Freethought & Rationalism Archive

burning flames · 11-20-2007, 03:35 PM

this website has refutations of skeptics like richard carrier, earl diherty and acharya s:

http://www.answeringinfidels.com/answering-skeptics/

spin · 11-20-2007, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burning flames

this website has refutations of skeptics like richard carrier, earl diherty and acharya s:

http://www.answeringinfidels.com/answering-skeptics/

Who cares? If you can't argue a case, who's going to waste their time looking at your reading suggestions???

spin

Toto · 11-20-2007, 03:43 PM

Correction: this apologetic website, which has been noted here before, attempts to refute skeptics. Some of the contents of that site are pretty lame.

Is there something in particular there that you want to discuss?

Silent Dave · 11-21-2007, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Correction: this apologetic website, which has been noted here before, attempts to refute skeptics. Some of the contents of that site are pretty lame.

Namely, the parts with words.

Mageth · 11-21-2007, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent Dave

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Correction: this apologetic website, which has been noted here before, attempts to refute skeptics. Some of the contents of that site are pretty lame.

Namely, the parts with words.

If there's any pictures, them too.

Artemus · 11-21-2007, 01:09 PM

I took a quick look at Licona’s Reply to Doherty. It consists of a couple of unconvincing facts (a few non-Christian sources mention Jesus more 100 years after he supposedly live, and a few Christian sources mention him within 70 years of when he supposedly lived), followed by an appeal to authority, and then several paragraphs of ad hominems. There is no rebuttal to Doherty at all. Not much of a reply, now is it?

MiddleMan · 11-21-2007, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Artemus

I took a quick look at Licona’s Reply to Doherty. It consists of a couple of unconvincing facts (a few non-Christian sources mention Jesus more 100 years after he supposedly live, and a few Christian sources mention him within 70 years of when he supposedly lived), followed by an appeal to authority, and then several paragraphs of ad hominems. There is no rebuttal to Doherty at all. Not much of a reply, now is it?

Licona's irony is quite strong!

Quote:

...if a person has strong emotional reasons for denying a well-evidenced position (e.g., Doherty and Flemming have a very low opinion of Christians and the President of Iran hates Jews), it will be difficult for any amount of evidence to convince him of his error until he is able to deal with those emotions, and thereby allowing his horizon to mature.

mountainman · 11-21-2007, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MiddleMan

Licona's irony is quite strong!

The irony used by Licona looks to be superficial
very simplistic, with covert appeals to authority
interspersed for good measure, and concerned
with the perjoritive options and viewpoints.
(See below)

If you want to study the use of irony in an
ancient historian's account of christianity have
a read through anything written by
Arnaldo Momigliano.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Licona

Doherty could miss my meaning here and think, “Oh, but we have so much evidence for the holocaust! We have living eyewitnesses and photographs!” But my point is that just as some deny the holocaust in spite of strong evidence, others deny the existence of Jesus in spite of strong evidence. Moreover, if a person has strong emotional reasons for denying a well-evidenced position (e.g., Doherty and Flemming have a very low opinion of Christians and the President of Iran hates Jews), it will be difficult for any amount of evidence to convince him of his error until he is able to deal with those emotions, and thereby allowing his horizon to mature.

Licone is attempting to outline the issues associated with the
term Historical revisionism, without ever once mentioning the term,
or without ever once mentioning that it has always been
seen to possess both a legitimate academic use and a
pejorative meaning. Licone, of course, spreads the butter
of the pejorative across his slice of bread, before
casting it upon the waters.

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

Steven Carr · 11-21-2007, 10:29 PM

Licona, of course, is the sort of person who would not believe Christianity was false, if an angel came down from Heaven and told him.

In fact, the very sort of person Paul praises.

But I'm not sure that Paul would be pleased by Licona denying that Paul believed Jesus turned into a spirit at the resurrection.

'The last Adam became a life-giving spirit' wrote Paul.

Licona claims Paul did not believe Jesus turned into a spirit.

So much for denialists.

mountainman · 11-22-2007, 03:21 AM

At the moment the worst book I have seen is
Cracking Da Vinci's Code (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Garlow and Jones.

One skim through it, inside 15 minutes was enough
for ever, and I was not really going to mention this.

Best wishes,

Pete Brown

11-20-2007, 03:35 PM	#1
burning flames Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: florida Posts: 887	answering infidels??? this website has refutations of skeptics like richard carrier, earl diherty and acharya s: http://www.answeringinfidels.com/answering-skeptics/

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

11-20-2007, 03:43 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Correction: this apologetic website, which has been noted here before, attempts to refute skeptics. Some of the contents of that site are pretty lame. Is there something in particular there that you want to discuss?

11-21-2007, 01:09 PM	#6
Artemus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: USA Posts: 2,467	I took a quick look at Licona’s Reply to Doherty. It consists of a couple of unconvincing facts (a few non-Christian sources mention Jesus more 100 years after he supposedly live, and a few Christian sources mention him within 70 years of when he supposedly lived), followed by an appeal to authority, and then several paragraphs of ad hominems. There is no rebuttal to Doherty at all. Not much of a reply, now is it?

11-21-2007, 10:29 PM	#9
Steven Carr Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: England Posts: 5,629	Licona, of course, is the sort of person who would not believe Christianity was false, if an angel came down from Heaven and told him. In fact, the very sort of person Paul praises. But I'm not sure that Paul would be pleased by Licona denying that Paul believed Jesus turned into a spirit at the resurrection. 'The last Adam became a life-giving spirit' wrote Paul. Licona claims Paul did not believe Jesus turned into a spirit. So much for denialists.

11-22-2007, 03:21 AM	#10
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	At the moment the worst book I have seen is Cracking Da Vinci's Code (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Garlow and Jones. One skim through it, inside 15 minutes was enough for ever, and I was not really going to mention this. Best wishes, Pete Brown

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.