Orthodox_Freethinker

The truths of science are provisional while those of theology, if they are true, are eternal and unchangeable.

Peace.

LambdaCalculator

Meaningless tautology. You are saying that theology is abolutely true if it is absolutely true. You give no way of demonstrating this "trueness", and I have indeed argued elsewhere that you cannot.

Orthodox_Freethinker

Domstrating the truth of Christian theology would require substantiating Jesus Christ's claims of divinity. Then, his assertion that the Word of Scripture is truth would logically follow given that God cannot lie.

peace.

LambdaCalculator

Three problems:

1. Substantiating the "divinity" of Jesus Christ, if such were possible, would in no way resolve disputes between the various Christian sects. All of which have varying theologies (even within the tent of trinitarianism).

2. Even if Jesus Christ's divinity were substantiated, such does not even follow since there is no record of Jesus stating that the Bible (which did not exist in his day) is absolute truth.

3. There is no justification for the notion that God (whatever that is) cannot lie.

Orthodox_Freethinker

"Your Word is truth" - Jesus Christ, John 17:17

Numbers 23:19: “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?�

1 Samuel 15:29: “And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor relent. For He is not a man, that He should relent.�

Psalm 92:15: “To declare that the Lord is upright; He is my rock, and there is no unrighteousness in Him.�

Malachi 3:6: “For I am the Lord, I do not change.�

Romans 3:4: “Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.�

Titus 1:2: “[I]n hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began.�

Hebrews 6:18: “[I]t is impossible for God to lie.�

James 1:17-18: “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.�

Peace.

LambdaCalculator

1 Kg.22:23
"Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee."

2 Chr.18:22
"Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets.

Jer.4:10
"Ah, Lord GOD! surely thou hast greatly deceived this people."

Jer.20:7
"O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived."

Ezek.14:9
"And if a prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet."

2 Th.2:11
"For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie."

Point - Anyone can pull Bible quotes out of their ass.

Orthodox_Freethinker

How could a book on evolution be better than the Origin if it merely supplements Darwin's original work with new evidence? For a book to be truly better, it would need to provide us with an understanding which we did not have before.

The historicity of the New Testament should be proof enough:

Gospel of St. Matthew
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10057a.htm

Gospel of Saint Mark
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09674b.htm

Gospel of Saint Luke
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09420a.htm

Gospel of St. John
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08438a.htm

Early Historical Documents On Jesus Christ
www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm

Peace.

Orthodox_Freethinker

False analogy. Star Wars was written with the intention of fiction while the Gospels are serious biographies of Jesus of Nazareth. Matthew was an Apostles of Christ, Mark was a disciple of Peter, Luke was a disciple of Paul and a historian and John was the closest Apostle to Christ. What better witnesses could one ask for?

Peace.

LambdaCalculator

The Gospels we know of all date back to 40 to 100 years after the death of the Yeshua figure is typically dated. There is no evidence that they were meant to be historical documents. Furthermore, we have at least one extra-canonical source (The Gospel of Thomas) which presents Jesus as a human disseminator of Jewish wisdom, making no reference to any miracles, virgin birth, immaculate conception or even apocalyptic rhetoric.

You can doubt the historicity of the GosTom (although it wouldn't make any sense in the light of your acceptance of the canonical gospels, none of which were written during the time of Yeshua's life), but the historical Jesus is nowhere near as clear-cut as just looking at the Bible. And furthermore, it does not demonstrate the truth of Christianity.

Orthodox_Freethinker

The Gospels were written within the generation which Jesus lived.

You are woefully uninformed.

Gospel and Gospels
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06655b.htm

The Gospel of Thomas is a Gnostic text that was written well into the second century while the latest canonical Gospel, John, was written within the first century. There is good reason why the Church has never considered Thomas canonical - It was not written by either an Apostle or disciple of an Apostle and its date is too far from the lifetime of Christ.

Peace.