Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 05-19-2010, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Some of the answers are in the link above but it's addressed throughout her work especially Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ

Thanks. All interesting material - I listened to the introductory video clip. Again - quite an interesting precis.

The author states that it is her opinion backed by scientific forensic evidence that the date at which the four gospels undoubtedly emerge into the historical record is the end of the 2nd century. She mentions Origen, Epiphanius and Jerome, as examples of critical primary sources. Origen is mentioned. But is the author refering to the "Christian Origen" or "Origen the Platonist"?

QUESTION:

What is this scientific forensic evidence by which the author asserts the opinion that the four gospels undoubtedly emerge into the historical record at the end of the 2nd century? What citation is the author using as evidence for this undoubtedness ?

ApostateAbe · 05-19-2010, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave31

Quote:

Toto "I really dislike arguments on youtube. If you are presenting music or art, I can see the value of a video, but I would prefer to see a logical argument laid out in text form."

Fair enough, the guy who made the video is not a scholar, nor are the videos meant to serve as a scholarly documentary. It's just a private project that I thought was good enough to mention here since it was on topic ... no need to start a new thread for that video.

Quote:

mountainman "I am still not sure whether Nag Hammadi is mentioned by the author."

Yes, she mentions the Nag Hammadi in nearly every book she has written to date. No, I'm not in any contact with her, I have just actually read and own her books. She mentions the Nag Hammadi in Christ Conspiracy, Suns of God, Who Was Jesus? and Christ in Egypt.

Dave, just FYI, any time you post with little more than a link, then it comes off as spam. If you have something specific you would like to talk about, then put it on the table. That is what this forum is for.

Kapyong · 05-19-2010, 09:40 PM

Gday,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave31

Kapyong, I don't see any real point with your post. Even Christian NT scholars can't agree on evidence. And I didn't see any scholars in that thread. Here are a few quotes from NT scholars:

My point was crystal clear - AcharyaS' work is worthless crap.

I agree with those scholars, I think Jesus was a myth.

But I have read Acharya S, and I have debated here right her - she cheated with the facts, her work is rubbish.

K.

mountainman · 05-19-2010, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapyong

And DOC has over 1500 posts here :
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=124603

And just as convincing.

What's the summary of this thread Kapyong? It is titled with the title "Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.". Here is the first post. What is your position in this?

Are you arguing that these 5 of 10 "reasons" are "convincing"?

Quote:

In the "Do Most Atheists know that Science..." thread I mentioned Norman Geisler and Frank Turek's book called "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist" a few times because of its clear explanations of scientific theories. But, yes, they did talk about more than science.

In chapter 11 of their book they give the top 10 reasons we know the New Testament writers told the truth. I'll mention some of those reasons and maybe expound on them as time permits.

Reason #1

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details About Themselves.

For example some passages portray the disciples as dim-witted, uncaring, and cowards.

Reason #2

The New Testament Writers Included Embarrassing Details and Difficult Sayings of Jesus.

For example in one passage someone call Jesus a drunkard, and in another He was called demon-possessed, another a deceiver.

Reason #3

The NT Writers Left in Very Demanding Sayings of Jesus.

For example: (Matthew 5:28) "I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart".

And (Matt. 5:44-45) "I tell you Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you...

As the book says "They certainly didn't make up a story that made life easier for themselves."

Reason #9

The New Testament Writers Describe Miracles Like Other Historical Events: With Simple, Unembellished Accounts.

If they made them up it would be likely that they would have used grandiose and extravagant images. The book says the gospels talk about the Resurrection in a matter of fact almost bland way.

Reason #10

The New Testament Writers Abandoned Their Long Held Sacred Beliefs and Practices, Adopted New Ones, And Did Not Deny Their Testimony Under Persecution Or Threat Of Death "

Toto · 05-19-2010, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapyong

And DOC has over 1500 posts here :
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=124603

And just as convincing.

What's the summary of this thread Kapyong? It is titled with the title "Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.". Here is the first post. What is your position in this?

Are you arguing that these 5 of 10 "reasons" are "convincing"?

...

A sarcasm tag was missing there. None of those reasons is convincing, and all are off topic.

mountainman · 05-19-2010, 11:34 PM

Without wading through the exchanges I was trying to ascertain why Kapyong states the following ....

Quote:

My point was crystal clear - AcharyaS' work is worthless crap.

I agree with those scholars, I think Jesus was a myth.

But I have read Acharya S, and I have debated here right her - she cheated with the facts, her work is rubbish.

I do not endorse "AcharyaS bashing" and I am wondering why Kapyong is serving this invective up again. I want an example of this "worthless crap" and/or "rubbish". What's the story K?

Kapyong · 05-20-2010, 01:47 PM

Gday,

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

I do not endorse "AcharyaS bashing" and I am wondering why Kapyong is serving this invective up again. I want an example of this "worthless crap" and/or "rubbish". What's the story K?

"AcharyaS bashing" ?
What a silly comment.
Why are you "Kapyong bashing" ?

I served this up again, because Acharyas' acolyte Dave turned up to preach here again.

Like I said - I've READ her books and articles, I've argued with here HERE - she's a cheat and a fool.

K.

Toto · 05-20-2010, 02:13 PM

She's also a registered user, so she should not be casually insulted. Please link to your proofs.

Dave31 · 05-26-2010, 12:09 PM

There doesn't appear to be any requirement for students of New Testament or biblical studies to investigate the case for mythicism in order to get a PhD. I'd like to hear the experience of others here who have taken assorted courses on religion, be it theology, comparative religion, etc. I'd like to know how much your course discussed mythology, mythicism or the case for mythicism, or if they ever discussed it at all?

Please list your school or university and your course.

mountainman · 05-26-2010, 04:11 PM

Does McDonalds advertise for Hungry Jacks or vice verse?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave31

There doesn't appear to be any requirement for students of New Testament or biblical studies to investigate the case for mythicism in order to get a PhD. I'd like to hear the experience of others here who have taken assorted courses on religion, be it theology, comparative religion, etc. I'd like to know how much your course discussed mythology, mythicism or the case for mythicism, or if they ever discussed it at all?

Please list your school or university and your course.

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

05-20-2010, 02:13 PM	#28
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	She's also a registered user, so she should not be casually insulted. Please link to your proofs.

05-26-2010, 12:09 PM	#29
Dave31 Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Posts: 425	There doesn't appear to be any requirement for students of New Testament or biblical studies to investigate the case for mythicism in order to get a PhD. I'd like to hear the experience of others here who have taken assorted courses on religion, be it theology, comparative religion, etc. I'd like to know how much your course discussed mythology, mythicism or the case for mythicism, or if they ever discussed it at all? Please list your school or university and your course.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.