FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-18-2007, 03:20 PM   #21
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 139
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post
I am very puzzled by this alleged lack of degrees in the Mythicist camp because I see the whole academic world of Classicism as actually being very sympathetic to the Mythicist cause, but what has happened is that they have not looked at the subject because they have assumed the status quo is correct.
Assumed the status quo is correct, and I think, assumed that it is not worth fighting over. I don't see Earl Doherty's work as being a particularly attractive or rewarding field myself.
openlyatheist is offline  
Old 05-18-2007, 03:34 PM   #22
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by openlyatheist View Post
Because of bias.
what bias?

Quote:
How do you know they are doctors? Do they all have the same credentials? Do they work in the same hospital? Are they all from the same background? Better yet, have you taken their advice to see if the sore actually goes away?


What does this badgering have to do with the analogy?

Quote:
You say you have turned to the experts concerning Jesus, so what has changed? Has it actually solved some sort of problem, the way a doctor can make a sore go away?

Yes. I believe Jesus existed. I believed this based upon the majority of expert concurrence. I also believe this belief to be rational in my circumstances.

Quote:
(I find it interesting that your position on turning to experts sounds very much like how Christians tell me I must turn to Jesus to do my thinking for me too.)

When you can argue such, then i will listen.
Quote:
You are not disagreeing with me, though you appear to be trying.


I am offering other ways of reasonable choice--Ones you did not mention.
Quote:
Heeding word of mouth, checking track records, are all part of the process of educating yourself about the person you’re relying on.
I hear a few people claim mechanic X is good, and this counts as educating myself?

Quote:

No matter how much you wish to rely on 'experts' you must still make a judgment call as to who and what an expert is.
yes. point?


Quote:
There are not as many non-Christian scholars as there are Christian scholars, at least not in the Western world, because Christians are the majority.
:huh:
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/division.html

show me evidence that most HJ scholars are Christians. Once you do that, then we have the problems regarding belief-formation.
~M~ is offline  
Old 05-18-2007, 04:00 PM   #23
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 139
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by openlyatheist
Because of bias.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~
what bias?
Biases like those people have towards subjects concerning their beliefs and backgrounds, like the political science example I just wrote to you which you just cut out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~
Yes. I believe Jesus existed. I believed this based upon the majority of expert concurrence. I also believe this belief to be rational in my circumstances.
Ok. No one ever said you were irrational.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/division.html

show me evidence that most HJ scholars are Christians. Once you do that, then we have the problems regarding belief-formation.
Excuse me, but you are the one who insists your position is “based upon the majority of expert concurrence.” A position that you yourself have failed to meet a Burden of Proof upon (check those fallacy files). And if you are telling the truth, then you should already know what scholars are what.

I can see you aren’t serious about discussion. I’m done here.
openlyatheist is offline  
Old 05-18-2007, 04:01 PM   #24
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Glendale, CA
Posts: 139
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by openlyatheist
I don't see Earl Doherty's work as being a particularly attractive or rewarding field myself.
Ladies and Gentlemen: this thread is proof of that.
openlyatheist is offline  
Old 05-18-2007, 04:10 PM   #25
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by openlyatheist View Post
Biases like those people have towards subjects concerning their beliefs and backgrounds, like the political science example I just wrote to you which you just cut out.


Wouldn't that apply to all experts?
Quote:
Ok. No one ever said you were irrational.
The rationality of my choice is the question.

Quote:
Excuse me, but you are the one who insists your position is “based upon the majority of expert concurrence.”

and it is.
Quote:

A position that you yourself have failed to meet a Burden of Proof upon (check those fallacy files).
Isn't it generally accepted that the mythic case is a minority position with relevant scholars?



Quote:
And if you are telling the truth, then you should already know what scholars are what.
what scholars are what???? :huh:
Quote:
I can see you aren’t serious about discussion. I’m done here.
I'm not? :huh: Are you mad because you committed the whole division fallacy thingy?
~M~ is offline  
Old 05-18-2007, 08:41 PM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post
So, if I had to bank on one hypothesis, then wouldn't I be rational to follow the one with the most scholarly support?
Yes. It is up to the dissenters to make their case against the consensus. If they fail to convince you, then you are entirely justified in accepting the consensus as more likely to be true. And if you can't even understand the dissenters, then no one can reasonably fault you for not being convinced.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 05-18-2007, 10:06 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: California
Posts: 748
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by achristianbeliever View Post
Whenever I am confronted with someone who accepts the Jesus myth scenario I ask them for two things.

1. What is the minimalist criteria showing the historicity of any historical figure?

2. Give me an example of someone who just passes this criteria in order for me to compare them to Jesus to understand why Jesus fails.

I think that's a great request and yet I've never received an answer to this except an excuse as to why they will not do this.

Example: "Every historical person should be based on its own merits"

Well that's rather convenient. So anything I find that helps my case against Jesus historicity I can use without worrying about it screwing the historicity of anyone I do believe existed. The real reason they do this excuse is because if they do create a general criteria then they risk one of two things happening. Either they'll create a criteria that Jesus passes thus ruining their entire position or they create a criteria that Jesus fails but so do many other historical figures that it makes their criteria seem ridiculous.

I have one for you:

Show me a historical figure about whom thousands and thousands of words were written for a period of well over a hundred years, yet in all those words barely a single event from his life is ever referenced. Then, suddenly, about 120 years after his alleged death (starting pretty much with Justin Martyr and some undated gospels), all those details suddenly become so well known that nobody who writes about him from that point on can refrain from reiterating them ad nauseum.

I can guarantee that the earliest writings about Alexander the Great were chock full of specific biographical details about what he said and did from the get-go.

Moreover, if we are basing what we know about Jesus on the four canonical gospels, we don't even know who wrote them, and the writers don't cite a single source or reference for us to know where they got their information. This is NOT the case with ancient historians like Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus, Pliny etc. The gospels are written as narratives not histories, which also makes them highly suspect.

Finally, it's pretty easy to demonstrate that virtually every single detail of the Jesus "biography" is a product of midrash based on the Old Testament. The gospel writers themselves give the game away with their constant referencing of the OT when chronicaling the details of Jesus' "life." Is that true of any other historical figure?
Roland is offline  
Old 05-18-2007, 11:32 PM   #28
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor
Posts: 4,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
Sadly, if only I had the time. Peter, you of all people should know how hectic my schedule is.

BTW - I found a graphic artist, and I already went over the basics with her. Things are looking up for this, ω φιλε.

Ps - I never considered myself an "heavyweight". Ask Vork if he'll debate John P. Meier.
Hehe, ask J. P. M. first. I doubt he'd be able to do so; his stature is so great already, it could only take a hit.
Peter Kirby is online now   Edit/Delete Message
Old 05-19-2007, 12:23 AM   #29
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Posts: 15,576
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post
Not what I meant. He is a big deal in culture, history and so forth. This remains true whether you are indifferent or not.
Right...again, it's still dependent on the culture which determines how big of a deal he is or not.
Soul Invictus is offline  
Old 05-19-2007, 04:04 AM   #30
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Mornington Peninsula
Posts: 1,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by openlyatheist View Post
Fortunately for me, I do not need Doherty or anyone else to point out a myth when I see one. I haven’t even read The Jesus Puzzle, or anything by Robert Price for that matter.
and
Quote:
Assumed the status quo is correct, and I think, assumed that it is not worth fighting over. I don't see Earl Doherty's work as being a particularly attractive or rewarding field myself.
You are not making a whole lot of sense matey!
youngalexander is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:33 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.