Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Doug Shaver · 09-15-2007, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

It's more convenient that way.

How's this for convenience? Pick a religion. Any religion. Read its founding documents. Interpret those documents. Assume that your interpretation is infallible. Evaluate all counterarguments from the premise of that assumption.

It works every time. Guaranteed. What could be more convenient than that?

Clivedurdle · 09-16-2007, 06:31 AM

On Swedenbourg, at approximately the same time Dick Turpin rode from London to York.

Using Persian methods (Darius!) of having trained fresh horses ready and waiting at reasonable distances getting from Stockholm to Gothenberg would take far more than Jesus' three days.

Methinks urban myth!

Bracer · 09-16-2007, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

Science is based on the behavioural constancy of matter and energy, which permits repeatable experiments. The whole point about the supernatural is that it is temporary suspension of normal behaviour. As I say, the supernatural is not susceptible to scientific measurement.

It's more convenient that way. You can avoid the embarrassment of Jesus never having made a documented, fulfilled prophecy, and have room for all sorts of stories about how the gospels really really are true if you forget all that "evidence" stuff, as well.

(Sorry for the snark, but I couldn't help it with the irony staring me right there in the face, screaming and howling and dancing its little jig like that.)

Johnny Skeptic · 09-16-2007, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

As I say, the supernatural is not susceptible to scientific measurement.

How do you define the word "supernatural"? If Jesus gave amputees new limbs, that would certainly have been measurable.

Minimalist · 09-16-2007, 01:58 PM

Quote:

You claim they must have noticed it, but how do you know? They never wrote about it, the Roman officials only started noticing Christians around the end of the first century. There is absolutely no evidence of a widespread Christian movement around 70 CE outside of the NT.

Neither Tacitus (Histories) nor Josephus indicates that "christians" constituted any power bloc in the run up to the Great Revolt. Christians cannot be both spreading like wildfire and totally invisible at the same time.

Johnny Skeptic · 09-16-2007, 07:24 PM

In chapter 1 of "The Rise of Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk)," Rodney Stark estimates that there were only approximately 8,000 Christians in the world in 100 A.D., which makes sense if Jesus did not perform any miracles, and did not rise from the dead. Stark uses various kinds of evidence, including archaeology and papyrology, and refers to writings by many experts.

One Christian book, I think "World Christian Trends (or via: amazon.co.uk)," estimates that in 100 A.D. there were approximately 800,000 Christians in the world, or about 100 times Stark's estimate.

Minimalist · 09-16-2007, 07:43 PM

Christians have always had delusions of grandeur.

spin · 09-16-2007, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

In chapter 1 of "The Rise of Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk)," Rodney Stark estimates that there were only approximately 8,000 Christians in the world in 100 A.D., which makes sense if Jesus did not perform any miracles, and did not rise from the dead. Stark uses various kinds of evidence, including archaeology and papyrology, and refers to writings by many experts.

One Christian book, I think "World Christian Trends," estimates that in 100 A.D. there were approximately 800,000 Christians in the world, or about 100 times Stark's estimate.

How do those who make these approximations arrive at their figures? There must be some data from the period on which they base them... or not?

spin

Johnny Skeptic · 09-16-2007, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

In chapter 1 of "The Rise of Christianity," Rodney Stark estimates that there were only approximately 8,000 Christians in the world in 100 A.D., which makes sense if Jesus did not perform any miracles, and did not rise from the dead. Stark uses various kinds of evidence, including archaeology and papyrology, and refers to writings by many experts.

One Christian book, I think "World Christian Trends," estimates that in 100 A.D. there were approximately 800,000 Christians in the world, or about 100 times Stark's estimate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stark

How do those who make these approximations arrive at their figures? There must be some data from the period on which they base them... or not?

Regarding Stark, in chapter 1 of "The Rise of Christianity," Stark answers your question in great detail. Regarding "World Christian Trends," some time ago I corresponded with one of the authors by e-mail, but he never gave me any good reasons who he and his co-author arrived at the figure of 800,000 Christians in 100 A.D. Most conservative Christians do not want to accept Stark's figure because the book of Acts says that there were thousands of Christians at Pentecost, not because of any historical evidence. If there were thousands of Christians at Pentecost, which I assume would have been around 35 A.D., and there were only 8,000 Christians in the entire world in 100 A.D., that would be good evidence that Jesus did not do what the New Testament says that he did. If Jesus did what the New Testament says that he did, his exploits would certainly have attracted the attention of the Roman government in Palestine, and even at Rome. Roman history would contain lots of references to the exploits of Jesus. If Josephus actually wrote about the exploits of Jesus, why didn't anyone else of that time period write about them? If other non-Christian historians did write about the exploits of Jesus, you can bet that Christians would have preserved those records because the very best possible testimony for a Christian would be testimonies from skeptics. I am not influenced by what I want to believe about the size of the early Christian church. If the vast majority of experts agreed that there were about 800,000 Christians in 100 A.D., I would still not be a Christian.

darstec · 09-16-2007, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

Petitio principii comes round again. The supernatural cannot occur, therefore it did not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

How about "Supernatural events are, by definition, so unlikely that only when substantial evidence exists suggesting such a thing actually did happen, it is entirely rational to disregard it as a viable possibility."?

How about "If God really wanted people to believe that he could do things that humans cannot do, he would have showed up in person, in front of people all over the world in all generations, and demonstrated that he is able to do things that humans cannot do."?

I know from past experience that it is beneath your scholarly dignity to reply to my posts. You sit upon your lofty scholarly perch looking down scornfully on skeptic laymen like me. You conveniently never choose to discuss philosophical issues because of the difficulties that they present to conservative and moderate Christians. If a twelve year old asked you why you are a Christian, would you ask him to read some scholarly books? If you wouldn't, I would sure like to know what your approach would be.

Keep in mind that Roger has no qualifications as a scholar himself. He is merely a layperson who has copied and pasted others' works to his own webpage and he parrots the opinions of Fundamentalists who for the most part obtained their diplomas in garage sales. What makes matters worse is that he often contradicts his own website when he posts.

A dead giveaway is his opinion that all the gospels were written in the 60s CE. Does any biblical critic today believe that except Evangelicals?

<edit>

The quote above was incorrectly originally attributed to Roger Pearse

Amaleq13, BC&H moderator

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

09-16-2007, 06:31 AM	#32
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	On Swedenbourg, at approximately the same time Dick Turpin rode from London to York. Using Persian methods (Darius!) of having trained fresh horses ready and waiting at reasonable distances getting from Stockholm to Gothenberg would take far more than Jesus' three days. Methinks urban myth!

09-16-2007, 07:24 PM	#36
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	In chapter 1 of "The Rise of Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk)," Rodney Stark estimates that there were only approximately 8,000 Christians in the world in 100 A.D., which makes sense if Jesus did not perform any miracles, and did not rise from the dead. Stark uses various kinds of evidence, including archaeology and papyrology, and refers to writings by many experts. One Christian book, I think "World Christian Trends (or via: amazon.co.uk)," estimates that in 100 A.D. there were approximately 800,000 Christians in the world, or about 100 times Stark's estimate.

09-16-2007, 07:43 PM	#37
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	Christians have always had delusions of grandeur.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.