Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Wooster · 08-02-2009, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jedi Mind Trick

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wooster

I agree, they are all made up entities.

That was what you meant, correct?

Yes and No... If by being made up you mean that they came from the minds of humans, then yes, but if you mean that there is therefore no "breath of life" in them, then no.

IMO, the God(s)ess(esses) come from human consciousness which is no different than (((it is identical to))) the divine consciousness that pervades the universe. This consciousness is ultimately formless, but takes on a myriad of form(s) in this and other worlds to suit the varied needs of sentient beings.

Stay off that LSD, brother, it makes you mind really screwed!

The second paragraph take things to the lala-land level.

_Naturalist_ · 08-02-2009, 12:10 PM

When the stories are as fantastical as they are, asking for evidence is not unreasonable. A waste of time, sure...

aa5874 · 08-02-2009, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

Surprisingly, I'd say early Christian writings are probably studied more than many other works of history. Historical Jesus scholars are trained in the field that they work in, which is to say, a field of anonymous compositions and sparse documentation. The vast majority think that history can be pulled from these texts and rightly so.

But where is that history of Jesus that can be pulled? No Historical Jesus Scholar can provide any sources of antiquity about an historical Jesus of the NT.

The NT and all Church writings are off-limits to the HJ.

No person, scholar or not, can use the NT and Church writings to show that Jesus was only human.

The NT and Church writings were produced precisely to show and propagate that Jesus was God and man, the Creator of heaven and earth, the offspring of the Holy Ghost, who transfigured, resurrected and ascended through the clouds.

You cannot pull an human only Jesus from the NT and Church writings just as you cannot pull a flat earth out of Galileo's writings.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

Early Christian writings may not be historical sources but they are sources of history. Even if a Christian author tells us more about his beliefs and his community than of events prior to it, that is still a reconstruction of past events (aka history).

All that can be pulled is that some people believed the Jesus stories in antiquity and some people wrote fiction about the Church History and their own God and Creator Jesus.

I have pulled from the Christians writings that the Church claimed Jesus was the Creator of heaven and earth and then proceeded to write books upon books of fiction about him.

Vinnie · 08-02-2009, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Why don't you thrill me with a select, succinct bibliography of specifically historian-reviewed scholarly articles rather than just going through the verbal motions. No stuff by "Historical Jesus scholars", please, just historians.

I have gone through the entire lists of of three archived journals (e.g. JBL) from Jstor, saving articles as pdfs of things I find interesting in early Christian research and I read them frequently. I have a folder with a large number of pdf files on my computer.

But I am not here to satisfy your pedantic, hyper skepticism. If you can't concede that, at the very least, a Christian work tells us some information about the view-points of its author and respective community, I have no purpose in dialoging with you on this or any other issue.

Vinnie

steve_bnk · 08-02-2009, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

Quote:

Why don't you thrill me with a select, succinct bibliography of specifically historian-reviewed scholarly articles rather than just going through the verbal motions. No stuff by "Historical Jesus scholars", please, just historians.

I have gone through the entire lists of of three archived journals (e.g. JBL) from Jstor, saving articles as pdfs of things I find interesting in early Christian research and I read them frequently. I have a folder with a large number of pdf files on my computer.

But I am not here to satisfy your pedantic, hyper skepticism. If you can't concede that, at the very least, a Christian work tells us some information about the view-points of its author and respective community, I have no purpose in dialoging with you on this or any other issue.

Vinnie

On what basis do you have access to JSTOr?

'Christian works' as you put it in these times tend to be self fulfilling, the authors interpret what is needed for his/her point of view.

What do you mean by 'Christian works'?

From your studies, what then is the historical evidence?

spin · 08-02-2009, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

Quote:

Why don't you thrill me with a select, succinct bibliography of specifically historian-reviewed scholarly articles rather than just going through the verbal motions. No stuff by "Historical Jesus scholars", please, just historians.

I have gone through the entire lists of of three archived journals (e.g. JBL) from Jstor, saving articles as pdfs of things I find interesting in early Christian research and I read them frequently. I have a folder with a large number of pdf files on my computer.

Any of them historical?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

But I am not here to satisfy your pedantic, hyper skepticism.

Is anybody who calls you on your own brand of sloppiness guilty of "pedantic, hyper skepticism"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

If you can't concede that, at the very least, a Christian work tells us some information about the view-points of its author and respective community, I have no purpose in dialoging with you on this or any other issue.

When you do not know what genre the texts you are trying to cite are, you don't know what the content means. If you cannot concede that, then you are wasting your time. If you can concede it, next step is to be able to argue your case for a text you want to use, rather than continue making sweeping statements. You need to connect the author with a specific community. Constructing a community from a text, a community you cannot verify, isn't doing your job.

So this "pedantic, hyper skeptic.." says to you, person with apparently no appreciation of history, if you don't want to dialog, then that's your decision.

spin

Vinnie · 08-03-2009, 01:16 AM

Quote:

On what basis do you have access to JSTOr?

One of the perks of college.

Quote:

'Christian works' as you put it in these times tend to be self fulfilling, the authors interpret what is needed for his/her point of view.

I am talking about 1st and 2nd century texts. Though the same applies.

Quote:

What do you mean by 'Christian works'?

Written by Christians,

Quote:

From your studies, what then is the historical evidence?

Broad swathe of material left behind.

Vinnie

steve_bnk · 08-04-2009, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinnie

Quote:

On what basis do you have access to JSTOr?

One of the perks of college.

I am talking about 1st and 2nd century texts. Though the same applies.

Written by Christians,

Quote:

From your studies, what then is the historical evidence?

Broad swathe of material left behind.

Vinnie

where is your debate

!. hypothesis
2. reasoning
3. conculsion

Newfie · 08-04-2009, 10:34 PM

A similar situation exists for Atlantis.

From Wiki

Quote:

Other than Plato's Timaeus and Critias there is no primary ancient account of Atlantis, which means every other account on Atlantis relies on Plato in one way or another.

So, Atlantis is also based on one source, yet has enjoyed support from ancient times up until today. Should more of us believe in Atlantis in spite of this limited documentation? Like the story of Jesus, it's a romantic idea of a perfect possible world, like utopia, Camelot, the Star Trek or Harry Potter universes. People want it to be true, and the wanting overpowers the rational checks that filter out the fantastic impossibility of it all.

Jedi Mind Trick · 08-05-2009, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wooster

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jedi Mind Trick

Yes and No... If by being made up you mean that they came from the minds of humans, then yes, but if you mean that there is therefore no "breath of life" in them, then no.

IMO, the God(s)ess(esses) come from human consciousness which is no different than (((it is identical to))) the divine consciousness that pervades the universe. This consciousness is ultimately formless, but takes on a myriad of form(s) in this and other worlds to suit the varied needs of sentient beings.

Stay off that LSD, brother, it makes you mind really screwed!

The second paragraph take things to the lala-land level.

Suit yourself. I could care less what you think I'm on. I have nothing to prove to you.

What you wrote to me just means you have nothing interesting to say about such things. I see it as a poverty of mind not unlike that of a fundamentalist Christian. You don't have to agree with me and you can think it is all woo, but what I said wasn't incoherent and trippy.

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

08-02-2009, 12:10 PM	#82
_Naturalist_ Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Sweden Posts: 5,914	When the stories are as fantastical as they are, asking for evidence is not unreasonable. A waste of time, sure...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.