Films/DVD Asylum

I hope you're not going to argue the NT or OT

66.74.234.158

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

EdM

(R)

In Reply to: "Fiction" posted by DWPC on May 25, 2006 at 13:42:17:

have ANY basis in reality!
The New Testament and especially the Old Testiment are more fiction than any book Dan Brown ever wrote.
Don't forget Brown was sued by legiment researchers who claimed he stole their ideas.
Sure most of the book was fiction but it is based on what very could be fact- that Mary M had more of a relationship with Jesus then were were led to believe for 2000 years. That's all I'm saying.
Music is Emotion

Follow Ups:

You're conflating faith issues with historic material - DWPC 08:39:42 05/26/06 (1)
The debate over DVC relates to historical evidence not the faith issues. The NT has been virtually under a microscope for two millenia. Its provenance is thoroughly established. The record of its study alone is documented to the 2nd Century. The Gnostic gospels; Brown's basis; are de-coupled from the NT gospels by 200 years and there is no independently verifiable line of authorship. They were excluded from the NT because they promote concepts that directly conflict with the fundamental tenets of Christianity. The Gnostic concepts are closer to the Koran than to the NT. Even if one were to accept the Gnostic texts, they're directly self-contradictory relative to the supposed Jesus-MM "thing".
- You are joking. What provenance? (n/t) - gd 10:10:40 05/27/06 (0)
  gd
OT and NT not having Any basis in reality? GMAB! - MMasztal 04:40:35 05/26/06 (5)
For OT reality, the existence of the Jewish people is evidence enough, nevermind that archeological findings support support the OT. Additionally, the Jewish calendar goes back over 5700 years.
NT, even Hebrew historians, namely Josephus, support much of the NT writings.
- Re: OT and NT not having Any basis in reality? GMAB! - Analog Scott 08:47:47 05/27/06 (4)
  What archeological findings support any of the OT stories?
  - Jehrico ntq - MMasztal 09:48:01 05/27/06 (3)
    nt
    - What story in the bible is confirmed by the mere existance of Jehrico? - Analog Scott 11:28:25 05/27/06 (2)
      And let's not forget that Jehrico, the real Jehrico, predates Genesis.
      - It's utter destruction by the Israelis in Joshua ... - MMasztal 10:23:06 05/28/06 (1)
        
        In Reply to: What story in the bible is confirmed by the mere existance of Jehrico? posted by Analog Scott on May 27, 2006 at 11:28:25:
        
        preserved by the Jewish historians for millenia.
        Plus you'll like this story. The Egyptians wanting to sue the Jews for the gols taken wheb the Exodus occurred.
        
        http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP55603 (Open in New Window)
        
        Yikes again - Analog Scott 12:13:02 05/28/06 (0)
        
        In Reply to: It's utter destruction by the Israelis in Joshua ... posted by MMasztal on May 28, 2006 at 10:23:06:
        
        The ruins don't support the biblical story in any way whatsoever. There is no evidence of any sudden destruction. Heck there weren't even any walls to come down. Even worse is that Jehrico predates the biblical story by a seveal thousand years. And I don't find a group of wacky Egyptians filing a wacky lawsuit as evidence of anything. The Egyptian records of that era are quite detailed. There is no mention of any of the events in Exodus.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Sonic Craft

You can not post to an archived thread.