And your Father – who sees all that is done in secret – will reward you!” (Mt.6:6). That is to say – sooner or later we are hopefully able to say to parents, teachers and pastors, “Now I no longer BELIEVE because of what YOU told me. I have heard Him myself [I have sensed his real presence at the very point of my being] and I KNOW – He really IS the Saviour of the World” (Jn.4:42) and my own personal Saviour.

So we need to fear not PHYSICAL death but the “second death” – the second kind of death – SPIRITUAL death. Simone de Beauvoir (1908-86), for instance, allowed herself to be killed spiritually when she was only about 19 – and she lived for another 59 years before she died physically!

So it is sad that you opted for “complete atheism” when you were only 15 – for unspiritual people can accept nothing spiritual but see it all as nonsense (1 Cor.2:14). But while thee is life, there is hope. Thus you may have finished with God – but surely God hasn’t finished with you

It's good to be back amongst friends.

Foxy, I'm sorry that you are feeling fragile, I hope you recover quickly. My point was not intended to upset you, but to draw attention to the hypocrisy of atheists constantly being accused of "making it up as we go", while Christians freely indulge in the same activity.

As indeed Roch was gracious enough to admit. Although he did try to pass it off as merely "a little hyperbole".

Boaz, thanks for another classic Boaz-ism.

>>I've actually yet to see anyone challenge my evidence with even the slightest effect<<

The reason there is no effect, Boaz, is because your approach to each challenge is to i) ignore it completely and change the subject, ii) repeat the item under challenge as if repetition will suddenly make it correct or iii) hide behind a half-dozen biblical quotes that make sense only to you.

Sometimes, a combination of all three.

And you are even kind enough to present an example.

>>we've had the 'contemporary accounts' debate before so I won't revisit it fully<<

The reason you won't revisit it, Boaz, is simply because your arguments hold no weight at all to anyone who has not already made up their mind to accept the infallibility of the sources.

A modern analogy would be to respond to email promising you millions of dollars you have "won" in a lottery that you never entered.

You do so on the basis of a blind faith that no-one would attempt to pull the wool over your eyes in such a manner.

Others ask questions, and find the ground not as firm as it might first appear.

>>Luke.. who in all respects has demonstrated an attention to detail and accuracy which can in many cases be verified externally<<

J K Rowling also gave some convincing accounts of life amongst "muggles" that may be independently verified. Doesn't give Harry real magical powers though, however detailed the accounts of studying Potions.

But ok, I'm listening. Bring on the external verification.

That's a "challenge", by the way.

Which "receptus ignavorum" will you choose this time?

Foxy.. I saved you from further gnashing from Pericles canines:)

He was going after you, but quickly diverted to his preferred prey.. 'me'.

PERICLES, in the same way that you say I 'just repeat things, after they are refuted'.. I say 'You just keep coming back with the same inaqequate and invalid refutations.. hence the continuance of such debates.

On Christian things, Luke in particular, his detail of the various politcal identities Luk 3:1-3

During the reign of....(nothing the dual High Priesthood of Caiaphas and Annas..if he just needed 'a few names' it's unlikely he'd have gone to this trouble)

which then flows naturally into the account about John.

External Testimony:
Flavius Josephus mentions John the Baptist and Herod - Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 5, par. 2

..The Word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the desert......

He went about preaching a baptism of repentance and forgiveness of sins.

Now..out of the above..I suggest that the only thing you could or would take issue with is this "The Word of God came to John"

Now..reading that I suspect you might substitute "due to the harsh living conditions of desert life, John had delusions and 'heard voices'".....

But seriously.. would you actually dispute that there was a man named John who went about preaching a Baptism etc ?

There is no reason whatsoever to do so.. given Lukes own opening statement:

ONE Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us,

TWO Just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.

THREE Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning,

FOUR it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,

FIVE so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

COMMENT:
We have compelling internal and external evidence for the facts of the account.

It seems the only thing you could reasonably dispute is the miraculous in his account.

Fractelle,

"OK, Roch, YOU believe in all this, but there is no point quoting from stories that others do not believe in and for which there is no evidence. It is analogous to quoting from Harry Potter to prove the existence of Dumbledore."

As a Christian that is the only thing that I anticipate you will say relating to religion that I will agree with. That is, it seems strange to wield scripture to convince people who don't accept it as a source of authority that you are correct. Indeed the Bible itself contains counsel relating to that topic.

Not that Christians in these discussions make the only surprising comments. Atheists hold their own in that regard.

Good luck with your faith journey. It is good to see you in here taking an interest in the religion you lost as a child.

BD

Mjpb understands that to the atheist quotations from the bible does not constitute truth, fact or even a reason for faith (given the inconsistencies and contradictions in the bible).

In fact, there is more moral and ethical behaviour and a consistent plot in Harry Potter, than you'll find in either the OT or NT.

And JK Rowling is a lot easier on the eye than a tortured body on a crucifix.

;-)