Zaphod

So far, it seems that opinions verifying the historicity of JC have all come from proctologists.:devil1:

Zenaphobe

Just before I perused this thread, I was looking at some emotional thing someone sent me on Facebook about a little girl in an airport asking one of the solders waiting to be shipped off to give her daddy a hug for her when he got to Iraq and how this event inspired some folks to wear red colored shirts on Fridays to show solidarity with the troops.

I wondered if this was one of those urban legends that seem to multiply these days like rabbits on Viagra and did a search to see what I could learn about it's origins. One search result took me to a forum for military folks and one person's reply stood out to me.

What would make a modern person with access to almost unlimited investigative power scoff at whether there are any actual facts to support a story that they find psychologically satisfying?

It doesn't matter to him that the airport, the solders, the little girl, the tearful crowd, or any other detail in the account is made up whole cloth, he doesn't care, it's the emotion and confirmation of his desire for it to be true that keeps him from looking beyond the yarn to any reality behind it.

I doubt that this man's admission of believing because it makes him feel good is something new to humanity, in fact, I have not trouble imagining a tale about some underdog Rabbi who gets crucified and rises from the dead being spun out of whole cloth and people eating it up like the man who could care less if the girl who gave out the hug was fact or fiction and has the entire internet to check it out, but doesn't.

FWIW, I realize this wasn't historical or Biblical criticism, but I have been thinking about the HJ/MJ debate for a while from a psychological and sociological POV and it seemed an interesting trail to follow. Sorry if this is too far off topic.

Godless Raven

So...if a religious leader uses the placebo effect to "heal" it's customer's and I note that evidence shows the placebo effect is real and a natural phenomina, does that mean that I support the claims of the religious leader that he's a faith healer?

Without reading the book (like yourself), it would seem possible that Tom investigated whether or not the touch and empathy of a fellow living creature speeds up the healing process.

I suspect it probably does. Having a comforting human touch can ease anxiety and fears allowing the immune system to functional optimally. I don't think it means you accept the claim that faith healing was responsible. :huh:

Zaphod

Treatments which can not outperform the placebo effect are claptrap treatments regardless of your 'suspicions' that they somehow significantly affect the immune system. That a religious leader would promote claptrap as an advertisement for his religion is not surprising, but a man who claims to have made objective investigation into claptrap treatments and then finds them to be effective in a way that would impress doctors is a man who does not understand the scientific method. Which leads me to discount his opinions on the historicity of JC, as I do not have trust in his ability to evaluate evidence. A pity, because I would be happy to see more qualified people endorse the MJ hypothesis.