Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 10-21-2009, 05:33 PM

Hi KrisK10,

Good luck with the new book.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KrisK10

Hi folks,

I swung by the forum here for a quick look and couldn't help but notice that the title of the current thread nearly matches the title of my new book Doubting Jesus' Resurrection: What Happened in the Black Box? (or via: amazon.co.uk) Although I'm just a layman, it has some pretty good endorsements from Dr. Richard Carrier, Dr. Robert M. Price, Dr. Robert J. Miller, Dr. Gregory C. Jenks, and others. If you are interested in this topic, you might want to check it out. All the best!

Kris K.

It's also available on Amazon.uk and Amazon.ca

Carrier's Review:

Quote:

"Rare is it when a lay author puts in the effort of wide research, gathers the references to every point together, interacts with the leading disputes, and offers something soundly argued that hadn't been so well argued before. Komarnitsky does all of that and presents a surprisingly excellent demonstration of how belief in the resurrection of Jesus could plausibly have originated by natural means.

Though I don't always agree with him, and some issues could be discussed at greater length, everything he argues is plausible, and his treatise as a whole is a must for anyone interested in the resurrection."

– Richard Carrier, Ph.D. Ancient History

badger3k · 10-21-2009, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

No, she didn't say that.She isn't.Nobody knows for sure.

Ref - Paul and the 500 people. That assumes that he wrote that at all. Some scholars that I am aware of think that the passage is a later interpolation from a Christian copyist. So we can't even be sure that the passage is genuine (and we're assuming Paul existed, etc, etc). So, :huh: who knows?

aa5874 · 10-21-2009, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But it is right there. What can you see?

I see a difference between

'about Paul's veracity'

and

'what the content of Paul's visions were'

Don't you? Doesn't everybody?

It should be obvious that if Barefoot Bree does give a shrill hoot.... about the contents of Paul's vision that Barefoot Bree does not give a shrill hoot... about Paul's veracity.

The contents of Paul's vision as found in the Epistles must be directly related to Paul's veracity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

When people perceive I am wrong they move in like vultures, when they believe I may be right, they just disappear, vanish, run away. They BOLT for cover.

I don't run from anybody.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

What, not even a berserker with a flamethrower?

I guess you'll live your life the way you choose, but if everybody I met ran away from me, I might check that I was washing myself properly. Or see a counsellor. Or something.

You are confused. You are off topic. This is not a war.

We are dealing with facts and sources of antiquity. Some people cannot support their position so they BOLT for cover.

aa5874 · 10-21-2009, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Please show exactly what words I have twisted around to the exact opposite of what you were saying.

Do you not understand how an 'ignore list' works?

It doesn't REALLY work. Barefoot Bree can read my responses to you when you reply to me. It is JUST a total waste of time.

I don't understand why people use it unless they are using the "ostrich approach".

Sheshbazzar · 10-21-2009, 06:48 PM

Everything in the NT bearing the name of 'Paul' is of such dubious provenance that not even a single sentence can be trusted to have actually originated from the pen of a original and authentic Paul.
Christianity wants the world to accept its documents and claims, yet they 'cooked the books' so thoroughly that the actual content of the originals are irrecoverably lost in the morass of latter theological interpolations and 'improvements'_ that is, IF there ever were any genuine Pauline letters in the first place.

Sheshbazzar · 10-21-2009, 06:50 PM

^^

J-D · 10-21-2009, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

I see a difference between

'about Paul's veracity'

and

'what the content of Paul's visions were'

Don't you? Doesn't everybody?

It should be obvious that if Barefoot Bree does give a shrill hoot.... about the contents of Paul's vision that Barefoot Bree does not give a shrill hoot... about Paul's veracity.

It isn't obvious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The contents of Paul's vision as found in the Epistles must be directly related to Paul's veracity.

There's no 'must' about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

What, not even a berserker with a flamethrower?

I guess you'll live your life the way you choose, but if everybody I met ran away from me, I might check that I was washing myself properly. Or see a counsellor. Or something.

You are confused.

I think you're the one who's confused.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

You are off topic. This is not a war.

I know that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

We are dealing with facts and sources of antiquity. Some people cannot support their position so they BOLT for cover.

Some people cannot support their position but are not a whit deterred from restating it endlessly.

J-D · 10-21-2009, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Do you not understand how an 'ignore list' works?

It doesn't REALLY work. Barefoot Bree can read my responses to you when you reply to me.

At the time when you posted this, there was no way Barefoot Bree could see it. And although she can still see my posts if she checks the thread, who's to say she's going to do that?

Sheshbazzar · 10-21-2009, 08:45 PM

Bree's had a rough go lately, she don't need hang around here and be further abused.

aa5874 · 10-21-2009, 08:59 PM

It is my view that the writer called Paul was a liar.

He lied about seeing Jesus resurrected even if it is assumed Jesus was human.

There is no corroborative evidence for Paul's existence in the first century. The biography of Jesus as found in the Gospels is not from the Pauline Epistles.

The teachings of Jesus as found in the Gospels is not from the Pauline Epistles.

Justin Martyr did not account for Saul/Paul, Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline Epistles, or the Pauline churches.

He appears to have lived no earlier than the middle of the 2nd century.

Paul is a fraud.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-21-2009, 06:48 PM	#425
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Everything in the NT bearing the name of 'Paul' is of such dubious provenance that not even a single sentence can be trusted to have actually originated from the pen of a original and authentic Paul. Christianity wants the world to accept its documents and claims, yet they 'cooked the books' so thoroughly that the actual content of the originals are irrecoverably lost in the morass of latter theological interpolations and 'improvements'_ that is, IF there ever were any genuine Pauline letters in the first place.

10-21-2009, 06:50 PM	#426
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	^^

10-21-2009, 08:45 PM	#429
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Bree's had a rough go lately, she don't need hang around here and be further abused.

10-21-2009, 08:59 PM	#430
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	It is my view that the writer called Paul was a liar. He lied about seeing Jesus resurrected even if it is assumed Jesus was human. There is no corroborative evidence for Paul's existence in the first century. The biography of Jesus as found in the Gospels is not from the Pauline Epistles. The teachings of Jesus as found in the Gospels is not from the Pauline Epistles. Justin Martyr did not account for Saul/Paul, Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline Epistles, or the Pauline churches. He appears to have lived no earlier than the middle of the 2nd century. Paul is a fraud.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.