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

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-04-2013, 12:49 PM   #51
Peter Kirby
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor
Posts: 4,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post
Bart Ehrman
If you love ad hominem, who am I to stop you?

Bart Ehrman has written several books and articles that are at least as good in their critical approach as the books written by any historians whose conclusions you like.

If this one book of his offends you enough to go on a crusade against his bona fides, so be it.
Peter Kirby is online now   Edit/Delete Message
Old 10-04-2013, 12:51 PM   #52
Peter Kirby
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor
Posts: 4,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMacSon View Post
you mean argument from authority ?
I mean focusing on the source of an argument (the man) as a way to discuss the argument. That way lies ad hominem when the conclusion is negative (and, yes, argument from authority if it is positive). Both are fallacies.
Peter Kirby is online now   Edit/Delete Message
Old 10-04-2013, 01:37 PM   #53
aa5874
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kirby View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post
Bart Ehrman
If you love ad hominem, who am I to stop you?

Bart Ehrman has written several books and articles that are at least as good in their critical approach as the books written by any historians whose conclusions you like.

If this one book of his offends you enough to go on a crusade against his bona fides, so be it.
Don't you realize that it is not just an isolated case?

Carrier has admitted that Ehrman's "Did Jesus Exist?" is probably the worst book for the HJ argument. Carrier claimed "it is filled with factual errors, logical fallacies, and badly worded arguments".

Other scholars, including Doherty, Acharya S, Price, his own peers, have written articles exposing the fallacies of Ehrman in "Did Jesus Exist?"
aa5874 is offline  
Old 10-04-2013, 01:57 PM   #54
MrMacSon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 559
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kirby View Post
Bart Ehrman has written several books and articles that are at least as good in their critical approach as the books written by any historians whose conclusions you like.

If this one book of his offends you enough to go on a crusade against his bona fides, so be it.
Yes, most of those books were very good.

But the book in question is the latest; and attempts to assert something that virtually counters a few of those previous books,
with very poor arguments; so is the most controversial.

It quickly spurned several authors to collective write a rebutal -
Bart Ehrman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth
Richard Carrier Ph.D. (Author), D.M. Murdock (Author), René Salm (Author), Earl Doherty (Author), David Fitzgerald (Author), Robert M. Price Ph.D. (Editor), Frank R. Zindler (Editor)
MrMacSon is offline  
Old 10-04-2013, 02:13 PM   #55
Robert Tulip
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 635
Default

Peter Kirby does not understand what ad hominem reasoning is. The discussion here is about how going to pastor school trains you to be a pastor, not a historian, and how there is an actual difference, which perhaps Peter Kirby does not comprehend. Are you a pastor, Peter Kirby?

We do not ask a dentist to fix a car, and nor should we ask a pastor for reliable information about history. If we do talk to pastors about history, we will find the information is corrupted by mumbo jumbo such as Erhman's Wheaton College mission statement with its assertions of the existence of Satan, evil powers, and that Jesus was true God and true man.

Erhman's Did Jesus Exist? is an exercise in homiletic politics, and is not intended to be read. Rather, it is a magic talisman that ignorant evangelists can wave at rationalists to ward off discussion.

If Ehrman chose to be trained at institutions that placed faith above reason, it is not unreasonable to expect the views he formed during his training might inform his books. Did Jesus Exist confirms that supposition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphod View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Kirby View Post
...Also, these guys that are being called out for their affiliations. If they know Greek and other languages, know the primary sources, engage the secondary literature, and come to critical conclusions in all good faith, then they are doing nothing essentially different from what a historian would do, and bringing up their title can be taken as ad hominem.
And what of the members of this august group of historians without an actual History degree, raised as Christians, educated in Christian institutions, and doing their "good faith" investigations as paid employees of religious institutions who demand adherence to a code of Doctrinal beliefs? Would it be an ad hominem to submit that such a background might well induce a lack of "good faith" scholarship?

Here, for example, is text from the application for employment form at Dallas Theological Seminary, where there eleven professors of New Testament studies:

DOCTRINAL BELIEFS
Please write a brief statement describing your conversion to Christianity. Please indicate what a person must do to receive eternal life and when you took that first step.
The mission of Dallas Theological Seminary as a professional, graduate-level school is to prepare men and women for ministry as godly servant-leaders in the body of Christ worldwide. We are seeking applicants who are passionately committed to our mission and will subscribe in good faith to the school’s doctrinal beliefs.
Do you adhere to the following doctrines:
• The authority and inerrancy of the Scripture
• The Trinity
• The full deity and humanity of Christ
• The spiritual lostness of the human race
• The substitutionary atonement and bodily resurrection of Christ
• Salvation by faith alone, in Christ alone
• The physical return of Christ


Bart Ehrman received his education at Moody Bible Institute, Wheaton College, and the Princeton Theological Seminary. At Princeton, where he received his PhD, he was required to adhere to a Mission Statement, which includes the following paragraph:

"A professional and graduate school of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the Seminary stands within the Reformed tradition, affirming the sovereignty of the triune God over all creation, the Gospel of Jesus Christ as God’s saving word for all people, the renewing power of the word and Spirit in all of life, and the unity of Christ’s servant church throughout the world. This tradition shapes the instruction, research, practical training, and continuing education provided by the Seminary, as well as the theological scholarship it promotes."


This is the mission statement from Wheaton College. Among other things, it asserts the existence of Satan, evil powers, and that Jesus was "true God and true man":

http://www.wheaton.edu/About-Wheaton...tional-Purpose

Does the scholarship evident in Ehrman's "Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth" indicate that Ehrman was doing historical research in the same manner as an actual historian?
Robert Tulip is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:35 AM.

Top

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