angelo

As Pontius Pilate is quoted as saying; What is truth?

aa5874

And, quite ironically, Pilate's statement, as recorded in the NT, may not be truthful.

Solitary Man

Calling all scholars who do not agree with him dishonest is a personal attack. He just fricking called nearly the whole community of scholars liars! That's not a personal attack?

Sure! If you're biased enough to want to ruin Christianity, you'll do anything to sink it in the ground. Whereas if you just focus on the evidence, Christianity, if it has faults, will eventually collapse on its own accord.

Toto

I took it as an offhand reference to something that everyone knows is true - that there are scholars of Christianity who have had to conceal their skepticism of some of its basic tenants. You read this as a charge that the entire community of scholars are dishonest. You might be projecting something inside yourself here.

I think that certain Christians have done a good enough job "ruining" Christianity without my help.

But no, evidence means nothing to True Believers.

Jeffrey Gibson

Really?? Would you please list them -- and provide evidence that backs up your claim that they felt that they had to do what you say they had to do?

Jeffrey

Yellum Notnef

Does it have faults? And if so what are they?

mountainman

Surely you have noticed that for the last 1700 years
there has only been one side to the "christian story".
It is like we have been forced to read a moebius strip
and always end up in circular arguments which end up
as an appeal to "ancient historical authority".

To resolve this "fault" we have to see both sides to the
pieces of paper that the ancient transmitters of the
"early christian phenomenom" have delivered to us
bound with a twist, and having only the one visible side.

In regard to christian faults, start with the
very first christian (emperor) Constantine.

Best wishes,


Pete Brown

Solitary Man

Please reread.

"Then we have a couple of references by historians of the time, that have been discredited by most biblical scholars who are honest enough to admit it."

Let's remove the irrelevant parts.

"Then we have a couple of references...that have been discredited by most biblical scholars who are honest enough to admit it."

The passage is in passive. Let's switch it to active.

"Most biblical scholars, [those] who are honest enough to admit it, have discredited the couple of references which we have."

English also permits an implied "at least" before "[those] who", which would be more lenient to his factual inaccuracies (i.e. most biblical scholars have not discredited the references of Josephus and Tacitus), but either way, it still impugns the honesty of the biblical scholars who have not discredited the couple of references.

I agree! It's no wonder that many Christians who study this stuff in depth adopt a more and more liberal attitude as they go, resulting for some in agnosticism or atheism.

Neither do base and malicious attacks.

Solitary Man

Moderators: Fenton's post and my reply here ought to be split off to GRD.

Fenton - I would posit the belief in God to be a fault. I don't think there's enough evidence for a God, and thus any religious system which posits the existence of one (let alone an interactive deity) is ultimately flawed until more evidence is shown that there is in fact a God.

spin

I wouldn't list those that I have met. Would you?


spin