The Testimony of the 3 and 8 Witnesses to the BoM

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Matthew Bell
I don't see how such is a problem. The Bible mentions coinage. That coinage
is confirmed by independant sources. The Bible is correct with regard to
its references to coinage. Of course this does not say anything with regard
to other matters, e.g. the resurrection, but no-one is claiming is does.

POOBAH
That's odd, because at the very beginning of this thread, you said:


> POOBAH (past)

> On what should we judge the claims of the  BoM & the Bible, pray tell?


Matthew Bell (past):
Those would be many. A primary factor would be whether the claims made in
the book could be shown to be false, especially when speaking of ordinary
matters. An example with the two mentioned books above would be the
testimony of archaeology, which has verified parts of the Bible, but little,
if any of the details in the BoM. If you want to test such, all you need to
do is some research into the coinage mentioned in the Bible and verified by
archaelogical finds and compare such with the complete absence of such with
the coinage in the BoM.

POOBAH
So back then (just a week ago), you said that if a book could be shown to be
accurate in ordinary matters, it would be a *primary factor* in accepting
the claims of the book. Now you seem to be back-peddling, saying that no one
(evidently including you) ever said that. Hmmm...

You've ignored this question, so I'll ask again: Since Josephus, Tacitus,
Seutonius, are generally accepted to be accurate in ordinary matters, is
this a *primary factor* in you accepting the miraculous claims contained in
their texts?

• Previous message: The Testimony of the 3 and 8 Witnesses to the BoM
• Next message: The Testimony of the 3 and 8 Witnesses to the BoM
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]