FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Philosophy & Religious Studies > History of Abrahamic Religions & Related Texts
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 01:23 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-14-2013, 10:14 AM   #41
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
..
Id just like to add that mutiple other criteria must line up first. Criterion for Embarrassment is never used alone to determine anything.
Not "for" - criterion "of" embarrasment.

We have seen that is it used alone, as in the examples above. Are all those scholars mistaken? [trick question. . . ]

And what is this "appeal to ignorance" that you keep mentioning? An appeal to authority is based on an appeal to your own ignorance of the matter, and your need to find an authority, is it not?
Toto is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 10:25 AM   #42
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
And what is this "appeal to ignorance" that you keep mentioning? An appeal to authority is based on an appeal to your own ignorance of the matter, and your need to find an authority, is it not?

Many here discount almost all of modern scholarships, education and knowledge on the topic because they discount the totality of their findings.

Instead of responsible research, they appeal to those uneducated people that have a similar faith.
outhouse is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 10:32 AM   #43
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default

Mark 10:39

Jesus said to them, “You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with...

According to Mark's way of thought, Christians had to emulate Jesus.

Just how embarrassing would it have been to him if Christians were baptised, and other Christians then pointed out that baptism was hardly necessary - after all, Jesus himself had not been baptised.

So Mark performed a quick baptism on Jesus, and them got his Jesus to tell other Christians to do like him.
Steven Carr is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 10:34 AM   #44
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
..
Id just like to add that mutiple other criteria must line up first. Criterion for Embarrassment is never used alone to determine anything.
Not "for" - criterion "of" embarrasment.
This is showing ignorance of the topic at hand.

I have already posted examples showing your error here due to the limitations of the rule.

There may be rare examples, but generally other criteria must be used with it.

Quote:
http://factlookup.com/article/Criter..._embarrassment


The criterion of embarrassment has its limitations and must always be used in concert with the other criteria.
outhouse is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 10:55 AM   #45
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
..
Id just like to add that mutiple other criteria must line up first. Criterion for Embarrassment is never used alone to determine anything.
Not "for" - criterion "of" embarrasment.
This is showing ignorance of the topic at hand.
No, it shows your confusion, not being able to name what you are trying to talk about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
I have already posted examples showing your error here due to the limitations of the rule.

There may be rare examples, but generally other criteria must be used with it.

Quote:
http://factlookup.com/article/Criter..._embarrassment


The criterion of embarrassment has its limitations and must always be used in concert with the other criteria.
This clearly says that the criterion--if it functioned--is not a sufficient condition, despite the fact that it is used as such. Just see the Ehrman example I cited earlier.
spin is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 10:59 AM   #46
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
And what is this "appeal to ignorance" that you keep mentioning? An appeal to authority is based on an appeal to your own ignorance of the matter, and your need to find an authority, is it not?
Many here discount almost all of modern scholarships, education and knowledge on the topic because they discount the totality of their findings.
This is nonsense. Most people here question the capacity of religious scholars to do history, which they are usually not trained to do. You wouldn't get a dental hygiene expert to do history, would you?? You get biblical scholars to analyse biblical texts. And I for one frequently use their results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Instead of responsible research, they appeal to those uneducated people that have a similar faith.
Sounds like biblical scholars trying to do history.
spin is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 11:22 AM   #47
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Many here discount almost all of modern scholarships, education and knowledge on the topic because they discount the totality of their findings.
This is nonsense. Most people here question the capacity of religious scholars to do history, which they are usually not trained to do. You wouldn't get a dental hygiene expert to do history, would you?? You get biblical scholars to analyse biblical texts. And I for one frequently use their results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Instead of responsible research, they appeal to those uneducated people that have a similar faith.
Sounds like biblical scholars trying to do history.

Your solidifying my statemnt.

Scholars are historians.
outhouse is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 11:33 AM   #48
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr View Post
Mark 10:39

Jesus said to them, “You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with...

According to Mark's way of thought, Christians had to emulate Jesus.

Just how embarrassing would it have been to him if Christians were baptised, and other Christians then pointed out that baptism was hardly necessary - after all, Jesus himself had not been baptised.

So Mark performed a quick baptism on Jesus, and them got his Jesus to tell other Christians to do like him.
The only need for Jesus to have been baptized is if he was a sinner. 1:4 clearly says that baptism by John was for the forgiveness of sins. We reasonably can conclude that Matthew, Luke, and John were embarrassed about the implication that Jesus was a sinner prior to his baptism. We simply don't know if Mark was also. Your 'emulation' theory might be true but if Mark was not an adoptionist -- his pre-baptism Jesus was the Christ, the son of God, the one Isaiah said would come, and was way mightier than John, who baptizes in the Holy Spirit--if Mark also saw Jesus as sinless, then he was writing about an embarrassing event.

One could apply the same reasoning you are using for Mark to Matthew, Luke, and John and yet they clearly had a problem with the idea that Jesus was baptized by John for the forgiveness of sins.
TedM is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 11:37 AM   #49
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: USA, Missouri
Posts: 3,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post


Your solidifying my statemnt.

Scholars are historians.
And they know a hell of a lot more than the amateurs on this board who seem to think that biblical scholars are all either naive bible thumping believers, or are psychologically still in that mindset even if they have turned away from an earlier position of faith.
TedM is offline  
Old 08-14-2013, 11:52 AM   #50
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TedM View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr View Post
Mark 10:39

Jesus said to them, “You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with...

According to Mark's way of thought, Christians had to emulate Jesus.

Just how embarrassing would it have been to him if Christians were baptised, and other Christians then pointed out that baptism was hardly necessary - after all, Jesus himself had not been baptised.

So Mark performed a quick baptism on Jesus, and them got his Jesus to tell other Christians to do like him.
The only need for Jesus to have been baptized is if he was a sinner.
Tell the author of Mark who has a need for Jesus to be baptized , not as a sinner, but as a precedent.
Steven Carr is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:54 AM.

Top

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