New Atheist

I've been given a book to read by a Cristian friend. :banghead: I promised I'd make the effort, but I'm trying to take notes and note down all the mistakes and faulty logic in each chapter to point them out later.

I'm not THAT much of an expert in Biblical history, certainly not as much as you people. Here's a claim made by the author about how the accounts of Jesus life as we have them could not have possibly been myth: He cites the epistle I Corinithians in verse 15, and how Paul is describing basic beliefs about Christianity, how Christ was killed and resurrected in the 3rd day etc. Then the author says,
"If the crucificion was as early as AD 30, Paul's conversions was about AD 32. Immediately Paul was ushered into Damascus where he met with a Christian names Ananias, and some other disciples. His first meeting with the apostles would have been around AD 35. At some point along there Paul was given this creed, which had already been formulated and was being used in the early church. Now here you have the key facts about Jesus' death for our sins, plus a detailed lit of those to whom he appeared in resurrected form- all dating back to withing two to five years of the events themselves. That's not later mythology from 40 or more years down the road as Armstrong suggested. A good case can be made for saying that Christian belief in the resurrection, though not yet written down, can be dated within two years of that event."

I think its all unsupported assertions basically. Assuming there even was a resurrection at AD 30, why would Paul's conversion be at 32. Just where did disciples come from in Damascus, if Christianity was only 2 years old. Says who that he met the disciples? But I don't know enough about the actual history. Can somebody help me deconstruct this arguement?

New Atheist

Why can't I edit my msg to add this? Anyway, just wanted to comment on this... I've been trying to get into the book more. Writing comments at the same time. I've already filled 11 pages. I didn't know these things were so bad!!! It's been ages since I've actually tried to read Christian arguements in full, I've been confident in my views for a long time and didn't want to do any searching on religious staff any more. But really, this is really, really awful! The type of argumentation, its so annoying, so wrong, and so false, it just drives me mad!

WHY :banghead: DID :banghead: I :banghead: AGREE :banghead: TO :banghead: THIS!!!

Jedi Mind Trick

In my survey of the New Testament class, last night the instructor mentioned that the passage 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 is in essence a mini creed that was formulated as early as within 22 months of the crucifixion. He said that this was researched and presented in Lee Strobel’s book “The case for Christ.” Does anyone have any information on this?

Roller

Stay away from your professor.

Jedi Mind Trick

Yeah, the class is already about too much for me to handle, it's very "shove it down your throat" apologetics, but I need the credits to get my degree.

Roller

The so called "Kerygma" is probably early, but I don't know how Strobel came up with his "22 months." Some (Burton Mack, if I recall correctly) consider it to be rather formulaic, and as such, probably not extremely early as Strobel suggest. In general, I'd stay away from someone who's using Strobel as a source.

Jedi Mind Trick

He also used D. James Kennedy's "Skeptics answered" and McDowel's "Evedence that demands a verdict." The whole point of the exercise last night was to prove that the resurrection is historical fact... I was out numbered so I pretty much kept my mouth shut.

This class is supposed to be a survey of the NT but my instructor has thrown in his own material which amounts to an apologetic. I go to Indiana Wesleyan University as an "adult professional" student, I'm getting a BSBA and this is my last class. It was required that we take at least one "bible" course.

To give you some idea what I'm involved with regarding my instructor last night he took issue with the author of our textbook because the author (rightly in my view) said that Luke tries to smooth over the conflicts in the early church. My instructor said that the author of the text is showing off a liberal theological bent by saying such things.

I should start a thread about the “devotional” material he handed out to the class. This material aims to answer the skeptic… You should read what he had to say about evolution and his probability calculations.

Roller

I feel sorry for you

Apikorus

Where the hell do you go to school? A private institution, one would hope.

Jedi Mind Trick

Well yeah, it's a private university but they specialize in accelerated business degrees... quite a few people in my workplace have received their bachelors or their MBA's from IWU so it came highly recommended where I work... truth be told I am kind of kicking myself... I should have gone to IU for my degree. My original goal was to get my Bachelors quickly from IWU and then go on for my Masters at IU but I am burnt out and I don’t think I’ll get on with a Masters. This degree should serve my short term and long term goals anyway. maybe not as well as a more reputible IU degree but it works for me anyhow.

But about Strobel’s claim of 22 months… does anyone have any info debunking it?