The testimony of the NT writers

[SkepticThinker]

not really. In your perspective maybe.

In reality. You didn't accept a mountain of evidence against your claims about spanking either.

 

[Kenny]

In reality. You didn't accept a mountain of evidence against your claims about spanking either.

And I thought it was the other way around. go figure

 

[SkepticThinker]

And I thought it was the other way around. go figure

You thought wrong. You offered a single anecdote. I offered mountains of evidence against it. You stuck with what you already believed. Just like in this thread.

Have a good one.

 

[Subduction Zone]

wrong... but nice try

Wrong again. You simply do not understand your error.

As usual you used the concept of a logical fallacy improperly. Perhaps if we discussed that error you might see the mistake that you made.

Do you understand that sometimes (not always) that lack of evidence can be evidence of absence?

 

[Kenny]

You thought wrong. You offered a single anecdote. I offered mountains of evidence against it. You stuck with what you already believed. Just like in this thread.

Have a good one.

I think I will....

I'm sure it went both ways and certainly you may continued to be stuck in what you already believed. It happened to Jesus too... so I'm good with it.

 

[Kenny]

Wrong again. You simply do not understand your error.

As usual you used the concept of a logical fallacy improperly. Perhaps if we discussed that error you might see the mistake that you made.

Do you understand that sometimes (not always) that lack of evidence can be evidence of absence?

Do you understand that sometimes (not always) lack of evidence doesn't translate into "it is therefore false"? At least Ignatius offers the potential that I was right whereas you are basing your position on opinions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you understand that sometimes (not always) lack of evidence doesn't translate into "it is therefore false"? At least Ignatius offers the potential that I was right whereas you are basing your position on opinions.

Now you are using a strawman argument since no one said that. What we do have is evidence against your claims.. The evidence for your claims appears to be very weak. You are the only one that has improperly brought up the claim of "proof".

 

[Kenny]

Now you are using a strawman argument since no one said that. What we do have is evidence against your claims.. The evidence for your claims appears to be very weak. You are the only one that has improperly brought up the claim of "proof".

Funny, I thought it was the other way around. What evidence do you have that Ignatius made up his statement?

 

[lukethethird]

Funny, I thought it was the other way around. What evidence do you have that Ignatius made up his statement?

What statement did Ignatius make?

 

[Kenny]

What statement did Ignatius make?

Matthew was in Hebrew too.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Matthew was in Hebrew too.

And if you listen to linguists the absence of signs of that in the Gospel of Matthew is a case of evidence of absence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Funny, I thought it was the other way around. What evidence do you have that Ignatius made up his statement?

LOL! Is logical fallacies all that you have? Why do you automatically assume that just because someone is wrong that they are lying or "made it up"?

And weren't we discussing Irenaeus? What was Iggy's claim?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I think I will....

I'm sure it went both ways and certainly you may continued to be stuck in what you already believed. It happened to Jesus too... so I'm good with it.

I follow the evidence as best I can because I want to believe in as many true things as possible and not believe in as many false things as possible.
And I have, in fact changed my mind in the past, when presented with evidence that contradicted my beliefs. Specifically in regards to climate change.

 

[Kenny]

And if you listen to linguists the absence of signs of that in the Gospel of Matthew is a case of evidence of absence.

Someone's opinion doesn't negate what he wrote - not to mention I can translate English to Spanish or visa versa and you wouldn't know which one would come first... 2000 years later.

 

[Kenny]

LOL! Is logical fallacies all that you have? Why do you automatically assume that just because someone is wrong that they are lying or "made it up"?

And weren't we discussing Irenaeus? What was Iggy's claim?

Ok... I understand now that you have no evidence.

 

[Kenny]

I follow the evidence as best I can because I want to believe in as many true things as possible and not believe in as many false things as possible.
And I have, in fact changed my mind in the past, when presented with evidence that contradicted my beliefs. Specifically in regards to climate change.

That is very good!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok... I understand now that you have no evidence.

LOL, projection. So far you have only given little to none. Tell me, what well know errors do you need evidence for now? We all know that you won't post any.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Someone's opinion doesn't negate what he wrote - not to mention I can translate English to Spanish or visa versa and you wouldn't know which one would come first... 2000 years later.

You might be able to translate Spanish to English and I would not know. That is not my area of expertise. But a linguist familiar with both languages knows what to look for and could see the artifacts of translation that I would miss. You are making a typical mistake of the uneducated. Just because you may not be able to detect something does not mean that others cannot do so.

 

[lukethethird]

Matthew was in Hebrew too.

The following is from your post 674, it states that the name Matthew was attributed to the gospel Matthew in 180CE and not before.

Your very own source tells us that it was Irenaeus that attributed Matthew to the gospel Matthew, and not Matthew himself:

5. Patristic citation - The earliest statement that is 100% unambiguous on this matter comes from Irenaeus of Lyons, writing approx. AD 180. He attributes the Gospel of Matthew to Matthew, quotes repeatedly from the document, (see Irenaeus Against Heresies 3.1.1)


"He [Irenaeus] attributes the Gospel of Matthew to Matthew"


Thank you Kenny, you helped confirm that the gospel of Matthew was written anonymously,

 

[lukethethird]

You might be able to translate Spanish to English and I would not know. That is not my area of expertise. But a linguist familiar with both languages knows what to look for and could see the artifacts of translation that I would miss. You are making a typical mistake of the uneducated. Just because you may not be able to detect something does not mean that others cannot do so.

Usage of cultural sayings are giveaways, for example if one were to translate kill two birds with one stone into a language of a different culture, the reader would understand it literally and take it as a comment on marksmanship, it would not occur to the reader that one could run two errands on one trip.