post tenebras lux

Except that in the cases I see on IIDB, it is that when the 'amateur' asked the so-called (self-called?) professionals to provide some references to back up their claims that we see this, as gurugeorge calls it, argument from intimidation.

Which is rather different that the phenomenon studied by the research you mentioned (of which I - at least - was well aware). Given the various Principles of Charity, IIDB's self-appointed experts should assume their questioners are also well aware of said study, and understand that their questioners are trying to make allowance for.

But, instead of getting references and background arguments, I tend to see mere condescension. :huh:

Toto

Hi Chris: I don't think that article is talking about professionals versus amateurs, just general competance versus the incompetant, the sort of people Scott Adams calls induhviduals.

Gooch's dad

Condescension is probably the appropriate response to someone who thinks that kata sarka is best translated as "Christ in you", or that their claim of later interpolation in Paul's letters is correct, "because it makes sense to [them]".

Roger Pearse

Nothing in this requires any comment from me, I think (other than laughter).

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Chris Weimer

When explicit consistently is hand-waved away, isn't that what you get? I already went over much of the evidence, including in this very thread, and it was merely handwaved away, as it always is, through various fallacies, such as bait and switch, ad hominem, and general conspiracy theorism.

Toto

You can see here the difference between the HJ and evolution. Scientists who study evolution do not just mock and condescend to creationists. They patiently provide masses of scientific details and reasoning, and link to articles that lay out their case and why it has scientific support.

Perhaps the new Jesus Project will force the HJ'ers to take the questions seriously.

Chris Weimer

Are you joking me? There was such a furor when certain scientists decided to debate creationists and intelligent design advocates by which doing so makes them "legit" to talk about.

And go have yourself a thorough look in E/C where creationists are constantly ridiculed (rightly so). Bathing in your own ignorance should not, and will not, be tolerated.

Toto

So what do you think Talk Origins is?

I'm not talking about staged debates, although Kenneth Miller has debated ID to good effect.

eta: individual creationists are ridiculed in E/C, but they are also given masses of factual data, and legitimate questions are answered.

Chris Weimer

Even talk origins has condescending parody, such as Godless Linguistics.

And the hundreds of scholarly books that come out related to the Historical Jesus are all full of condescend and ridicule? You've GOT to be fucking kidding.

And please, legitimate questions are answered here. But every single answer is returned with "Christians forged it all!" I finished with this conspiracy theorists, and you bigots who promote it. It's anti-scholarship, and hypocritical to the "rational" mindset you promote elsewhere.

Toto

We've gone over this for years. There are lots of scholarly books on the HJ. Few of them seriously deal with the evidence for or against a historical figure.

It's not going to get you anywhere to belittle your opponents or call them bigots because you don't follow their reasoning and can't imagine any other motive for not believing in a historical Jesus. That's just a failure of imagination on your part.

It is not true that every single answer is returned with "Christians forged it all!" unless you are dealing with mountainman.