Egoinos

I don't really understand the purpose of apologetics. Surely most Christians must be able to see that archaeology/history can, at the very most only prove that the authors of the Bible got their history/geography correct. Its never going to be able to "prove" the burning bush at Sinai, or the resurrection of Jesus. They may want it to, but surely they can see that that's never going to happen?

I'd be interested to know when the sort of apologetics that relies on history and archaeology to somehow convince nonbelievers of the existence of Yahweh and Jesus began. The earliest evangelists, those in the NT, weren't preaching to atheists/agnostics, after all, but generally to those who believed in gods of some sort or another to begin with. They then tried to convince them not that Yahweh-Jesus existed, but that he was a better god than the ones they had already. In the OT they seem to have believed that other gods did actually exist, just that they weren't as big as Yahweh.

lpetrich

Apologetics may be a veiled way for believers to support their beliefs, to try to convince themselves that they are correct. When one considers that apologists often indulge in crude caricatures of freethinkers' beliefs, one wonders who they are really addressing.

As to interesting apologetics, my favorite is the early theologian Origen, best-known for having neutered himself in an effort to follow Matthew 19:12. He argued that if you believe the story of the siege of Troy, the story of Romulus and Remus, etc., then why believe those stories and not those of the Bible?

A common position among present-day freethinkers may be described as inverse Origenism -- if one disbelieves in the stories of religions other than Xianity, why not extend one's disbelief one step further?

If one considers the alleged divine paternity of Pythagoras, Plato, and Alexander the Great to be pure fiction, then why not also consider that about about the alleged divine paternity of Jesus Christ?

If one refuses to believe that the Roman Emperor Vespasian had healed some people with magical spit therapy, as reputable historians Suetonius and Tacitus report, then why not also refuse to believe stories of Jesus Christ successfully curing people with magical spit therapy?

Marduk

Isn’t the Roman Emperor Vespasian the same guy who on his deathbed said sarcastically “yes, I can feel myself becoming a god already”

Radcliffe Emerson

Archaeology for the most part disproves much of the bible as being true.
However, I've heard there is one misunderstanding. When the bible refers to the "world", like the whole world flooded, or Jesus' disciples were told to preach the Gospel throughout the world, it refers to Israel and the surrounding areas around the Mediterranean, not the literal entire world.

jess

actually, I was merely mentioning that there was a reason the Chinese records did not go back that far. I was 'joking' about the research line: more of a 'do you want me to do it for you, or can you take it from here' bit. I do enjoy research, and would, when not rushed, be happy to do it for people.


I am more than capable of hitting a book, journal, encylopedia or even <shudder> a search engine when I need to do research. I saw little reason to do it for this, unless I had been asked.


It's not like I posted a 'hey, can people find this out for me' line. I actually do research as part of my job, so I need no more 'practice' doing so, one reason why my two liner did not include it. I'm sorry, I guess I found your line a little condenscending, assumptive and unwarranted, although I understand how I could have hit a hot button with you. My own buttons are nicely labelled with huge <push me!> signs.

[edited to post something on topic]

well, you can always point out that Maine exists and pets exist but that is no reason to believe that Pet Cemetary exists. Good fiction uses characters, places and events that actually happened. It makes it no more true than Stephen King novels.

[ December 02, 2002: Message edited by: jess ]</p>

Jayhawker Soule

And we know this how, exactly?

Radcliffe Emerson

Several scholars, historians, archaelogists state their opinion "world" only referred to that area.
They're living in a time when even Jesus is recorded as going most places on foot, and rarely ever going more than 100 miles from where he was born.

Butters

Could you please go tell all the fundies this, please?

beausoleil

Don't blame you, mate. It was.

Hex

Would it do any good?

You know, after reading all this and many other things on II, I begin to wonder why we do the <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> -thing and try to use logical thought to try and convince these folks of the illogic of the religion.

Maybe I'll start a new thread and ask?

Again, thanks for all the insights and info ...

- Hex