JSP... would you mind contacting me at newlifeinhim777@yahoo.com.au
I'm interested in something you said. Thanx

FH.. I checked out the 'mythbuster' link you gave.. *sigh* :) no mate its not me who is 'tired or desperate'..but that link was quite weak. It was not 101 'arguments' ..it was 'questions' with no answers provided, nor references to any sources.

When I gave you the link to Jay Smith, he does
a)Make a statement
b)Provide a source.

You are welcome to scrutinize his sources, and offer an opinion as to their veracity, but that 'reasons' demythologizing link was not worth its place in cyberspace mate.

Smith is a doctoral candidate in Islamic studies, and has a masters in it, so he has done some original research.

Speaking of desperation.. when arranging a debate in the UK the Muslim side called in Shabir Ally, flew him in..under an ASSUMED NAME to give the impression he was not the 'highly qualified debater who knows Jay Smiths material very well' even so, when I heard what he had to say, I was unimpressed.

FINALLY.. Our discussions have nothing to do with 'me' being 'right' and you being wrong. They have to do with grappling with Islam and Christianity, and the truth or falsehood of them. That is much bigger than me or you.
I'm just a small bit player, but I play to my best, and still seek truth. Truth is able to be determined based on facts. If facts point 'away' from a certain path, we would be wise to consider them.

OLIVER special for you :)

Something Jay Smith said struck my attention, I recommend you google him in 'Muslim Christian debates' and listen to what he has to say.

He said "Except for 7 verses, the WHOLE New Testament can be reconstructed from quotations in the writings in the early church fathers"
I found this claim rather striking, and have not tried yet to independantly verify it, but if true, it is most impressive regarding the documentary foundation we have in our Scriptures.

I won't re-hash all the stuff we already covered in other places, but, IF... the Gospels were written AFTER Paul, one would expect 'Pauline Theology' to be widely reflected in them... but it isn't. So it suggests the Gospels were well preserved in their original form.

cheers.

Not quite sure about the definition of "true" that you are employing here JSP.

>>Pericles, “The piggy bank story was debunked ages ago” may or may not be true.<<

It is certainly true that the story was published in the Daily Express, under the front-page headline "Hogwash: Now the PC brigade bans piggy banks in case they upset Muslims"

Two Banks were named. They both denied the accusations.

[Halifax] "Halifax has not withdrawn any piggy banks from branches. As a matter of fact we have not used piggy banks in our branches for a number of years."

[Natwest] "Piggy banks have been and will continue to be used as a promotional item by NatWest"

That makes it well and truly debunked, doesn't it?

>>Whether police are advised or instructed to remove shoes before entering a house for search purposes, this would interfere with the integrity of the search, giving the occupants time to dispose of anything illegal if that was the case.<<

The advice was not designed to cover searches, which continue along their normal path.

http://sportscalendar.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1378529.ece

"Fifteen officers, armed with machine guns and pistols and dressed in three layers of protective clothing, burst into 46 and 48 Lansdowne Road at around 4 o'clock in the morning on June 2 last year, believing that explosives mixed with hazardous materials -- a "dirty bomb" -- might be on the premises."

I doubt if they stopped to take off their shoes.

But had they been calling to say "I'm afraid your son has been in an accident", they would have removed them, I'm sure.

>>I was made aware of certain dress codes such as not wearing singlets in public as that may cause offence to the locals. . Why couldn’t they accept my lifestyle?<<

If you had been visiting a tribe who traditionally did not wear clothes, I doubt they would insist that you strip, respecting that you would be uncomfortable. However, if they visited you in Australia, you would probably prefer them to be clothed.

That's what "not causing offence" is all about.

BOAZ,

" 'Except for 7 verses, the WHOLE New Testament can be reconstructed from quotations in the writings in the early church fathers ' " [Smith in BOAZ]

- Does the author refer to Quelle? Q1 is reconstructed to Galalee c.50 CE, Q2 to Northern Palestine c. 65 CE and Mark drawing directly from Q3 c. 80 CE. However, the miracle and pronouncement stories forming Mark come from Palistinean oral tradition between 50 CE and 70 CE.

The Q1, Q2 line goes to Thomas, more closely reflecting Q1 [Galilee 50 CE]. Mark has more religious stories than does Thomas, and was developed twenty years after Jesus died.

" 'Pauline Theology' to be widely reflected in them... but it isn't. So it suggests the Gospels were well preserved in their original form."

Paul doesn't link to/from the Gospels in time or by location, but Paul and Mark, both might have Kerygma as a common root. Paul [Letters] should seen more context with Colosians and Ephesians.

Regards.

Oly....sounds like you are a passionate subscriber to the 'Documentary Hypothesis' :) - I'm not.

Presumably when you mention 'Q' you are referring to the supposed document on which Mark relied ? (the document supposed to be behind some of the material found in Matth, Luke and John which is not found in Mark.

Your statements about connecting various portions of the Gospels to various traditions and areas is overflowing with unwarranted confidence. Its pure speculation mate. One of the problems with some of these more exotic 'theories' is that when you apply the rules they used to other portions, you find that content which is known and verifiably NOT of such origins suddenly becomes 'from Thomas' or something like that. Hence, such theories are weak, and I often think they are more about some German scholar getting a 'name' for himself in academia than about seeking truth.

Not exactly on topic mate :) come back to the fold and discuss "Muslim Christian relations here" and have a look at whether the early Muslims actually DID use deception toward King Negus of Ethiopia.
cheers.

Pericles, I used “true” to be the same as the true definition of the word in the dictionary. As I wrote previously, I checked the link to the ABC that you supplied and noted that there were statements for and against the “piggy bank” theory. I have just checked again and see that all the newspapers quoted affirmed my claims while the Halifax and NatWest denied them. I don’t see how that debunks anything. To be selective with the evidence does not prove a point. All evidence has to be weighed up before coming to any conclusions. Also, I have friends still in the UK who describe what is happening there. Why would they lie to me?

Your link to the “Fifteen officers, armed with machine guns” etc also has the statement from the IPPC that “the Metropolitan Police should make a ‘high-profile public apology’ to the families involved and should have altered their ‘very aggressive’ behaviour as soon as they had taken control of the two houses on Lansdowne Road”. Do you think that this would have happened on a raid on bikies’ premises? “Sorry for that Mr Hell’s Angels president, we will be nice to you in future”.

If I visited a tribe that sat around naked, depending on how fit the females were, I might well join in. I don’t think that they would respect that I would be uncomfortable naked, as that was their normal way of life. As for me prefering them to be clothed if they visited Australia, do you mean Western style dress or burkas, hijabs etc as is expected to be accepted here now?