Freethought & Rationalism Archive

EarlDoherty · 03-29-2012, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl

"But what I have claimed, and supplied evidence for, is that it is possible we can deduce that the cults interpreted their myths along Platonic lines, but that unlike philosophers like Plutarch, they did not render them allegorical; they saw them as literally taking place, probably (again deducible from evidence if without certainty) in a non-earthly dimension."

You seemingly did not supply evidence for that, beyond mere assertion and unlikely assumption. Ehrman tends to have his own problem in his book of failing to back his assertions with specific citations, but at least his assertions are buttressed by scholarly reputation and scholarly agreement, for whatever that's worth. What is your argument and your evidence for your claim that the myths of the mystery cults were probably (or even significantly possibly) either Platonic or much like Plutarch's philosophy?

That evidence is presented over several pages, and not all in the same place (some of it was quoted above in post #128). Abe, if you have not by now, after all this debate here and on Vridar, after all this discussion of Ehrman's book and criticism of me into which you have inserted yourself front-row-center in extremely judgmental and biased fashion, obtained a copy of my book one way or another, you are hopeless, and not deserving of any further attention. JNGNM is available on Kindle for $14.95. Is that too much for you? Hell, you can't even bother to get a "pirated" copy?

Ehrman is "buttressed by scholarly reputation and scholarly agreement"??? You've seen here and elsewhere how Ehrman himself has tossed his own scholarly reputation into the toilet. As for scholarly agreement, you're drawing on the old appeal to authority again? There's no excuse for Ehrman to fail to back his assertions with specific citations, such as about Aramaic sources telling of an HJ within one year after his crucifixion! Isn't he a 'professional scholar'? If he had even bothered to cite *me* properly, he might have realized how off the mark he was in making false accusations about what I had written.

Earl Doherty

blastula · 03-29-2012, 04:53 PM

Earl, do you have a copy of Ehrman's book?

EarlDoherty · 03-29-2012, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blastula

Earl, do you have a copy of Ehrman's book?

A copy of the book? Not yet. But I expect to be reading it by later next week, after I've gotten my new lens.

Earl Doherty

Adam · 03-29-2012, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EarlDoherty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abe

Ehrman tends to have his own problem in his book of failing to back his assertions with specific citations, ...

There's no excuse for Ehrman to fail to back his assertions with specific citations, such as about Aramaic sources telling of an HJ within one year after his crucifixion! Isn't he a 'professional scholar'?
Earl Doherty

Agreed, Earl (I'm your age, so "Mr. Doherty" seems overmuch) and Abe, but already on this thread in my Post #113 I have provided and linked to my documentation of very early Aramaic sources. Apparently Ehrman has some similar thoughts, but not ready for academic proof yet.
Aramaic sources in the 30's

So my much-derided long thread Gospel Eyewitnesses turns out to be very relevent in light of Ehrman's otherwise outlandish claims. Maybe I dared publish here in FRDB what academic scholars are too cautious to present for peer review.

In that regard, see my Post #227 in Bart Ehrman : Did Jesus Exist?

Gospel According to the Atheists
in which I link to and partially rework my key Post #555 in Gospel Eyewitnesses in which I present my "Gospel According to the Atheists". In spite of the focus there on Proto-Luke, I am not forwarding L (Special Luke) as one of the first three Aramaic sources from the 30's, because it comes after Q. I hold the earliest Aramaic documents to be the Passion Narrative, Q1, and the Johannine Discourses (written by Nicodemus).

Diogenes the Cynic · 03-29-2012, 10:18 PM

Sometimes appeals to authority are valid in the absence of anything else. If we have a medical issue, we have no problem with trusting the opinion of a licensed physician over say, licensed plumber, and Ehrman is literally a doctor in his field.

aa5874 · 03-29-2012, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Sometimes appeals to authority are valid in the absence of anything else. If we have a medical issue, we have no problem with trusting the opinion of a licensed physician over say, licensed plumber, and Ehrman is literally a doctor in his field.

Well, Ratzinger loves that very much.

For over 1600 years people appear TERRIFIED by the evidence that Exposes that Jesus, the disciples and Paul were invented.

I will NOT appeal to authority. I am presenting evidence and sources of antiquity not opnion.

I will use the very Written Statements provided by the Church and apologetic sources to show that the NT Canon is NOT history but a Compilation of Myth Fables that were Believed in antiquity.

In effect, the claim that Jesus LIVED is also an Embellisment.

EarlDoherty · 03-30-2012, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Sometimes appeals to authority are valid in the absence of anything else. If we have a medical issue, we have no problem with trusting the opinion of a licensed physician over say, licensed plumber, and Ehrman is literally a doctor in his field.

Yes, but a small minority of licensed doctors in the medical field prove to be quacks, or are found guilty of medical malpractice and even lose their licenses. Why can't the same thing happen in other doctorial fields? In fact, in view of the flood of criticism of Ehrman's new book on several blogs/DBs, it's too bad the historical research field doesn't have a governing body that reviews accusations of incompetence and malpractice.

Earl Doherty

jdl · 03-30-2012, 05:39 PM

If a licensed physician had spent his career writing books that used my unique illness as a case study, I wouldn't trust him to give an honest appraisal when faced with evidence that I'd always been perfectly healthy.

spin · 03-30-2012, 06:27 PM

Worse, though Ehrman is a PhD, he isn't a historian. He's a text scholar, studying his PhD under Metzger. Would you like your pills pushed by a doctor of sociology?

spin · 03-30-2012, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

In Greek versions of the Tanakh does the word SOTER ever get used

Yes, it's the routine LXX translation for Yasha ("saviour").

Yasha' (ישע) is a verb, which is the root of moshia (מושיע). This last means "savior" and some have confused it with "messiah" (משיח).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-29-2012, 04:53 PM	#142
blastula Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: USA Posts: 6,070	Earl, do you have a copy of Ehrman's book?

03-29-2012, 10:18 PM	#145
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	Sometimes appeals to authority are valid in the absence of anything else. If we have a medical issue, we have no problem with trusting the opinion of a licensed physician over say, licensed plumber, and Ehrman is literally a doctor in his field.

03-30-2012, 05:39 PM	#148
jdl Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Auckland Posts: 85	If a licensed physician had spent his career writing books that used my unique illness as a case study, I wouldn't trust him to give an honest appraisal when faced with evidence that I'd always been perfectly healthy.

03-30-2012, 06:27 PM	#149
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	Worse, though Ehrman is a PhD, he isn't a historian. He's a text scholar, studying his PhD under Metzger. Would you like your pills pushed by a doctor of sociology?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.