Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 11-06-2011, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

...
I am not at all surprised, of course, that atheists do not believe that any supernatural events occurred in the Bible. What does surprise is that I have not seen anyone here dispute the MJ theory by stating that the HJ theory could be affirmed by drawing upon paranormal activity. That is, could not the supposedly supernatural events in the gospels be paranormal instead? Extraterrestrial visitors with advanced scientific powers might have brought about many "miraculous" events. Nor do I see anyone suggesting that psychic powers as in ESP could greatly increase the number of events in the gospels that could have happened to Jesus. It would seem that the MJ school would need to be refuting all these possibilities as well, and that the HJ school could be strengthening its case accordingly.

Whenever I have speculated about what atheists believe, I have tended to assume that they would believe in ETs or ESP as ways of dismissing what tradition or common credulousness claims as miracles. You guys surprise me with your absolute certainty combined with absolute skepticism.

There are societies devoted to studying paranormal activities, and the evidence has accumulated through the years that the natural world, with its laws of physics, is all we've got. No one has ever demonstrated any paranormal abilities, in spite of years of effort and James Randi's million dollar offer to anyone who can.

Sheshbazzar · 11-06-2011, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

No one has ever demonstrated any paranormal abilities,....

But Adam can.

J-D · 11-06-2011, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

I am satisfied--and nobody seems to dispute it in this discussion--that we can eliminate the possibility that the supernatural elements of the story are literally accurate reports of events that actually took place, although this is not literally the same thing as saying they are myths in a strict literal sense of that word.

You've smoked me out. My one-liner compliment to you in #259 did not draw out this bigger issue.
You have never posted on my two main threads, but I would think that you are aware that I have a continuing thread (up to my #230 just posted) in "Gospel Eyewitnesses" that would seem to imply just by its title that I am a believer in supernatural occurrences being accurately (though not inerrantly) stated in the four gospels. In addition for incidental scholarly grounding for my thesis I am in process of transciption here in my thread my article "Significance of John". Those anyone reading this post can readily find here on FRDB, and I link therein to four of my articles here:
http://megasociety.org/noesis/181.htm#Common
I have never presupposed miracles can or cannot occur. Empirical evidence seems solid that supernatural events occur, or at least what looks like supernatural events.
I am not at all surprised, of course, that atheists do not believe that any supernatural events occurred in the Bible. What does surprise is that I have not seen anyone here dispute the MJ theory by stating that the HJ theory could be affirmed by drawing upon paranormal activity. That is, could not the supposedly supernatural events in the gospels be paranormal instead? Extraterrestrial visitors with advanced scientific powers might have brought about many "miraculous" events. Nor do I see anyone suggesting that psychic powers as in ESP could greatly increase the number of events in the gospels that could have happened to Jesus. It would seem that the MJ school would need to be refuting all these possibilities as well, and that the HJ school could be strengthening its case accordingly.
Whenever I have speculated about what atheists believe, I have tended to assume that they would believe in ETs or ESP as ways of dismissing what tradition or common credulousness claims as miracles. You guys surprise me with your absolute certainty combined with absolute skepticism.

The following analysis exhausts all logical possibilities.

EITHER (1) all of the statements using the name Jesus in the canonical gospels are literally accurate reports of events that actually took place

OR (2) some of the statements using the name Jesus in the canonical gospels are literally accurate reports of events that actually took place

OR (3) none of the statements using the name Jesus in the canonical gospels are literally accurate reports of events that actually took place

Clearly anybody who adheres to (1) must accept supernatural realities. I gather from what you’re saying that you do adhere to (1) and you do accept supernatural realities. As far as I can tell, everybody else on this thread (including me) rejects supernatural realities, and if they are rejected then (1) can be excluded. That still leaves two possibilities open, (2) and (3).

aa5874 · 11-06-2011, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

... As far as I can tell, everybody else on this thread (including me) rejects supernatural realities, and if they are rejected then (1) can be excluded. That still leaves two possibilities open, (2) and (3).

Your statement cannot be verified as true. How were you able to say what EVERYBODY else on this thread reject?

Does NOT Adam count?

Adam does NOT Reject option 1 therefore based on your own words ALL possibilities would still be open.

Your assertion is therefore illogical.

On the other hand, What ADAM must realise is that the Historical Jesus is claimed to be an ORDINARY man and was NOT Fathered by a Holy Ghost, nor was Tempted by Satan on the Pinnacle of the Temple or walked on the sea and Transfigured, resurrected and ascended.

If Adam believes the NT is fundamentally true then ADAM inadvertently SUPPORTS Mythology.

The HJ theory REJECTS and DISCREDITS the Jesus of the Canon and EMPLOY imagination while still CLINGING to the Jesus stories.

It was a Child of a Ghost that lived in Nazareth but HJers assert WITHOUT any source that their HJ lived there.

J-D · 11-06-2011, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

... As far as I can tell, everybody else on this thread (including me) rejects supernatural realities, and if they are rejected then (1) can be excluded. That still leaves two possibilities open, (2) and (3).

Your statement cannot be verified as true. How were you able to say what EVERYBODY else on this thread reject?

Does NOT Adam count?

Adam does NOT Reject option 1 therefore based on your own words ALL possibilities would still be open.

Your assertion is therefore illogical.

On the other hand, What ADAM must realise is that the Historical Jesus is claimed to be an ORDINARY man and was NOT Fathered by a Holy Ghost, nor was Tempted by Satan on the Pinnacle of the Temple or walked on the sea and Transfigured, resurrected and ascended.

If Adam believes the NT is fundamentally true then ADAM inadvertently SUPPORTS Mythology.

The HJ theory REJECTS and DISCREDITS the Jesus of the Canon and EMPLOY imagination while still CLINGING to the Jesus stories.

It was a Child of a Ghost that lived in Nazareth but HJers assert WITHOUT any source that their HJ lived there.

Don't you understand the difference between 'everybody' and 'everybody else'? You never did confirm whether you understood the difference between 'some' and 'all'.

aa5874 · 11-06-2011, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

... As far as I can tell, everybody else on this thread (including me) rejects supernatural realities, and if they are rejected then (1) can be excluded. That still leaves two possibilities open, (2) and (3).

Your statement cannot be verified as true. How were you able to say what EVERYBODY else on this thread reject?

Does NOT Adam count?

Adam does NOT Reject option 1 therefore based on your own words ALL possibilities would still be open.

Your assertion is therefore illogical.

On the other hand, What ADAM must realise is that the Historical Jesus is claimed to be an ORDINARY man and was NOT Fathered by a Holy Ghost, nor was Tempted by Satan on the Pinnacle of the Temple or walked on the sea and Transfigured, resurrected and ascended.

If Adam believes the NT is fundamentally true then ADAM inadvertently SUPPORTS Mythology.

The HJ theory REJECTS and DISCREDITS the Jesus of the Canon and EMPLOY imagination while still CLINGING to the Jesus stories.

It was a Child of a Ghost that lived in Nazareth but HJers assert WITHOUT any source that their HJ lived there.

Don't you understand the difference between 'everybody' and 'everybody else'? You never did confirm whether you understood the difference between 'some' and 'all'.

You do NOT know what EVERYBODY else reject whether it is POSSIBILITY 1, 2 or 3.

Your assertion is ILLOGICAL.

ALL POSSIBILITIES MUST be open.

Now, in gMark Jesus WALKED on the sea which would mean that the SPECIFIC GRAVITY of Jesus was likely NON-HUMAN.

So Regardless of what ADAM may believe about the Supernatural, gMark does NOT Support the HJ theory.

Sheshbazzar · 11-06-2011, 06:12 PM

Unless that HJ could walk on water, rise from the dead, and ascend into heaven, as per Adam's professed belief in both miracles and a Historical Jebus

J-D · 11-06-2011, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

... As far as I can tell, everybody else on this thread (including me) rejects supernatural realities, and if they are rejected then (1) can be excluded. That still leaves two possibilities open, (2) and (3).

Your statement cannot be verified as true. How were you able to say what EVERYBODY else on this thread reject?

Does NOT Adam count?

Adam does NOT Reject option 1 therefore based on your own words ALL possibilities would still be open.

Your assertion is therefore illogical.

On the other hand, What ADAM must realise is that the Historical Jesus is claimed to be an ORDINARY man and was NOT Fathered by a Holy Ghost, nor was Tempted by Satan on the Pinnacle of the Temple or walked on the sea and Transfigured, resurrected and ascended.

If Adam believes the NT is fundamentally true then ADAM inadvertently SUPPORTS Mythology.

The HJ theory REJECTS and DISCREDITS the Jesus of the Canon and EMPLOY imagination while still CLINGING to the Jesus stories.

It was a Child of a Ghost that lived in Nazareth but HJers assert WITHOUT any source that their HJ lived there.

Don't you understand the difference between 'everybody' and 'everybody else'? You never did confirm whether you understood the difference between 'some' and 'all'.

You do NOT know what EVERYBODY else reject whether it is POSSIBILITY 1, 2 or 3.

Your assertion is ILLOGICAL.

ALL POSSIBILITIES MUST be open.

Now, in gMark Jesus WALKED on the sea which would mean that the SPECIFIC GRAVITY of Jesus was likely NON-HUMAN.

So Regardless of what ADAM may believe about the Supernatural, gMark does NOT Support the HJ theory.

Don't you understand the meaning of 'as far as I can tell'?

You never did confirm that you know the difference between the meanings of 'some' and 'all'.

Horatio Parker · 11-06-2011, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam

I have never presupposed miracles can or cannot occur. Empirical evidence seems solid that supernatural events occur, or at least what looks like supernatural events.

Do you have any cites to back the first part of this statement?

I'm not at all interested in appearances of the supernatural. I've had sandwiches that appeared to be supernatural events.

Quote:

I am not at all surprised, of course, that atheists do not believe that any supernatural events occurred in the Bible. What does surprise is that I have not seen anyone here dispute the MJ theory by stating that the HJ theory could be affirmed by drawing upon paranormal activity. That is, could not the supposedly supernatural events in the gospels be paranormal instead? Extraterrestrial visitors with advanced scientific powers might have brought about many "miraculous" events. Nor do I see anyone suggesting that psychic powers as in ESP could greatly increase the number of events in the gospels that could have happened to Jesus. It would seem that the MJ school would need to be refuting all these possibilities as well, and that the HJ school could be strengthening its case accordingly.

Again, do you have any examples? If this is something that has happened and been documented, then I might consider such a possibility for HJ. But until then....

Quote:

Whenever I have speculated about what atheists believe, I have tended to assume that they would believe in ETs or ESP as ways of dismissing what tradition or common credulousness claims as miracles. You guys surprise me with your absolute certainty combined with absolute skepticism.

Since miracles and the supernatural play no role in my life (or anyone I know or care about) to date, they don't figure into my contemplations of history, religion, spirituality or metaphysics. It seems to me they were used by ancient writers to make a point, a point not so easy to make to a largely illiterate population.

That's not to say M&tS don't exist. But I consider the probability that they do exist to be very small.

I don't see the point of trying to interpret the Gospels as being consistent with the miraculous. I don't see any spiritual advantage to it.

aa5874 · 11-06-2011, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Don't you understand the meaning of 'as far as I can tell'?..

It means you don't KNOW what you are talking about.

You don't know what EVERYBODY ELSE REJECT.

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

11-06-2011, 06:12 PM	#267
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Unless that HJ could walk on water, rise from the dead, and ascend into heaven, as per Adam's professed belief in both miracles and a Historical Jebus

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.