I am what is normally referred to as a shark, a bottom feeder, an ambulance chaser or just scum. I am a trial lawyer with my own litigation practice ( which this board has taken me away from for quite awhile since I found it). But I want it to be known that I am not an ambulance chaser, I pride myself on arriving before the ambulance.
Posts by RWC
-
91What is you occupation
by Beans inim a liceinced electrician now working in wireless communication installations.i love the electrical industry,there is so much to learn and so many different things do work with and technology is always changing.never a boaring day especially when we are working in the office buildings downtown,chicks everywhere!.
beans.
-
-
-
67
Bible Error: The Visit to the Tomb
by JosephAlward inthe following two accounts of the morning visit by the women to anoint jesus body are contradictory.
according to mark, the women wondered how they would remove the stone covering the tomb, but they found that it had already been rolled away.
matthew, however, says that when the women went to the tomb, there was an earthquake, and an angel came down from heaven, went to the tomb, and rolled the stone back.
-
-
RWC
Pope - That is funny!!
Joseph, I do not know why Matthew chose to include some things and not others. He was writing to a different audience so maybe somethings were thought to be more important than others, such as the geneology for example. However, the fact that this is in John and not Matthew does not make one account wrong and the other right. One just includes more information.
That goes for the other supposed contradictions you mention. The important fact is that Mary encountered Jesus at the tomb. You cannot refute that both accounts reflect that Mary encountered Jesus alive after he was dead. Why don't you find a "contradiction" in one Gospel where it says that Jesus did not arise from the dead and one says he did. That would be a contradiction.
Let me give you an example of what you are arguing. Suppose
I and a friend go on a trip. In recounting the story I say that we stopped at McDonald's before noon. My friend says that we stopped at McDonald's after noon. You would say that because of this "contradiction" that we never made the trip or stopped at McDonald's. That is not logical nor does it follow from the supposed contradiction. The supposed contradiction does not invalidate the trip.Abaddon,
First, the evidence of God has developed over thousands of years. You cannot look at a snapshot in time today and say that it is hearsay. When Moses reported that he talked to God that would not be hearsay at the time he reported it. It was eyewitness testimony. The same goes for the disciples who stated it. If they were alive we would bring them before the court to testify on the stand. You have not given any reason why they should not be believed.
Second, to say that the Illead maybe in part archeologically correct doesn't validate the Greek Gods, does not invalidate the Bible. The Illead will have to stand or fall on its own. We are hearing proving the case for God.
Third, circumstantial evidence is used all of the time to prove a fact beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, most criminal trials are prosecuted on circumstanital evidence.
Fourth, we have discussed the existence of universal truths before. But I would present one here for an example, the Holocaust. Now even those who engaged in that behavior thought it was right when they were doing it, the world's population declared it wrong. The fact that one person thinks he is justified in his actions, does not mean that it is not univesially accepted that killing millions of people is wrong. Yet societies evolution could support the idea that inferior people should be killed to insure the survival of the most healthly race.
God Bless
-
67
Bible Error: The Visit to the Tomb
by JosephAlward inthe following two accounts of the morning visit by the women to anoint jesus body are contradictory.
according to mark, the women wondered how they would remove the stone covering the tomb, but they found that it had already been rolled away.
matthew, however, says that when the women went to the tomb, there was an earthquake, and an angel came down from heaven, went to the tomb, and rolled the stone back.
-
-
RWC
Joseph,
Again I tell you that you have a timing problem. To answer your question, Mary told Peter what she did because she had not yet been told what happened to Jesus, nor had she seen him.
The sequence of events as described by both Gospels is that Mary went to the tomb, the stone was rolled away, without going in she runs back to Peter to tell him Jesus has been taken away, Peter runs to the tomb sees the wrappings and leaves, Mary stays behind ans talks to the angel and then sees Jesus, and then goes to tell the disciples what she has learned.
Abaddon,
Greetings. I am not asking atheists to prove there is no God and when they can't thus there must be one. I was responding to the argument that even atheists will say there might be a God, only not the God from any established religion. See Expatbrits post.
But, to answer your questions: Evidence that there is a God that could be presented in a court of law: First, to make it relevent the evidence will be presented as gathered over time. Second, direct and circumstantial evidence will be presented.
Eyewitness testimony from those who spoke with God: Moses, Abraham and Elijah for example.
Eyewitness testimony from those who heard from Jesus that he was God, said he would die and be raised again and then saw him after his death.
Circumstantial evidence: the creation itself- something from nothing and complex design (that has been discussed before); absolute moral truths that are beyond the need for survival and that cannot be explained by society evolution (which we have discussed before);archeological evidence that validates the description of events in the Bible showing it is accurate; miracles performed by individuals who attribute the power to do them to God such as Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead in front of a crowd of people..etc.
I could go on but you get the point. Now in a court of law you would get the opportunity to rebut this evidence but you cannot do that by simply saying you don't believe it. You must show that the eyewitnesses are lying for example. I look forward to your response.
God Bless
-
67
Bible Error: The Visit to the Tomb
by JosephAlward inthe following two accounts of the morning visit by the women to anoint jesus body are contradictory.
according to mark, the women wondered how they would remove the stone covering the tomb, but they found that it had already been rolled away.
matthew, however, says that when the women went to the tomb, there was an earthquake, and an angel came down from heaven, went to the tomb, and rolled the stone back.
-
-
RWC
Joseph,
You have a timing problem. In John, Mary is told these things after she talked to Peter. As I said, Matthew didn't include that portion, of the sequence, but that doesn't make the two versions inconsistent. In both, she is told by the angel where the body went and than she meets Jesus.
-
67
Bible Error: The Visit to the Tomb
by JosephAlward inthe following two accounts of the morning visit by the women to anoint jesus body are contradictory.
according to mark, the women wondered how they would remove the stone covering the tomb, but they found that it had already been rolled away.
matthew, however, says that when the women went to the tomb, there was an earthquake, and an angel came down from heaven, went to the tomb, and rolled the stone back.
-
-
RWC
Of course you start with the presumption that there is no evidence of God. There is ample of evidence if you accept it. The problem is that
atheist do not accept the evidence that God exists.My argument with your post was that you said that strong atheists usually do not say that no God exists they only restrict their claims to descirbe Gods professed by various religions.That is saying that the athiest doen't have enough faith in his atheism to say that there is no God, only that he doesn't believe in the Gods of various religions. If he truly believed that there was no God he would have faith in that belief and say so. Just like I assume the atheist would say that there are no unicorns or fairies. But simply saying there maybe a God, but I don't like any of yours is no logic at all.
If you asked me If I believed in unicorns I would ask you, what evidence do you have of unicorn's existence. Than I would examine the evidence to see if it made sense and could stand up. If so, then maybe I would believe in unicorns. But I would not say that unicorns must exist because you can't prove they don't. I agree that is illogical. But that argument does not apply to God. It is a false analogy.
-
67
Bible Error: The Visit to the Tomb
by JosephAlward inthe following two accounts of the morning visit by the women to anoint jesus body are contradictory.
according to mark, the women wondered how they would remove the stone covering the tomb, but they found that it had already been rolled away.
matthew, however, says that when the women went to the tomb, there was an earthquake, and an angel came down from heaven, went to the tomb, and rolled the stone back.
-
-
RWC
Rem,
The assumption would be that either the angel rolled the stone away or the earthquake did it. It really doen't matter either way. To answer your question though, those who believe in the Bible believe that it was inspired by the Holy Spirit, so that would be how Mathew could know how the stone was rolled away. I understand you won't accept that reasoning, but I believe it answers the question.
Joseph,
Your "contradiction" is answered in the next verses of John that you did not include. After Mary goes to Peter and says they have taken Jesus she stays and the angel talks to her, telling her the same thing that Matthew writes. Evidently, Matthew did not include the part about Mary running back to Peter before the angel spoke. But that doesn't change the account, nor is it a contradiction. It is simply an added piece of evidence.
What I find ammusing is that most skeptics argue that the Gospels are false because so much of Matthew and Luke are copied from Mark. So because they are so much the same they must be fake. You pick the perceived differences and say because of this they are fake. If they all said the same thing the same way would you then believe that they are authentic?
Expatbrit,
What nonsense. Are you saying that an atheist will say that since I can't prove that any particular God exists, but I can't say that no God exists, that I will simply choose not to believe in any God, even though there may be one? And you call that logic and reasoning? You spend all your efforts attempting to destory all religions and than say that I am not saying that no God exists, just that all of you are wrong. I say again, nonsense.
-
67
Bible Error: The Visit to the Tomb
by JosephAlward inthe following two accounts of the morning visit by the women to anoint jesus body are contradictory.
according to mark, the women wondered how they would remove the stone covering the tomb, but they found that it had already been rolled away.
matthew, however, says that when the women went to the tomb, there was an earthquake, and an angel came down from heaven, went to the tomb, and rolled the stone back.
-
-
RWC
Joseph,
Mark says that the women looked up and the stone was rolled away. Matthew doesn't say that the stone was rolled away in front of the women. It simply says how it was rolled away. You are reading into the scripture that the stone was rolled away in the presence of the women.
-
18
Irony in Mark
by JosephAlward intaking care of the son of god.
mark creates a story in which mary thinks that jesus is out of his mind, and must be taken charge of (mark 3:14-21, 31).
next to god himself, the last person one would expect to reject jesus' divinity would be his mother.
-
-
RWC
REM,
It seems that you are requiring greater proof to the Gospel of Mark than would be applied to other ancient texts. If people who lived at the time it was written explain who the author is, why is that not proof? Even if you say it is tradition, there is no dispute as to the author is. We seem to have more direct evidence of the authors of the Gospels than that of other ancient documents such as the Iliad, yet it is not accepted without question.
Joseph,
In all due respect, what does it matter? Is Matthew wrong if he says that Jesus said to get a donkey and a colt and Mark says Jesus said to get a colt? In either version the event is recorded as happening. The truth in the section is that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a colt in fullfillment of the prophecy. None of the Gospels are in contradiction on the event itself. This is no basis to say that the Gospels are fictional or that the stories are made up.
You never answered my question on your motivation. I am curious.
You also fail to list the historians who you rely upon to say that Jesus was a fiction. I would like their names.
God Bless
-
18
Irony in Mark
by JosephAlward intaking care of the son of god.
mark creates a story in which mary thinks that jesus is out of his mind, and must be taken charge of (mark 3:14-21, 31).
next to god himself, the last person one would expect to reject jesus' divinity would be his mother.
-
-
RWC
Rem, The evidence that I have is as follows:
1. This person is identified as the author by the early church fathers including Polycarp, Hermas, Papias, Irenaeus ( who wrote - And after their(Peter and Paul's) deathMark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself also handed down to us in writing the things preached by Peter), Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Terullian, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Eusebius, Jerome, and Augustine.
2. He is identified within the Bible itself: He was a Jewish Christian whhose mother, Mary, owned a home in Jerusalem where the earlt church met ( Acts 12:12); He was the cousin of Barnabas ( Col. 4:10);When 1 Peter was written, Mark was with Peter in Rome and regarded as Peter's spiritual son ( 1Peter 5:13)
3. There is evidence within Mark itself to connect this author with Peter such as the inclusion of the unique words "and Peter" ( 16:7) and the close similarity between the broad outline of this Gospel and Peter's sermon detailed in Acts 10.
Joseph,
I respectfully disagree that you have given detailed reasons why you think the Gospel of Mark or Jesus is fictional. You have given nothing more than your opinions and speculations. These are some of the same opnions as expressed by the members of the Jesus seminar, which are long on theory and speculation but short on evidence.
As for Harvard professors I would point you to Harvard Law Professor Simon Greeleaf. He was known as the most prominent professor of evidence in his day and wrote a book on evidence that was quoted by the Supreme court. He studied the evidence to support and deny that Christ was a true historical figure and concluded that he was and became a Christian. ( As cited by Irwin Linton in his book A Lawyer Examines the Bible).
I do not view the differences between the accounts of the colt and the donkey as contradictions. In all of them Jesus enters the city on a colt. Matthew includes a donkey, but that does not contradict the other accounts, it adds to them. For example if four people say that a man was wearing blue pants and one of them adds that he was wearing a red shirt, does that addition contradict the other versions or does it simply add to them another detail? This additional detail could easily have been given by Matthew since he was a disciple and was acutally present when the event happened.
Also, does the addition of the donkey by Matthew defeat that the prophecy was fulfilled? It doesn't. The essense of the prophecy is fulfilled by Jesus, the Messiah, entering Jerusalem on an animal triumphantly. All of which is consistent in the Gospels.
Finally, you are incorrect in your reading. Mark wrote that the disciples fetched a colt, as does Luke. John mentions it as an "ass" and quotes the prophecy as an "ass's colt". But is a baby horse still not a horse? Of course it is. SO if one writer refers to it as a horse and another as a colt aren't they both right?
Joseph, you go to great lengths in your attempt to show apparent contradictions in the Bible? I have asked you before why this is but never received an answer. Of course that is private and if you do not want to answer that is fine. I am just curious where you are coming from. For me, the fact that the Bible was written by over forty men over thousands of years is free from condradiction proves to me that it was an inspired book. By beliefs are intact.
-
18
Irony in Mark
by JosephAlward intaking care of the son of god.
mark creates a story in which mary thinks that jesus is out of his mind, and must be taken charge of (mark 3:14-21, 31).
next to god himself, the last person one would expect to reject jesus' divinity would be his mother.
-
-
RWC
Rem, To answer your question, my reference was the forward to the NIV and William MacDonald's Bible Commentary. The statement is the result of alot of research by Biblical scholars.
Joseph,
Would you please state where you have researched your conclusions. And would you also state the "majority" of Biblical scholars who think that the gospe;s are fictional and that Jesus was a myth. It sounds alot like the Jesus seminar folks. If so, they are not the majority, nor are they mainstream Biblical scholars.