Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lpetrich · 11-07-2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots quoting Todd Hanson

They supposedly hate something so much, but are still paying enough attention to everything about it to be motivated to write long screeds against it on the internet.

Like believers in a historical Jesus Christ writing long rebuttals to Jesus mythicism?

GakuseiDon · 11-07-2006, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

The debate strikes me as pedestrian. Richard Carrier's mission I read as an attempt to resurrect 19th century science to clobber 4th century superstitions.

:notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:

Johnny Skeptic · 11-07-2006, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Who, in their right mind, would want to argue with a religious fundamentalist?

Why do you prefer to debate liberal Christians?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

The debate strikes me as pedestrian. Richard Carrier's mission I read as an attempt to resurrect 19th century science to clobber 4th century superstitions.

That is false. Richard Carrier is a science buff, and I assume that he has forgotten more about modern science than you will ever know, and Gakusei Don as well. At http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../addendaB.html, there is an article by Richard that is titled 'Are the Odds Against the Origin of Life Too Great to Accept.'

I think that Richard is an atheist. I am an agnostic. At any rate, my favorite arguments against Christianity are philosophical arguments, not scientific arguments. It has been my experience that apologists are typically very poorly equipped to debate philosophical arguments. Dr. Norman Geisler is proof enough of that. You don't normally see the scholarly Christians at this forum daring to try to defend the nature of God at this forum or at other forums. The detestible nature of God is not logically defensible. That is why even if apologists can reasonably prove that Jesus rose from the dead, they are hardly any further along the road to establishing reasonable grounds for people to become Christians than they were before. Philosophy is death for all Christians. Apologetics is utterly useless against it.

TheGreaterForce · 11-07-2006, 07:36 PM

sooo, does anyone have any leads to the price/Atwill transcript?

TGF

Toto · 11-07-2006, 08:01 PM

Price's review of Atwill is here.

ETA: podcast of the debate is here

Quote:

DATE : Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:42:00 GMT

* Biblical scholar and author Dr. Robert M. Price and author Joseph Atwill discuss the origins of the New Testament. Atwill is convinced that The Flavians of Rome created the story while Price thinks that the New Testament is the result of a gradual synthesizing of gnosticism, mystery religions and divine hero cults. Simply put, Bob has a "bottom-up" view while Atwill's position seems to be "top-down".

lpetrich · 11-08-2006, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

The debate strikes me as pedestrian. Richard Carrier's mission I read as an attempt to resurrect 19th century science to clobber 4th century superstitions.

What "19th century science"? What "4th century superstitions"?

Quote:

Who, in their right mind, would want to argue with a religious fundamentalist ?

Such public arguments are useful for getting our arguments out there.

Quote:

For those who are less politically, and more philosophically inclined, may I offer an excellent introduction into modern thinking on the nature of consciousness, physics, and reality (or via: amazon.co.uk).

What "modern thinking"? "Mystic physics" wooziness?

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

11-07-2006, 07:36 PM	#14
TheGreaterForce Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Duval, Florida Posts: 24	sooo, does anyone have any leads to the price/Atwill transcript? TGF

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.