billywheaton

Why do people, like me, who feel the concept of biblical inerrancy is ridiculous fall into the trap of focusing on Jesus' life and resurrection story when debating christians? After all, Jesus did not write any of the New Testament. The Bible claims fantastic and bewildering stories of the apostles and Paul that make the Jesus claims seem simple. As these people were supposedly either the writers or at least the most direct sources for the presumed writers, their existence, motivation and credibility could impact on the issues about Jesus. The early christian leaders, like Paul, likely knew what I assume many of us know. Basically people respond to a distant authority. Indeed, this tactic of Argumentum ad verecundiam allows one to forcefully advocate a position without having to claim personal responsibility for the argument. I feel evengelical christian use this tactic now! For example, evangelical leaders point to "the founding fathers" when discussing "activist judges", school prayer, gun control, etc. I feel focusing on the founding fathers leaves their arguments vulnerable, but they may at the same time persuade more people to their side.

My hypothesis is that those of us arguing against the inerrancy of the Bible may be better served to avoid the trap set long ago by the early christians and avoid dealing with the question about Jesus directly. Rather, we might be better served to challenge the messengers (the supposed apostles, disciples, writers, paul, etc.)

Indeed, Dr James Dobson recently called a past sermon by the now dead evangelical Francis Schaeffer "God inspired". If christian now liberally use Argumentum ad verecundiam why should we think they did not use this tactic then.

Anyway, I think the debate against the resurrection story, for example, becomes straight-forward with this approach. Granted, the debate evidence in favor of resurrection portrays many vulnerabilities, but they gain context without first addressing the intentions of the gospel writer. Of course, this is my humble opinion. What do you think?
billywheaton from billywheaton.com:huh:

No Robots

The simple fact is that Christ fascinates. Love him, hate him, worship him, deny him; but you just can't ignore him.

telerion

I ignore him, unless some one calls him to my attention; and xian apologists never fail to do that.

Mageth

Who?

Llyricist

I think the main reason you see the Christian side "humored" is that even when "giving away the farm" to the Christian (accepting premises for the sake of argument), they still lack a leg on which to stand. If that doesn't get through, then the stumps are knocked out from under 'em.