Silent Dave

I found this . . . amusing.

<a href="http://www.twentyish.org/links/maaps.html" target="_blank">http://www.twentyish.org/links/maaps.html</a>


H

Toto

I found it . . . poorly formatted, but otherwise typical Christian apologetics. Is there someone from that site on this Board?

Silent Dave

I don't believe so, but I know the author and can pass along responses and such to him.


H

CX

This makes my head hurt. Pretty much all of it is ridiculous (though the author does seem to recognize the synoptic problem) but my absolute favorite is:

Since Greek is the original language these copies are very early, in fact these are the copies of the original autograph.

So since Westcott-Hort 1881 is in Greek it is a copy of the autograph (original autograph is redundant and it's Emperor Trajan not Trajen and...nevermind)?

CX

and "The famous archaeologist William F. Albright said. In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew."

What?!? I'd like to see anyone else who thinks ALk was a Jew.

Toto

You can tell your "friend" that our only response would be "unpersuasive." Maybe in addition "poorly written." The author raises a number of points which individually have been the subject of long threads on this board, but he appears to be just jotting notes to himself that bolster his own faith.

E.g., papyrology and what it means about the dating of the gospels. He lists a number of ancient manuscripts, but doesn't consider that many of these scraps have only a few words, and that scripture was tampered with throughout Christian history. I think his discussion is meant to show that the documentary evidence for Christianity is so old that it must have some validity, but what he writes is too confused and skips over too many difficulties to convince anyone but himself.

Then we get to the Autographa section, where he claims that Paul's death was recorded in 67 AD (was there a death certificate?) , which would be news to any historian, then claims that this shows that Acts was completed before that time. This is contrary to most of modern Biblical scholarship, and shows that the author is desparate to believe in the truth of Christianity, despite the facts.

I don't see the point of going on. Why did you find it "...amusing"?

Kosh

They way he backs into his conclusions is
pathetic. Why don't you invite him over here
so we can debate him on a point by point basis
and deconstruct his innaccuracies?

Wizardry

Little more needs to be said about this than the following:

Simply hilarious.

Silent Dave

Like I said, I know this guy. I've dealt with him, on and off, for about a year. He's trying really, really hard to sound like a grownup, and I think it's cute.


H

Toto

If he's 6 years old, he might be "cute". If he's past high school, he's just pathetic.

But Dave - why did you post it here instead of the humor forum? What are you holding back?