Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sschlichter · 08-08-2009, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

I certainly can butterfly all the works of Tertullian to find out what Tertullian knew. The connection Tertullian demonstrates is with the book of corinthians, in whihc he pointed out was written 160 years before ON Monogamy, which Tertullian has connected to Paul, whom Tertullian has demonstrated is connected to the apostles, whom Tertullian beleives are connected to Jesus of Nazareth, whom Tertullian has demonstrated is connected to the reign of Augustus. Tertullian has demonstrated that he knows these pieces of information and Tertullian has also made the claim that the rise of the name of Christians has occurred PUBLICLY

If you do not want to discuss Tertullian as a whole then just use the context from which he said 250 and 300 years where he is pointing out that Christians were NOT around in those timeframes. it is in this same context that he grounds the rise of the name of Christians to the reign of Augustus - no butterflying necessary.

Do you not find a Washington / Lincoln analogy hokey somehow?

Actually, that analogy does not originate with Spin, so he can't be blamed for it. It's mine, and I used it from a historicist angle in another thread. Heck, maybe it is hokey, but in my case, I used it to show that extravagant embellishments in the "record" (like Washington's tossing a coin clean across the Delaware(!) or Lincoln doing impossible things with logs(!)) do not necessarily discount the historicity of anyone.

Sincerely,

Chaucer

It was just an interesting inclusion after
condemning mine. I am actually a fan
of analogy - hokey or otherwise

xaxxat · 08-08-2009, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

I have seen the Great Pumkin, take it on faith, the Great Pumpkin will appear to the true believer.

If you say so. But I would advise you to get a better religion.

One of the goat herder variety, hmm?

premjan · 08-08-2009, 11:00 AM

Goats can eat pumpkins.

xaxxat · 08-08-2009, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

Goats can eat pumpkins.

Yeah, but pumpkins use goats to spread their seeds...

steve_bnk · 08-08-2009, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

I have seen the Great Pumkin, take it on faith, the Great Pumpkin will appear to the true believer.

If you say so. But I would advise you to get a better religion.

You must not have had the Peanuts cartoons in GB. Year after year Charlie Brown sits in a pumkin patch on Halloween eve waiting fior the Great Pumkin to appear.

aa5874 · 08-08-2009, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

Actually, that analogy does not originate with Spin, so he can't be blamed for it. It's mine, and I used it from a historicist angle in another thread. Heck, maybe it is hokey, but in my case, I used it to show that extravagant embellishments in the "record" (like Washington's tossing a coin clean across the Delaware(!) or Lincoln doing impossible things with logs(!)) do not necessarily discount the historicity of anyone.

Sincerely,

Chaucer

The historicity of Washington and Lincoln has no bearing whatsoever on any embellishments. There are public records of these persons.

The historicity of Jesus is solely dependent upon his description, since there are no known public records of Jesus the Messiah, the Creator of heaven and earth, in the 1st century during the governorship of Pilate.

There is simply no comparison at all between the biography of Jesus the God/man to Lincoln and Washington, former presidents of the USA.

angelo · 08-09-2009, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

If you say so. But I would advise you to get a better religion.

You must not have had the Peanuts cartoons in GB. Year after year Charlie Brown sits in a pumkin patch on Halloween eve waiting fior the Great Pumkin to appear.

Peter Peter the Pumkin eater. :devil1:

Doug Shaver · 08-09-2009, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

Year after year Charlie Brown sits in a pumkin patch on Halloween eve waiting fior the Great Pumkin to appear.

No, Charlie Brown doesn't do that. The Great Pumpkin is Linus's schtick.

spin · 08-09-2009, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Knock off the hokey analogies. These guys were depending on source texts. They apparently conflicted. You can't rationalize the conflict, butterflying from one text to another, for your own convenience. Just think of the modern college starters' sketchy knowledge of history: were Washington and Lincoln historically close? It's easy for you to check it up, if you're Wiki-literate. Tertullian didn't have a connection.

I certainly can butterfly all the works of Tertullian to find out what Tertullian knew.

No, you couldn't. You might find out all the things that came to his acquaintance, but that doesn't reflect his knowledge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

The connection Tertullian demonstrates is with the book of corinthians, in whihc he pointed out was written 160 years before ON Monogamy, which Tertullian has connected to Paul, whom Tertullian has demonstrated is connected to the apostles, whom Tertullian beleives are connected to Jesus of Nazareth, whom Tertullian has demonstrated is connected to the reign of Augustus. Tertullian has demonstrated that he knows these pieces of information and Tertullian has also made the claim that the rise of the name of Christians has occurred PUBLICLY

Interestingly you assume that he dates Augustus when you want him to date him!

(And why do you talk of "Jesus of Nazareth", which shows your willingness to synthesize rather than analyze?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

If you do not want to discuss Tertullian as a whole then just use the context from which he said 250 and 300 years where he is pointing out that Christians were NOT around in those timeframes. it is in this same context that he grounds the rise of the name of Christians to the reign of Augustus - no butterflying necessary.

Your assumption riddled approach requires you to "discuss Tertullian as a whole" then ignore information. When did Tertullian think Augustus was emperor?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Do you not find a Washington / Lincoln analogy hokey somehow?

You're not making sense.

spin

spin · 08-09-2009, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaucer

Actually, that analogy does not originate with Spin, so he can't be blamed for it. It's mine, and I used it from a historicist angle in another thread. Heck, maybe it is hokey, but in my case, I used it to show that extravagant embellishments in the "record" (like Washington's tossing a coin clean across the Delaware(!) or Lincoln doing impossible things with logs(!)) do not necessarily discount the historicity of anyone.

Sincerely,

Chaucer

It was just an interesting inclusion after
condemning mine. I am actually a fan
of analogy - hokey or otherwise

Understandable. You don't get the idea that you can't make an argument based on analogy, but merely elucidate one.

spin

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

08-08-2009, 11:00 AM	#163
premjan Obsessed Contributor Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: NJ Posts: 61,538	Goats can eat pumpkins.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.