Can 500+ Eyewitnesses Be Wrong? (Jesus, Earth, disciples, Corinthians) - Page 10

blueman · #91 09-06-2005, 09:08 AM

Paul was referring to a creed that circulated in early on (within 2-8 years of the Resurrection A.D. 32-38)was believed to be an eyewitness account of people (including the disciples) who encountered the resurrected Jesus. Paul himself being an eyewitness who encountered Jesus on the road to Damascus that prompted his own conversion from a persecutor of Christians to a dedicated apostle of Christ. They are a majority of scholars and theologians who acknowledge the trustworthiness of the creed that Paul makes reference to in I Corinthians 15.

Jayhawker Soule · #92 09-06-2005, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AV1611

In view of the fact that God took credit for writing Scripture - (2 Timothy 3:16) - He also accepts the blame for it.

No, 'God' took credit for nothing - not yours and not anyone elses. The anonymous author of 2 Timothy claimed that 'Scripture' is inspired. So what?

JerryL · #93 09-06-2005, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Believe me, Jerry --- I believe you time-traveled --- okay? I just think you're still there, and you're trying to prove you aren't. When I get verification from those 5000 that you've left, then I'll believe you're here. Remember: I need it in writing, though.

That's been our point from the beginning. You've no verification from Paul's claimed witnesses. All you have is the assertion by Paul.

Quote:

Believe me, Jerry --- I believe you time-traveled --- okay? I just think you're still there, and you're trying to prove you aren't. When I get verification from those 5000 that you've left, then I'll believe you're here. Remember: I need it in writing, though.

I didn't say that the topic of the thread was undiscussable. I said your position was.

Whether 500 people agreeing makes something true is certainly a discussion, as is whether someone asserting that there were 500 witnesses has any meaning. What isn't discussable is "Paul is right", which is the sum-total of your position and is not a question, nor even a supported position, but a statement.

michel · #94 09-06-2005, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryL

That's been our point from the beginning. You've no verification from Paul's claimed witnesses. All you have is the assertion by Paul.

I believe I already told you the Bible has been verified by God, Himself.

Quote:

What isn't discussable is "Paul is right", which is the sum-total of your position and is not a question, nor even a supported position, but a statement.

I'll agree with that. Since God, Himself verified Scripture, and put His stamp of approval on it, all we have now are statements.

You say you time-traveled back into history. If you wanted me to believe that, I wouldn't unless it came in writing with God's stamp of approval. I couldn't care less about what your "witnesses" say sola graphia, but I would if it was sola Scriptura.

In other words, to put it in today's vernacular, it must be written on official paper and signed.

Jayhawker Soule · #95 09-06-2005, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AV1611

Since God, Himself verified Scripture, and put His stamp of approval on it, all we have now are statements.

Nonsense. See Trotting Out Tired Old Timothy.

michel · #96 09-06-2005, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deut. 32.8

Nonsense. See Trotting Out Tired Old Timothy.

I just now did.

People LOVE to attack anything in Scripture they can get their hands on, don't they?

It makes them feel "scholarly".

michel · #97 09-06-2005, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deut. 32.8

Nonsense. See Trotting Out Tired Old Timothy.

The point about Scripture being just confined to the Old Testament is fallacious.

Peter says otherwise by calling Paul's writings Scripture in 2 Peter 3:16.

John 3:16; 2 Timothy 3:16; just can't get away from those 3:16's; can you, Deut?

Scott1 · #98 09-06-2005, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerryL

What isn't discussable is "Paul is right", which is the sum-total of your position and is not a question, nor even a supported position, but a statement.

Now that I have your retraction (thanks again) let me comment on this as I would have liked to from the start.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AV1611

In view of the fact that 1 Corinthians 15 mentions over 500 eyewitnesses to Jesus' resurrection, is that enough to convict Him of same?

Not for a second.