FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page Jesus, Arthur and Hercules
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 6 of 7 « First 45 6 7
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-17-2009, 02:49 PM   #51
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gone
Posts: 4,676
Default
Spare me the fortune cookie messages.
Yellum Notnef is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 02:57 PM   #52
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenton Mulley View Post
Spare me the fortune cookie messages.
Sure. Now, how about sparing me the snide commentary?
No Robots is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 03:04 PM   #53
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default
[staffwarn]Please stay on topic and try to maintain a modicum of civility, or bad things might happen to this thread.[/staffwarn]
Toto is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 03:04 PM   #54
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gone
Posts: 4,676
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenton Mulley View Post
Spare me the fortune cookie messages.
Sure. Now, how about sparing me the snide commentary?
What snide commentary? All I said was that your arguments from cartoons, arse jokes, Cohen lyrics and something Brunner wrote about Jesus aren't at all convincing to anyone. Maybe this shit flies at your local palm reader salon, but it's not working well for you here.

That's all I was saying.
Yellum Notnef is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 03:07 PM   #55
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenton Mulley View Post
What snide commentary? All I said was that your arguments from cartoons, arse jokes, Cohen lyrics and something Brunner wrote about Jesus aren't at all convincing to anyone. Maybe this shit flies at your local palm reader salon, but it's not working well for you here.

That's all I was saying.
How about Klausner?
No Robots is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 03:08 PM   #56
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gone
Posts: 4,676
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenton Mulley View Post
What snide commentary? All I said was that your arguments from cartoons, arse jokes, Cohen lyrics and something Brunner wrote about Jesus aren't at all convincing to anyone. Maybe this shit flies at your local palm reader salon, but it's not working well for you here.

That's all I was saying.
How about Klausner?
That's a little better.
Yellum Notnef is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 10:53 PM   #57
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
OK. In your judgment, what is the probability that the James to whom Paul referred was the same person to whom the authors of Matthew and Mark referred, and how do you reach that judgment without presupposing anything about the historical reliability of the gospels?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
The two sets of passages (Matthew 13:55, Mark 6:3 + Galatians 1:18–19) are mutually corroborative, meaning that they both reinforce the same conclusion.
You need to have already reached some conclusion before affirming that both sets of passages reinforce it. Either that, or you infer a conclusion from one set and then find reinforcement from the other. But that is not mutual reinforcement except in a circular sense.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 10:55 PM   #58
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
The two sets of passages (Matthew 13:55, Mark 6:3 + Galatians 1:18–19) are mutually corroborative, meaning that they both reinforce the same conclusion.
You need to have already reached some conclusion before affirming that both sets of passages reinforce it. Either that, or you infer a conclusion from one set and then find reinforcement from the other.
Actually, no we don't, and I gave you my reasoning in the rest of the writing you left out of your quote.
ApostateAbe is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 11:00 PM   #59
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApostateAbe View Post
I gave you my reasoning in the rest of the writing you left out of your quote.
I found your reasoning uncogent. When I have a little more time I'll follow up with a post explaining why.
Doug Shaver is offline  
Old 06-17-2009, 11:04 PM   #60
Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: MT
Posts: 10,656
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Shaver View Post
You need to have already reached some conclusion before affirming that both sets of passages reinforce it. Either that, or you infer a conclusion from one set and then find reinforcement from the other. But that is not mutual reinforcement except in a circular sense.
I'll respond to your edited post. If you don't think it is mutual reinforcement, that is fine by me. If you like, I infer a conclusion from one set and then I find reinforcement from the other. I don't see anything wrong with that.
ApostateAbe is offline  
 
Page 6 of 7 « First 45 6 7

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:13 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.