Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 12-21-2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgibson000

So far as I can see, S never abandoned or condemned the scientific method and never felt, as Brunner does of those who insist on using the historical critical method for establishing what Biblical texts say/Jesus meant, that his colleagues were wrong or were idiots to insist that that method they employed was the one that not only was was proper, but was what he'd have to (and did) use to convince them that he was right.

I have these memories of stories about him crying out at street corners (a little like Wisdom) only to go unheeded.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgibson000

He was the author of Journey to the Earth's Interior, a book in which he purveyed the "fact" all scientists were blind to -- that the earth was hollow and held a sun 600 miles in diameter at its center and had openings by which one could travel into the hollow at both poles.

Gardner used to complain that the reason he never got (or expected to get) a "fair hearing" for his views was because of the "conservatism of [scholars] who do not care to revise their theories... especially when that revision is made necessary by discoveries ... made independently of the great universities." These scholars, "have their professional freemasonry. If you are not one of them, they do not want to listen to you."

For more on Gardner and other cranks who uttered similar (and worse) charges against those in academia who could not see "the truth", have a look at Marvin B. Gardner's (no relation) Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science (or via: amazon.co.uk).

Ahh, juicy stuff. Thanks for the backgrounder. I just wonder what that sort of mentality would have been up to in ancient times. I bet it would have built up all sorts of wild and woolly cult followings.

spin

Boro Nut · 12-23-2006, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

In the passage that No Robots mentioned, the the high priest is said to have rent his clothes,

Frankly I find this laughable. If you'd worked your way all the way up to high priest I'm sure you could afford your own clothes.

I mean, its not as if some clothes shop is going to go 'I think I've spotted a gap in the rental market' is it? How many sets of high priest uniforms do you think people would enquire about on a daily basis?

And can you imagine the embarrassment if, at the height of the most important ceremony of the year, two burly gentlemen strode into the temple and said 'Sorry mate, the coat's going back'?

Boro Nut

Boro Nut · 12-23-2006, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Robots

Christianity was and is Judaism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

Oh no, it is not.

<All> OH YES IT IS!.

Boro Nut

QED. This short exchange is clearly inspired by early Punch and Judaism.

jgibson000 · 12-23-2006, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boro Nut

Frankly I find this laughable. If you'd worked your way all the way up to high priest I'm sure you could afford your own clothes.

I trust you are pulling our collective leg with this.

Please tell me that you are -- that you do know the difference between "rent (past tense of "rend") and "rented" (past tense of "rent") or, more importantly, that you know that "to rend = to tear" his mantle, not "to rent = to hire" it, is what the High Priest is said to have done in Mk. 14:63 and pars.

JG

Amaleq13 · 12-23-2006, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgibson000

I trust you are pulling our collective leg with this.

No question about it.

BTW, I need our leg next Wednesday.

Toto · 12-23-2006, 12:41 PM

Hm - Boro - Borat - could there be a connection?

No Robots · 12-23-2006, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Hm - Boro - Borat -

Genius. That's wot I calls it.

StarCross · 12-24-2006, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boro Nut

No they don't do they. Someone so remiss as to neglect to list their own names can't be expected to fabricate a waterproof yarn. The devil is in the detail as they say. And that includes not having Pilate either. I'm not asking much of my eyewitnesses. I mean, it's just another court case. It's not as if they're recording the most fundamental turn of events in history. I would have thought jotting down the date would have been a bit more helpful than recording conversations they couldn't have been party to that's all.

And yes, I am surprised. These aren't just any old executioners. According to Christian mythology they're the most famous executioners in history. I know who hung Hanratty. I know who shot Martin Luther King - and he didn't want anyone to find him. These blokes did the deed in front of a large crowd in broad daylight. If they ever existed, who were they?

Boro Nut

If you are looking for the names of every person in scripture involved in the crucifixion, I have no information to provide. Scripture records that when Pilate asked the crowd of people what evil Jesus had done, they answered "crucify him!" (Matthew 27:23). Peter was addressing the Jews ("House of Israel") when he identified them as the transgressors in Christ's crucifixion (Acts 2:36) and so did Paul in his letters (Romans 11:11). Technically, you could pin it on the Roman gaurds or Pilate since he was the Roman governor in charge of the region who gave the order while claiming to wash his hands of the incident (Matthew 27:24).

I have reservations about your motives regarding this thread. Are you seeking an answer to your question or fishing for comments from Christians in order to pass judgement on them for what they say? You claim the answer should embarrass us. Please explain.

Boro Nut · 12-24-2006, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StarCross

You claim the answer should embarrass us. Please explain.

Your ears go bright red and you start to mumble. That sort of thing.

Boro Nut

StarCross · 12-24-2006, 12:21 PM

Hi Mr. Boro Nut,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boro Nut

Your ears go bright red and you start to mumble. That sort of thing.

Boro Nut

LOL.. Ok, that was funny.

Seriously, why should Christians be emabarrased by the answer? If I say that the "House of Israel" (Acts 2:36) is identified as the culprit in the crucifixion of Christ, is that an embarrasment to Christians? I don't understand. Perhaps you already have an opinion on what the answer is and you think that it SHOULD be embarrasing to us? It just doesn't register from where I'm sitting.

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

12-23-2006, 12:41 PM	#76
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Hm - Boro - Borat - could there be a connection?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.