Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (Ftk @ Aug. 31 2011,14:42)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 31 2011,13:50)|
|Quote (Ftk @ Aug. 31 2011,13:41)|
|In regard to gnostic writings, please bear in mind the late dates that most of those were written in comparison to the books that were included in scripture.|
Also, back to the early church fathers. Certain books were not accepted for good reason...some didn't even yet exist...others obviously were in total contrast to what 1st hand witnesses attested to in their writings.
Name one first hand witness of Jesus that can be shown to have written a book of the Bible (any Bible).
Plenty evidence of that, but I'm sure you've read it all, as you seem to think you're a theologian. I'm not offering anymore links...find them yourselves. Most refuse to read and those who do scan and throw up strawmen.
Then again, anything you read that supports early writers and witnesses, you'll wave off as incorrect even if you have no solid evidence to refute the fact. Get into the early church father's. Eye opener.
Fail... again... or is it still?
You say there is much evidence of this. Name one person who is a known author of a book of the New Testament who also can be shown to have known Jesus.
You claimed it, you back it up.
Of course, you can't. We all know that. This is how evidence works. You make a claim (I made several) and I defended them. You make claims and refuse to even talk about them other than 'that's obvious'.
Does that remind you of anyone around here FtK? Hint, it's not a pro-science person.
Anyway, run along, when you decide to answer questions or actually engage in what the conversation is about, then feel free to come back.
You now have several challenges to you (all of which YOU started and all of which YOU are running away from) feel free to start catching up.
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.