FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-14-2001, 02:35 PM   #51
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 410
Post

To jess:

I have no idea what you are talking about. If you do not know how to examine expert witness testimony (which is, by definition, evidence) by the use of other evidence, then I do not know how to help you there.

As for persecution being a form of warfare, I guess we must agree to disagree. Polytheists persecute those of other faiths, just as do monotheists. Many of them also seek to impose their religious systems and beliefs on the conquored peoples. I cannot imagine that you would disagree with this fact.

Quote:
Originally posted by BobDobbs:

What are Paul's writings evidence of, besides his own opinion?
They are evidence of what he did, said, saw and believed.

Quote:
Did he meet, and was he instructed by Jesus? Literally?
In my opinion, and that of orthodox Christians, yes.

Quote:
What makes his opinions worth basing one's life around?
Well, if he is right, then I would say that what he said was pretty important. The claim that he was right, or was not cannot be made without reference to circular reasoning, of course, but we can compare many of his non-extraordinary claims with other evidence available to us.

Quote:
They are certainly not intuitive, as are many Taoist (for example) teachings.
Very true. At the same time, I would hope that you are not arguing that only intuitive things are, or can be, true.

Be well.

Nomad
Nomad is offline  
Old 08-14-2001, 03:00 PM   #52
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: rationalpagans.com
Posts: 7,400
Post

Hiya, Nomad! A few definitions to start---


Quote:
Nomad: As for persecution being a form of warfare, I guess we must agree to disagree.
Quote:
Main Entry: 1war
Pronunciation: 'wor
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English werre, from Old North French, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German werra strife; akin to Old High German werran to confuse
Date: 12th century
1 a (1) : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations (2) : a period of such armed conflict (3) : STATE OF WAR b : the art or science of warfare c (1) obsolete : weapons and equipment for war (2) archaic : soldiers armed and equipped for war
2 a : a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism b : a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end <a class war> <a war against disease> c : VARIANCE, ODDS 3
- war·less
/-l/ adjective

Quote:
Main Entry: per·se·cu·tion
Pronunciation: "p'kyü-sh
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 : the act or practice of persecuting especially those who differ in origin, religion, or social outlook
2 : the condition of being persecuted , harassed, or annoyed

Quote:
Main Entry: per·se·cute
Pronunciation: 'p"kyüt
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -cut·ed; -cut·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French persecuter, back-formation from persecuteur persecutor, from Late Latin persecutor, from persequi to persecute, from Latin, to pursue, from per- through + sequi to follow -- more at SUE
Date: 15th century
1 : to harass in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief
2 : to annoy with persistent or urgent approaches (as attacks, pleas, or importunities) : PESTER
synonym see WRONG
- per·se·cu·tee
/"p"kyü-'tE/ noun
- per·se·cu·tive
/'p"kyü-tiv/ adjective
- per·se·cu·tor
/-"kyü-t/ noun
- per·se·cu·to·ry
/-kyü-"tOr-E, -"tor-; -"kyü-t&-rE/ adjective

Merriam Webster. Please use standard definitions of words, Nomad, if you want people to understand what you are saying and be able to discuss with you without semantic differences; or else, you could define a term in a particular way for a particular arguement, if all are agreed, if you want. Merely equating two English words because they both have a negative connotation will not fly, at least not for me.


What was it Lincoln said about calling a dog's tail a leg?


Quote:
I have no idea what you are talking about. If you do not know how to examine expert witness testimony (which is, by definition, evidence) by the use of other evidence, then I do not know how to help you there.
I was asking for how you do it, so we can both be on the same page--- and so Bill, who asked the original question, could also be on the same page as you.


I am fairly sure that most people do not know how to/are not qualified to examine expert witness testimony. If you could just let me know how you do it, that would be awesome.


If you do not, I will have to go on the idea that for you, examining the evidence comes down to 'it sounds silly, it must be silly'. But then you should accept it when it is used against your evidence, as well.


Quote:
Polytheists persecute those of other faiths, just as do monotheists. Many of them also seek to impose their religious systems and beliefs on the conquored peoples. I cannot imagine that you would disagree with this fact.

Could you provide evidence for this accusation, please? I would like to see evidence, not just an assertion.

Actually, since my expert said that polytheistic people do not have religios wars, not that there has never been an incidence of religious persecutions, why don't we stick with debunking him, not what he did not say?

Thanks again,


jess

[ August 14, 2001: Message edited by: jess ]
jess is offline  
Old 08-14-2001, 05:15 PM   #53
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 410
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by jess:

Nomad: Polytheists persecute those of other faiths, just as do monotheists. Many of them also seek to impose their religious systems and beliefs on the conquored peoples. I cannot imagine that you would disagree with this fact.

Jess: Could you provide evidence for this accusation, please? I would like to see evidence, not just an assertion.
You mean like polytheistic India making war on montheistic Pakistan or the Sihks?

Look jess, I understand your desire to whitewash polytheism, and present it as sweetness and light, but it has human beings as its followers as much as does any other faith or ideology. When someone tries to deny the simple facts of history, then they are either hopelessly naive, or spreading propaganda. In your own case I would have to choose the latter option.

As for persecution equating to war, what is happening in Israel right now between Jews and Palestinians qualifies as war in my books. What happened between the Hutu and Titsi (sp?) tribes of Rwanda was war. Persecutions can and do take on the nature of a war once we pass a certain threshold of violence. And to quote a wonderful line in the movie, "The Lion in Winter":

"I never heard a corpse ask how it got so cold."

People die for their beliefs at the hands of others. Polytheists have been doing this to one another, and to monotheists (and vice versa) for a very long time. And when atheists aquire power (as they did in Communist countries), they persecute others who do not share their beliefs.

Such is our nature. Christians call it the sinful nature of man. I do not know what you call it.

Nomad

[ August 14, 2001: Message edited by: Nomad ]
Nomad is offline  
Old 08-14-2001, 05:26 PM   #54
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: rationalpagans.com
Posts: 7,400
Post

Yes, but Nomad, it is up to you to prove that these wars that polytheistic nations have are religious and not one of the myriad of other things humans go to war for.

I am not spreading propaganda. I have 'expert' testimony and you are not giving any reason for me to doubt it. It is you who are spreading propaganda, Nomad.

Please answer my other questions as well, will you?
jess is offline  
Old 08-14-2001, 05:34 PM   #55
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: rationalpagans.com
Posts: 7,400
Post

In defense of India and the Hindus, they are well known for their tolerance of other religions. Indeed, the World Jewish Congress, when reviewing good places for Jews to live, said this past year of India:
Quote:
All these different communities [Hindu, Muslim and Jew] live in an environment of tolerance and pluralism, with almost no anti-semitism or discrimination of any kind.
As I said above, there is more than one reason for them to declare war.

Quote:
Persecutions can and do take on the nature of a war once we pass a certain threshold of violence.
Again, Nomad, you are the end all of all experts--- now usurping Merriam-Webster's ability to define words.

Is that the image you really intended to give us?
jess is offline  
Old 08-15-2001, 01:02 PM   #56
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 410
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by jess:

Yes, but Nomad, it is up to you to prove that these wars that polytheistic nations have are religious and not one of the myriad of other things humans go to war for.
Hmm... have you become an apologist for the Hindus jess?

Will you admit that religious ferver drives the hatred felt by many in India that is held against Muslims, Christians and Sihks? After all, the Australian Christian missionary and his children were murdered for being Christian missionaries, not for driving on the wrong side of the street, or a myriad of other reasons for which people commit murder.

It is a slippery slope to try and build such a convenient escape hatch for yourself here jess. Polytheists, monotheists and atheists all go to war for many reasons. Defending or spreading their beliefs is obviously one of them.

Quote:
Please answer my other questions as well, will you?
Which questions are those jess?

Nomad
Nomad is offline  
Old 08-15-2001, 05:17 PM   #57
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: rationalpagans.com
Posts: 7,400
Post

Hiya, Nomad!


Thanks for the response.


Quote:
Hmm... have you become an apologist for the Hindus jess?
Last time I checked, they didn't need one.


Quote:
Will you admit that religious ferver drives the hatred felt by many in India that is held against Muslims, Christians and Sihks?
What I will admit is that, persecuted by monotheists for as long as they have been, even Hindus react violently. A few years back, a St. Bernard was 'put down' for killing two toddlers. During the exam, they discovered the children had been putting rubber bands around the dog's neck, slowly suffocating him.


I would call it self-defense of body, family and property in a religious persecution by monotheists, not a religious war.


Quote:
After all, the Australian Christian missionary and his children were murdered for being Christian missionaries, not for driving on the wrong side of the street, or a myriad of other reasons for which people commit murder.
Possibly. They were also killed after the Indian government issued a warning to all foreigners, including foreign Christian missionaries (which are, by the way, illegal in India; Indian Christian missionaries are not) to stay out of the area because of the unrest in that locale due to various reasons. Generally, well fed, healthy, well clothed foreigners entering an area which is not (well fed, healthy, and well clothed), add to existing unrest, regardless of their religion.


This (the murder of well fed, well clothed healthy foreigners in an area they were advised no to enter by malnourished, poor, and sickly natives) could possibly fall under 'persectuion', although persectution normally involves the persectuor in a position of power. We are, however, talking about war.
I am clear on that. Are you?


Quote:
It is a slippery slope to try and build such a convenient escape hatch for yourself here jess. Polytheists, monotheists and atheists all go to war for many reasons. Defending or spreading their beliefs is obviously one of them.

Not according to Keith F. Otterbein, current North American 'expert' anthropologist, specializing in law and war, or to Raoul Naroll, NA warfare 'expert' of the '60's, or Quincy Wright, NA warfare 'expert' of the '40's.
All three are/were professional anthropologists; two have published in peer reviewed journals (Wright could not--- he was writing prior to the inception of anthropological peer reviewed journals. However, he did the approprate thing for his time by publishing in edited professional journals.); all three say basically the same thing:


Wright's reasons for warfare are:
Quote:
subjugation and tribute; land plunder; trophies and honors; defense; and revenge

Naroll, in an attempt to see if Wright's reasons could be verified, and in the same level of importance that Wright used, came up with:
Quote:
political control, the equivalent of subjugation and tribute; presitge, the equivalent of trophies and honors; plunder, the equivalent of land plunder; revenge and defense
(Please note: the equivalents are Naroll's, not mine.)


(no, the values placed on each of the reasons did not remain the same in the two studies. Naroll found that prestige and plunder were reversed in his studies.)


Otterbein, conducting new research throughout the 80's to see which gentleman was correct, discovered that the (same) factors were actually linked--- that societies went to war for:
Quote:
plunder and defense; prestige, plunder and defense; political control, prestige, plunder and defense; defense alone.

Otterbein did not discover any new factors; indeed, he went so far as to say the importance of revenge was inflated in the previous studies, and discounted it in his own.


Quote:
jesse:Please answer my other questions as well, will you?


Nomad: Which questions are those jess?

These. I am sorry that they weren't clear enough before.
Quote:
Who counts as an expert?
Answered by Nomad:
Quote:
An expert is someone with a degree in a relavent field of study, and who has published in critical and peer reviewed jouranals. Their opions count as evidence, and once it is given, then we can examine the quality and utility of that evidence.

Quote:
if something is 'obviously silly' to you, it is thrown out as evidence, and evidentally you want me to agree with you out of hand...
Would you accept it if your discussion partner used the same policy on you?

Quote:
So why was my anthropologist discounted as an expert in his field of warfare? (No need to see the original post, you supported your statement above...)

Quote:
Nomad: Now, if you do have someone in an actual field related to Biblical studies, then offer them as expert witness evidence.


jess: But I am not talking about the bible. Why do I need to have a biblical expert to talk about a non biblical subject?

Quote:
Nomad: As to your expert being silly, this can obviously be the case, and the person can remain an expert.


jess: I am sorry--- I guess I am being dense here. Silly is Von Dannikan, not a respected and honored anthropologist. Please explain what you mean here.

Quote:
Nomad: At the same time, is his opinion evidence? Yes it is. Just not very good evidence, and easily refuted by other evidence.


jess: On what basis is it 'not very good'?

Quote:
Please tell me then, what tools and standards we can adhere to so we can examine the quality and utility of that evidence.
see the answer to the first question above for clarification.


Quote:
Nomad: I have no idea what you are talking about. If you do not know how to examine expert witness testimony (which is, by definition, evidence) by the use of other evidence, then I do not know how to help you there.


jess: I was asking for how you do it,

Quote:
Nomad: Polytheists persecute those of other faiths, just as do monotheists. Many of them also seek to impose their religious systems and beliefs on the conquored peoples. I cannot imagine that you would disagree with this fact.


jess: Could you provide evidence for this accusation, please? (regarding war, not merely persecution

Quote:
Please answer my other questions as well, will you?
Answered by Nomad:
Quote:
Which questions are those jess?

(If you need additional context, all the questions were lifted from the above posts.)


In addition, could you answer why Otterbein, Wright and Naroll are not experts, despite fitting your definitions above?


Also, could you name the peer reviewed journals that biblical 'experts' publish in?

Thanks for your time, Nomad. I am looking forward to your response.


jess

(edited for grammar)

[ August 15, 2001: Message edited by: jess ]
jess is offline  
Old 08-15-2001, 08:37 PM   #58
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The land of chain smoking, bible thumping, holy ro
Posts: 1,248
Wink

Quoted from Nomad/BT
Quote:
…People die for their beliefs at the hands of others. Polytheists have been doing this to one another, and to monotheists (and vice versa) for a very long time. And when atheists acquire power (as they did in Communist countries), they persecute others who do not share their beliefs…
Nice try Nomad/BT, but it was Marxists/communists etc that took power in all communist countries, not atheists. They didn’t oppress and murder in the name of atheism, it was in the name of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, etc or the party, or the state. I did contend in my essay; The Revenge of the Petty Bourgeois Intelligentsia
that Marxist/Communists were as true any “true believers” in their “Religion” Marxism/communism, as any of the true believers of what we call religion in the vernacular of today’s meaning. But again they didn’t kill in the name of atheism, did they? They were interested in controlling all political, economic and social institutions and they viewed any religion as a competitor for power, pure and simple. They were atheists, but that was not their driving force for being, it was a sub-set of their political philosophy. In religious conflicts, monotheist or polytheists (Look here BT, we agree on something!) use religion and/or the differences between them as the primary reason for the conflict, right? Of course this takes us back to the thread on who has done the most evil in the world, atheists/agnostics or theists, but we already know the answer to that don’t we BT? (Hint, it’s you theists that do the most evil, ie war, murder, etc in the name of god, religion, isn’t it BT? I know you would like to believe that it’s because there have been so many more theists than atheists/agnostics, but numbers are irrelevant when it comes to murder, war etc, because these are problems of behavior not just the number of people involved in the behavior.)
I hate to get off track Nomad/BT, but I posted a thread about Adam and Eve, Noah, incest and inbreeding that was addressed to you and Bede, here, you probably missed it, but it’s right here in this forum. Sure would like to get your input on this vexing little problem of biblical proportions. I know you aren’t hiding from the subject you must have just missed it, as you are a stand up guy, so I thought I would post this here for you and your friends to see. RW has just posted a response to the topic, and I am going over to that thread now to discuss his point now. Perhaps you can join us later.

All the best
David
David M. Payne is offline  
Old 08-16-2001, 10:48 AM   #59
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 410
Angry

Quote:
Originally posted by jess:

Nomad: Will you admit that religious ferver drives the hatred felt by many in India that is held against Muslims, Christians and Sihks?

Jess: What I will admit is that, persecuted by monotheists for as long as they have been, even Hindus react violently. A few years back, a St. Bernard was 'put down' for killing two toddlers. During the exam, they discovered the children had been putting rubber bands around the dog's neck, slowly suffocating him.

I would call it self-defense of body, family and property in a religious persecution by monotheists, not a religious war.
This is perhaps one of the most disgraceful things I have ever seen posted against Christians, Muslims and Sikhs on these boards. I have certainly expected better from you jess. Are you actually willing to blame the victims for being murdered and persecuted?

I will admit right now that as soon as I read this far, I stopped. If you are going to tell me that the Christians, Muslims and Sikhs being killed in India deserve it, or even that it is a least understandable, because of past persecutions against Hindus by these same groups, then we are done here. Such blatant acceptance of evil as a righting of past wrongs is sickening.

I am sorry that you believe such things jess, and hope that one day you will be able to get past them.

Nomad

[ August 16, 2001: Message edited by: Nomad ]
Nomad is offline  
Old 08-16-2001, 11:24 AM   #60
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: St Louis Metro East
Posts: 1,046
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Nomad:
<STRONG>

This is perhaps one of the most disgraceful things I have ever seen posted against Christians, Muslims and Sikhs on these boards. I have certainly expected better from you jess. Are you actually willing to blame the victims for being murdered and persecuted?

I will admit right now that as soon as I read this far, I stopped. If you are going to tell me that the Christians, Muslims and Sikhs being killed in India deserve it, or even that it is a least understandable, because of past persecutions against Hindus by these same groups, then we are done here. Such blatant acceptance of evil as a righting of past wrongs is sickening.

I am sorry that you believe such things jess, and hope that one day you will be able to get past them.
[ August 16, 2001: Message edited by: Nomad ]</STRONG>
Read: I am going to feign indignation now so I can skip out on the rest of the discussion, which I was losing badly.
Ulrich is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:31 PM.

Top

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