jgoodguy

I like my Gone With the Wind analogy. Just because it has historical facts in it, don't make it true.

ApostateAbe

OK, thanks, that clarifies it. The reason that I proposed a third way is because there doesn't seem to be much more reason to assume that "all of the rest of it is complete hogwash" until sufficient evidence indicates otherwise than to assume that all of the rest of it is historical until sufficient evidence indicates otherwise. If the historicity of the accounts really is mixed, then why not make judgments of historical reflections by finding best explanations on a case-by-case basis? Is it just because of that darned monkey?

ApostateAbe

You are exactly right.

Juststeve

I’m wondering why Dog-on insists on external confirmation for anything in the Bible. Is this a rule he applies only to the Bible or is it a general rule about trying to extract history from ancient documents.

If we were discussing Socrates for example would he discount anything in Plato or Xenophon if it wasn’t corroborated by an outside source. There is excellent reason to doubt Plato and Xenophon with regard to Socrates. Both were followers, perhaps disciples would not be too strong a term. There are inconsistencies between their accounts. Both may have been motivated to place their teacher in the best light possible, yet historians interested in Socrates use both as sources. Should we just reject both sources until corroborated? If so I don’t think we can know anything about Socrates.

Juststeve

Suppose that 2000 years from now the only remaining record of the Civil War is one copy of Gone With The Wind. Would it be unreasonable to conclude, from the existence of the book, that a Civil War had more likely than not taken place at some time in the distant past?

Steve

dog-on

I don't disagree. With the available evidence, we really can't know anything about the historical Socrates. We do, however, know about the Socratic method, whatever the true source. Kinda like Christianity, for that matter.

Toto

The real question is whether it would be reasonable to conclude that Rhett Butler was a historical person.

David B

I don't know Gone With the Wind, but if all the remaining records of between the wars Germany was a copy of 'Cabaret' might not the question be whether it was reasonable to suppose that there might well have been a historical person on whom the Sally Bowles of the film was based?

David B

Toto

It seems clear that Abe still does not understand the real meaning of the Arguement to the Best Explanation.

In any literary work that contains fictional elements, a claimed best explanation would have to have significantly more explanatory power than the competing explanation that the element is just more fiction. I cannot think of any circumstances where this conclusion would be justified. We know that human imagination and rationalization are unlimited.

Toto

Apparently. Sally Bowles
But no one disputes that there might have been one or more historical sources for the portrait of Jesus in the gospels. The question is whether this person was the inspiration for the Christian religion?