This is a satirical response to the nonsensical stuff posted by a guy named Dave at Raytractors. (sorry Dave but Greenlief answered Barker’s challenge long ago)
1.Do you go out of your way to use the most unreliable sources possible?
You happen to think that the books were chosen at the Council of Nicea (all that wasw diputed at the council of nicea was the doctrine of trinity) and that Paul somehow believed in a spiritual resurrection (Zero evidence for there ever being a belief in a spiritual resurrection in Judaism). Did you consult any studies (like the ones eminent scholar N.T. Wright carries out in his book The Resurrection of the Son of God ) or are you just talking out of ignorance?
2.How the heck did you come up with the crazy idea that Paul did not believe in a physical resurrection?
Never mind there is no evidence whatsoever of belief in a spiritual resurrection in Judaism. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 uses the word anastasis which in all Greek and Jewish literature means a literal physical resurrection.In 1 Corinthians 6:11-13 paul explicitly says we should not commit sexual immorality and defile our body because someday our bodies will be raised to be with the Lord. If Paul did not believe in a physcial resurrection how does this make sense? Also in verses like Phil. 3:20-21 , Paul clearly says that our mortal bodies will be transformed to be lke Jesus’. In light of these verses how can you say he did not believe in a physical resurrection?
3.Why do all your questions commit the fallacy of question begging so heavily?
4.The only accounts of Ceasar explicitly crossing the Rubicon are from 4 writers , each writing over a century after the fact. Each conflates the account with their own ideologies and ideas of the expansion of Rome. How can they be reliable?
5. In Tacitus’ The Annals of Rome , he describes 2 towns and says they were 25 miles apart.The real distance is known to be 125 miles. Most Roman histical scholars believe this is a copyist error. What do you think?
6. What good reasons do we have to say that Mark was written after 70CE as you say many times in your question?
(i will not accept the foretelling of the destruction of Jerusalem as a reason because it was cearly intended to be a prophecy.)
7 .You complained in your questions that there are instances where the bible “violates natural order”.Can you prove naturalism is true? If not wouldn’t you just be arguing that the bible is false because it contradicts your worldview?
8. Are you aware of the preterist interpretation of the Olivet discourse?
9. You say “miracles don’t happen today”. How did you arrive at this conclusion? Did you just dismiss any kind of testimony of a Christian having experienced a miracle offhand because of your naturalistic worldview? You might say “no-one has ever proven a miracle” but you cannot make a positive claim to knowledge about no miracles occuring based on them being unproven.
10. Are you aware of the use of typology in Jewish literature in interpreting prophecy? If not please acquaint yourself with it before critiquing Matthew.
I am holding a glass of water in my hands.Is this H20 because it is water, or is it water because it’s H2O?
(Meant to demonstrate the meaninglessness of Euthyphro dilemma.)