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: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-27-2007, 05:55 PM   #181
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default

Mark 3:6 is not credible for more or less the same reason that it would not be credible if you read something purporting to be a historical record of the modern US saying:

'And the Republicans went forth and straightway took counsel with the Communists'
J-D is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 05:56 PM   #182
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
All I can gather from your statements is that Jesus the Christ probably or probably not existed.
Twice now you have referred to 'all you can gather' from other people's posts. This appears to be a description of your limitations rather than of what other people are actually saying. You can't handle the truth.
J-D is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 06:29 PM   #183
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
These two statements are logically consistent:
(1) There never was a person with the supernatural characteristics attributed to 'Jesus Christ'.
(2) Some of the statements about Jesus in the Christian Scriptures are historically accurate.
If you read the NT, the first statement is false.
You yourself claim you don't know of anything true with regards to Jesus the Christ as stated in the NT.

Quote:
I'm not saying anything at this point about the truth or falsehood of either of those statements, I'm just saying that they are logically consistent. If somebody did believe both of these statements it would not be a logical contradiction.
If you believe false statements to be true, then you are deceived or mistaken. It is prudent for you to find out , within reason, what in the NT is true or not, since the logical may appear illogical to you.

Quote:
I don't know whether Jesus was crucified or not. But it's historically possible. There is nothing about that hypothesis that makes it historically impossible.
That is why investigations are done. Most people know, within reason, what is possible or not. At one time I thought that Jesus the Christ was a real person, after investigation, I have retracted and now view Jesus the Christ as pure fabricated fiction.

You do not know that Jesus was crucified, you do not know if he was buried or the where- abouts of his body, yet you fail to take into consideration that Jesus may have not existed at all, which is an obvious possibilty.

But upon reflection, may be you have not even started your investigation about the matter, since like law enforcement before they begin an investigation, usually say, 'Nothing can be ruled in or out'.

I have already past that stage, and although based on circumstantial evidence, I think I have a strong case against the HJ.
I leave you with the so-called words of Saul/Paul, a hostile witness, 2 Corithinians 12:2-3, "I knew a man in Christ above fourteen ago, ( whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, God knoweth such an one caught up in the third heaven.
And I know such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell; God knoweth;)

Now if Saul/Paul cannot recall, who can?
aa5874 is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 06:34 PM   #184
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Mark 3:6 is not credible for more or less the same reason that it would not be credible if you read something purporting to be a historical record of the modern US saying:

'And the Republicans went forth and straightway took counsel with the Communists'
The writers of Matt (12:14) and Luke (6:11) obviously agree: they left out the reference to the Herodians found in Mk 3:6.


spin
spin is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 06:56 PM   #185
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
You can't handle the truth.
Can you show me any truth in the NT, that you have handled, with respect to Jesus the Christ?
aa5874 is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 06:57 PM   #186
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
If you read the NT, the first statement is false.
You yourself claim you don't know of anything true with regards to Jesus the Christ as stated in the NT.
Why are you making me repeat myself? I already said that I wasn't saying anything at this point about the truth or falsehood of those statements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
If you believe false statements to be true, then you are deceived or mistaken. It is prudent for you to find out , within reason, what in the NT is true or not, since the logical may appear illogical to you.
Why are you making me repeat myself? I already said that I wasn't saying anything at this point about the truth or falsehood of those statements.

Can I please have a straight answer? Do you or do you not acknowledge that the following two statements are logically consistent with each other (I am assuming that you know what this means)?

(1) There never was a person with the supernatural characteristics attributed to 'Jesus Christ'.
(2) Some of the statements about Jesus in the Christian Scriptures are historically accurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
That is why investigations are done. Most people know, within reason, what is possible or not. At one time I thought that Jesus the Christ was a real person, after investigation, I have retracted and now view Jesus the Christ as pure fabricated fiction.

You do not know that Jesus was crucified, you do not know if he was buried or the where- abouts of his body, yet you fail to take into consideration that Jesus may have not existed at all, which is an obvious possibilty.
You quite obviously have no idea what I do or do not take into consideration, apparently because you are intellectually incapable of encompassing more than two alternatives at a time in your thinking. I do take into consideration the possibility that Jesus may not have existed at all. I defy you to demonstrate to the contrary from my own words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
But upon reflection, may be you have not even started your investigation about the matter, since like law enforcement before they begin an investigation, usually say, 'Nothing can be ruled in or out'.

I have already past that stage, and although based on circumstantial evidence, I think I have a strong case against the HJ.
You may have a strong case against the hypothesis that everything the Christian Scriptures say about Jesus is true. But I am not supporting that hypothesis, and never have.

If you had a strong case, or indeed any case, against the different hypothesis that some of the things the Christian Scriptures say about Jesus are true, then you would have presented it by now.

Probable conclusion: despite having had the distinction pointed out to you several times, you are unwilling to accept the difference between the two hypotheses. You can't handle the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
I leave you with the so-called words of Saul/Paul, a hostile witness, 2 Corithinians 12:2-3, "I knew a man in Christ above fourteen ago, ( whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, God knoweth such an one caught up in the third heaven.
And I know such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell; God knoweth;)

Now if Saul/Paul cannot recall, who can?
I don't know what you mean by describing Saul/Paul as a 'hostile witness', or what difference you think it makes. I regard him as a highly partisan witness, and possibly a corrupt one as well. So I don't see where your argument based on his testimony is supposed to get us.
J-D is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 07:04 PM   #187
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Can you show me any truth in the NT, that you have handled, with respect to Jesus the Christ?
The truth you can't handle is that there are more than two alternative possibilities here.

I've already told you that I can't point to any statement about Jesus in the Christian Scriptures which I am sure is true. And I've already tried to explain how this proves nothing.

You think that if you exclude one possibility, you automatically prove another. It doesn't work. There are more than two possibilities.
J-D is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 07:09 PM   #188
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
The writers of Matt (12:14) and Luke (6:11) obviously agree: they left out the reference to the Herodians found in Mk 3:6.


spin
I am not sure, however, that the authors of Matthew and Luke were motivated to vary from Mark primarily by concerns about historical plausibility. But it would take a lengthy digression to explain my thinking, so I won't go into it further now.
J-D is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 07:09 PM   #189
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Why are you making me repeat myself? I already said that I wasn't saying anything at this point about the truth or falsehood of those statements.Why are you making me repeat myself? I already said that I wasn't saying anything at this point about the truth or falsehood of those statements.
You have nothing to say. Again, anything is possible without investigation. The Earth was thought to be the centre of the Universe, and indeed it was thought plausible or possible until proper investigation, and even after, some, without doing any research, maintained their fictitious possibility.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 03-27-2007, 07:12 PM   #190
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
You have nothing to say.
Since what I am primarily concerned to say is that your reasoning is full of flaws, it is natural that you should say this. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
J-D is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:25 AM.

Top

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