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 06-06-2005, 07:57 PM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor
Posts: 4,035
Default Tektonics Critiques The Empty Tomb

Check it out:

http://www.tektonics.org/tomb/emptytomb.html

Does anyone have comments?

best wishes,
Peter Kirby
Peter Kirby is online now   Edit/Delete Message
Old 06-06-2005, 10:09 PM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default

Will it actually be readable? Holding's articles tend to be incoherent.

And will he start accusing his own sources of talking 'politically correct bulldada', as he has been know to do, when they write emails correcting his interpretation of what they write?
Steven Carr is offline  
Old 06-06-2005, 10:24 PM   #3
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

At first glance, it looks like it will be difficult to read the review unless you have read the book first.
Toto is offline  
Old 06-06-2005, 10:44 PM   #4
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
Default

The book's on the way, Peter. So I'll have to wait. But it looks like the same bullshit game he always plays:

"Kirby has, however, not considered two critical aspects of ancient reportage that come into play here. The first is that the similarities between accounts are just as likely to be attributed -- if not more likely, in a world where 95% of people were illiterate -- to oral tradition carried alike by independent witnesses."

As if no one had ever done any research on oral literature that proves that this is overwhelmingly wrong. Holding has mastered a tiny set of arguments that hinge on the fact that his audience does not know anything...
Vorkosigan is offline  
Old 06-06-2005, 10:58 PM   #5
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Carr
Will it actually be readable? Holding's articles tend to be incoherent.
The article in response to Peter II looked to me reasonably well done, and sans burps.

Vork makes a reasonable complaint about Holding's view of the oral / synoptic issues, but I will pass on that for now since it is not my baliwick, and I am not sure the oral option propounded by Holding is necessary or significant.

Apparently Peter works out arguments based on improbabilities, and I think Holding might have taken a different approach on that, as my gut sense is that such arguments based on improbabilities are innately weak. To me that may be the most interesting part of the dialog.

I haven't really looked at the other articles, although I may have browsed a couple of them en passant in other researches.

Shalom,
Praxeas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/
Steven Avery is offline  
Old 06-06-2005, 11:20 PM   #6
Moderator -
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 4,639
Default

I read the review of Peter's piece and was immediately put off by Holding's polemic and hostile style but persevered. It did not seem to me that he made any particularly strong or new rebuttals and that he relied a lot on selective and self-serving interpretations of Paul.
Diogenes the Cynic is offline  
Old 06-06-2005, 11:29 PM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vorkosigan
The book's on the way, Peter. So I'll have to wait. But it looks like the same bullshit game he always plays:

"Kirby has, however, not considered two critical aspects of ancient reportage that come into play here. The first is that the similarities between accounts are just as likely to be attributed -- if not more likely, in a world where 95% of people were illiterate -- to oral tradition carried alike by independent witnesses."
This does not stop Holding producing similarities in words from the women caught in adultery and words in Luke's Gospel and Acts to conclude that Luke might well have written the story, but left it out for reasons of space.
Steven Carr is offline  
Old 06-07-2005, 02:28 AM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,033
Cool

There was no "empty tomb" in history. This story is part of Christian mythology. Jesus was never buried there in the first place. It was common practice for the Romans to let the bodies of those crucified to hang on crosses for days following these kinds of executions. To let the body slowly rot away. This was done to intimidate and remind people of the penalty for not following Roman authority.

Its like taking a story of Superman and debating whether he really did all those things you read about in Superman stories. Dont we have "eyewitnesses" who have seen Superman? :Cheeky:
Killer Mike is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:29 AM.

Top

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