Saints meet your opposition

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
P

pottersclay

Guest
#41
Papias, Jerome, even Ignatius and few others made such claims about a Gospel of Matthew originally written in Hebrew.
Thank you watchers for that ....have you followed up with that claim to be true?
Id like to develope a defense for these bogas allegations that this bart person has claimed with the saints here that would like to participate.
Anyone with any input to his first claim feel free to post.
 

SomeDisciple

Well-known member
Jul 4, 2021
1,832
820
113
#42
I have seen this apostate's lecture before... I would pay him no attention; It's hardly worth the effort.
 
Jun 20, 2022
6,460
1,331
113
#43
Thank you watchers for that ....have you followed up with that claim to be true?
Id like to develope a defense for these bogas allegations that this bart person has claimed with the saints here that would like to participate.
Anyone with any input to his first claim feel free to post.
Ultimately, it's believed literally that such a Hebrew copy of the Gospel of Matthew did exist and Jerome even claims it was in a library at alexandria that was burned to the ground.

Jerome claims he personally went there and translated it into both Latin and Greek before the great Library was destroyed by Caesar.

It's interesting that several Church Father's make similar claims but it's Scholars some 2,000 years later calling them liars.

How would a scholar today know what existed 2,000 years ago and then discredit several written witnesses?

They were not there. They just assume the Church Fathers are lying, which makes no sense at all.
 
P

persistent

Guest
#44
Can anyone here set him straight on his false findings? Or is he right.
The resurrection is the core of our belief. How would you respond? Or do we live by blind faith?
The link here will likely be objected to on the grounds that it may require registering, but the refutation of the "Dr." on the video you posted would likely need to be done by someone of the same caliber and the video linked here would meet that requirement.

We are not in NT times when a motley crew was Holy Spirit imbued and possibly refuted 'Dr.'s' trained in Scripture. Dr. Ehrman would likely never debate someone below his title. That is the way things are today and seems that academia is still strongly influenced by the spirit of 'antichrist'.

One caution with the video at this link is that one of the interviewees, Ard Louis, is likely on the fringe of Christianity if not agnostic or even atheist. Quite unusual in that even his perspective on the historicity of the NT is 'positive'.

Towards Belief - The Bible - Season 1 - RedeemTV
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
7,585
3,169
113
#45
Those videos are on YouTube; here's Part 1. There are six parts near as I can tell.

 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,265
5,624
113
#46
Simply because watching two "Educated theologians" (each with his own theological axe to grind) is never likely to produce anything except CONFUSION at the practical level. The Bible says what it says, and is BY DEFINITION a reliable source, and its AUTHOR is present and accessible for comment.

Jas 1:5
If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
Jas 1:6
But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
:rolleyes: How very sanctimonious.
Defending the reliability of The Bible is not grinding a theological axe.

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason
for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect


~ 1 Pet 3:15
 

Papermonkey

Active member
Dec 2, 2022
724
256
43
#47
He was never in the office of Pastor. It was his intention going to school for study be'ut he never pastored a church.
 

Bob-Carabbio

Well-known member
Jun 24, 2020
1,258
613
113
#48
:rolleyes: How very sanctimonious.
Defending the reliability of The Bible is not grinding a theological axe.

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason
for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect


~ 1 Pet 3:15
Meaningless.
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,265
5,624
113
#49
The subject of the thread is Bart Ehrman and his attacks on our faith. If you don't care to discuss that, you are free not to participate.
My post about the debates were right on topic. Pontless agitation appears to be your purpose.

If you think my participation is meaningless, please feel free to ignore me.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,214
1,980
113
#50
I meant to post this the other day... the OP-vid-speaker (B.E.) mentioned (as one of the supposed "contradictions" in scripture) the matter of the two criminals crucified at the time Jesus was crucified.



The following video, which I've posted before (perhaps that was back on an old forum no longer in existence), where this man is covering the material written in E.W. Bullinger's "Appendix #164" titled "The 'Others' Crucified With The Lord (Matt. 27:38 and Luke 23:32)"...

... video: 10:31-mins (and if memory serves, the actual written appendix goes into the Greek text even a bit more than what is presented here in this short video) - Check it out! :


The Four Other Men Crucified with Jesus Christ, E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Appendix 164.mp4 - YouTube





The supposed "contradictions" are only in the mind of those not giving careful attention when reading the pertinent texts. This matter (explained in the above video) is just one example.
 

Seeker47

Well-known member
Aug 7, 2018
995
841
93
#51
I meant to post this the other day... the OP-vid-speaker (B.E.) mentioned (as one of the supposed "contradictions" in scripture) the matter of the two criminals crucified at the time Jesus was crucified.



The following video, which I've posted before (perhaps that was back on an old forum no longer in existence), where this man is covering the material written in E.W. Bullinger's "Appendix #164" titled "The 'Others' Crucified With The Lord (Matt. 27:38 and Luke 23:32)"...

... video: 10:31-mins (and if memory serves, the actual written appendix goes into the Greek text even a bit more than what is presented here in this short video) - Check it out! :


The Four Other Men Crucified with Jesus Christ, E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Appendix 164.mp4 - YouTube





The supposed "contradictions" are only in the mind of those not giving careful attention when reading the pertinent texts. This matter (explained in the above video) is just one example.
Fascinating! I had never heard that before. It goes back to faith; one either believes or does not believe.

Great post!
 

stilllearning

Well-known member
Oct 4, 2021
520
279
63
#53
Ultimately, it's believed literally that such a Hebrew copy of the Gospel of Matthew did exist and Jerome even claims it was in a library at alexandria that was burned to the ground.

Jerome claims he personally went there and translated it into both Latin and Greek before the great Library was destroyed by Caesar.

It's interesting that several Church Father's make similar claims but it's Scholars some 2,000 years later calling them liars.

How would a scholar today know what existed 2,000 years ago and then discredit several written witnesses?

They were not there. They just assume the Church Fathers are lying, which makes no sense at all.
If that is the claim as you have explained then it is a absolute lie bro. Caesar when he aided Cleopatra in the civil war between her and her brother. That is when the Great Library was burned. Forgive me I am feeling to lazy to look up exact dates. However, can tell you that after this event Caesar adopted his nephew Octavian. He then of course was killed. Octavian then won the following civil war in Rome.

Upon winning he ended the Roman Republic and became the first Emperor. Renaming himself Caesar Augustus. It was during his reign that Christ and Matthew would have been born. Which 30 years later Christ called Matthew. So basically what they are saying is a lie is that Matthew wrote his first copy of his gospel in Hebrew then it was stored in the Great Library. Then that copy got burned during the Egyptian civil war and this was all done before Christ and Matthew were even born.

So perhaps it was a different library in Alexandria but it could not have been the Great Library and been burnt during the civil war by Caesar. After Alexandria was burnt most of the worlds knowledge during that time period of classical history was held in the library at Pergamum.

So there is a possibility that it was stored in a library in Alexandria later on, however, it could not have been the Great library and it burned by Caesar.
 
Jun 20, 2022
6,460
1,331
113
#54
If that is the claim as you have explained then it is a absolute lie bro. Caesar when he aided Cleopatra in the civil war between her and her brother. That is when the Great Library was burned. Forgive me I am feeling to lazy to look up exact dates. However, can tell you that after this event Caesar adopted his nephew Octavian. He then of course was killed. Octavian then won the following civil war in Rome.

Upon winning he ended the Roman Republic and became the first Emperor. Renaming himself Caesar Augustus. It was during his reign that Christ and Matthew would have been born. Which 30 years later Christ called Matthew. So basically what they are saying is a lie is that Matthew wrote his first copy of his gospel in Hebrew then it was stored in the Great Library. Then that copy got burned during the Egyptian civil war and this was all done before Christ and Matthew were even born.

So perhaps it was a different library in Alexandria but it could not have been the Great Library and been burnt during the civil war by Caesar. After Alexandria was burnt most of the worlds knowledge during that time period of classical history was held in the library at Pergamum.

So there is a possibility that it was stored in a library in Alexandria later on, however, it could not have been the Great library and it burned by Caesar.
You are correct it was Library at Caesarea.
 

Attachments

stilllearning

Well-known member
Oct 4, 2021
520
279
63
#55
You are correct it was Library at Caesarea.
What is truly amazing on a side note is the majesty and glory of our God and his level of Generalship during this spiritual war that has raged since the Garden of Eden.

The coming kingdom of the anti-christ we have the first proto empire in whom we call Nimrod and the Tower of Babel. God of course changed human language from one to many. Later on in Daniel we find the other empires that the god of this world has tried to once again implement his kingdom. Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome, and the upcoming final one.

The changing of the language held it all at bay. Under Greece it must have seemed like the problem had been solved. As Greece dumbed down the Greek language and made it common so everyone could speak and write in one language. So there would be one culture and one language that could unite a world empire.

God, however, took that dumbed down Greek what we know as koine Greek and what was meant to build a world empire and unite mankind with one language again. God took it and wrote his new covenant in it and used it to build the body of Christ and to teach them his principals. Building his church with his word and truth in the language that was meant to build a world empire and solve the problem of various languages.

He indeed upon this rock built his church so that the gates of hell would not prevail. What was meant to build a unified language for a earthly kingdom, God took and used to build his church. That is some Generalship to beat the devil with his own plans and devices.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
18,421
7,249
113
#56
And, as everyone knows the Jews were scrupulous record keepers.

John 12:42 states that many of the leaders believed. Acts 6:7 States that a great company of priests were obedient to the faith.

In consideration of the spectacular nature of the events.......there were undoubtedly MASSIVE amounts of first-hand accounts which were duly recorded by people who's primary task was to write things down in a historically accurate manner.

Which Luke used in his writings no doubt.
Act 10:37
That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;

I would assume that these events did not pass without many many written records to be filed by many many persons, some of which were undoubtedly civil and religious leaders.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
18,421
7,249
113
#57
I meant to post this the other day... the OP-vid-speaker (B.E.) mentioned (as one of the supposed "contradictions" in scripture) the matter of the two criminals crucified at the time Jesus was crucified.



The following video, which I've posted before (perhaps that was back on an old forum no longer in existence), where this man is covering the material written in E.W. Bullinger's "Appendix #164" titled "The 'Others' Crucified With The Lord (Matt. 27:38 and Luke 23:32)"...

... video: 10:31-mins (and if memory serves, the actual written appendix goes into the Greek text even a bit more than what is presented here in this short video) - Check it out! :


The Four Other Men Crucified with Jesus Christ, E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Appendix 164.mp4 - YouTube





The supposed "contradictions" are only in the mind of those not giving careful attention when reading the pertinent texts. This matter (explained in the above video) is just one example.
Wow that is an amazing video presentation. A keeper. Thanks bro.

Looks like I am purchasing the E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible in short order....(y)
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
18,421
7,249
113
#58
I meant to post this the other day... the OP-vid-speaker (B.E.) mentioned (as one of the supposed "contradictions" in scripture) the matter of the two criminals crucified at the time Jesus was crucified.



The following video, which I've posted before (perhaps that was back on an old forum no longer in existence), where this man is covering the material written in E.W. Bullinger's "Appendix #164" titled "The 'Others' Crucified With The Lord (Matt. 27:38 and Luke 23:32)"...

... video: 10:31-mins (and if memory serves, the actual written appendix goes into the Greek text even a bit more than what is presented here in this short video) - Check it out! :


The Four Other Men Crucified with Jesus Christ, E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Appendix 164.mp4 - YouTube





The supposed "contradictions" are only in the mind of those not giving careful attention when reading the pertinent texts. This matter (explained in the above video) is just one example.
Jhn 19:18
Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side (one), and Jesus in the midst.

"enteuthen kai enteuthen"

2+1+2 = 5 crucifixions total.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
18,421
7,249
113
#59
Jhn 19:18
Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side (one), and Jesus in the midst.

"enteuthen kai enteuthen"

2+1+2 = 5 crucifixions total.
Jhn 19:18
where they crucified him, and with him two others, on this side, and on that side, and Jesus in the midst.

Youngs literal translation.
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
9,367
2,444
113
#60
And, as everyone knows the Jews were scrupulous record keepers.

In consideration of the spectacular nature of the events.......there were undoubtedly MASSIVE amounts of first-hand accounts which were duly recorded by people who's primary task was to write things down in a historically accurate manner.

Which Luke used in his writings no doubt.
Act 10:37
That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;

I would assume that these events did not pass without many many written records to be filed by many many persons, some of which were undoubtedly civil and religious leaders.
Historic Christianity - relying on evidence rather than speculation... even when speculation is well-intended:

1.) Historic Christianity is based on historical evidence, historical facts, and eyewitness accounts... not speculation.

(The apostles never spoke of what they "thought", or "assumed", or "imagined"... they spoke of what they actually SAW.)

2.) If, as Christians, we want to defend the faith, and have historical debate, it doesn't help our case if we resort to speculations rather than evidence... regardless of our good intentions. The apostles never resorted to speculation... they gave us facts.

3.) There is enough historical evidence, genuine evidence, that we CAN successfully defend the faith, and debate the unbelievers, without resorting to speculation.



Areas of Concern from above posts:

1.) "And, as everyone knows the Jews were scrupulous record keepers.
In consideration of the spectacular nature of the events.......there were undoubtedly MASSIVE amounts of first-hand accounts which were duly recorded by people who's primary task was to write things down in a historically accurate manner."

We should be very careful speculating about things for which we have no actual evidence.
a.) We have absolutely no ability to presume there were "massive amounts" of first-hand accounts which were "duly recorded" unless we can show some evidence such written accounts existed.
b.) People did not keep historical records in antiquity in the same ways we do in the modern age... that is why the gospels, written several decades after the events, were considered "current" by standards of antiquity. Things were done differently back then.
c.) If we make claims based on mere speculation, without evidence... well... that is not historic Christianity. Christianity is based on historical facts, and eyewitness accounts... not speculation.


2.) Act 10:37 "That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;"
"I would assume that these events did not pass without many many written records to be filed by many many persons, some of which were undoubtedly civil and religious leaders."


Again, we should be very careful basing our arguments on speculation, or misunderstandings of the text, rather than historical evidence.
a.) The word "published" in Acts 10:37, from the KJV, does not mean "published" in the modern sense... it has nothing to do with WRITTEN records. It does not mean to be printed, or written, or copied... that isn't what it means. It simply means "proclaimed."
b.) Again, we are standing on sand the moment we even use words like "assume" in an historical discussion, or historical debate... historic christianity is not based in assumptions, but in historical evidence.
c.) Historic Christianity is based in evidences... not assumptions.



CONCLUSION:
a.) Sometimes very good people can have very good intentions... and then present a weakly designed argument based in assumptions.
b.) Presenting a weakly designed argument (using speculation rather than evidence) doesn't necessarily mean we're wrong... but it does mean we can't back up our claims... and we can't win the argument.
c.) Since Christianity is based in history, with historical facts and evidence... we'd do well to trust that God has left us with adequate evidence... and then we should use that evidence God has left us.
d.) In all fairness, I realize not everyone is trained in formal debate, nor does everyone need to be... but Historic Christianity is based in Historical Facts and Historical Evidence... therefore, we will always do best if we stick to the facts and evidence... God has left us with plenty.
.

.