|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
 Posted - 12/03/2002 : 00:28:14 [Permalink]
|
Slater Responds: quote:
What's the big deal? The Roman Catholic Church had an office (a division) that "corrected" history. This office existed
for thundreds of years.
Take a look at the Catholic Encyclopedia and see if you can find one single Ante-Nicene Father whose original work
exists. There are none. Justin Martyr probably had the most books credited to him but there are no copies before
Eusebius. Even the CE admits that the best known Justin Martyr story is a fairy tale.
So then YOU HAVE FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGEthat this indeed happed? I'm sure the Historians and Classical Scholars would just love to see your "Documented Evidence". Yeah right! Slater just because your paranoid doesn't mean Their not looking for you. |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 12/03/2002 00:29:43 |
 |
|
|
LordofEntropy
Skeptic Friend
USA
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 00:35:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
Not that you need a source "other than [eyewitness accounts in]the NT
Wow! So eyewitness accounts == fact!
All this time I thought UFOs, Loch Ness, posthumous Elvis, and Sasquatch didn't exist =(
Must also be another Washington D.C. sniper about too, considering all the eyewitnesses that saw white vans leaving the crime scenes. Either that or the van shapeshifts into a blue Malibu. |
Entropy just isn't what it used to be.
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 05:08:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
All this time I thought UFOs, Loch Ness, posthumous Elvis, and Sasquatch didn't exist =(
Of course they exist! I've see them all through the bottom of the bottle. And a pink unicorn named Jumpin' Jehorseifat, too!
'Eye witness' accounts, particularly ancient ones, need be thought of as ancedotal evidence. And when they are presented in a tome such as the Bible, that has been revised, edited, and otherwise reworked for mainly political purposes, over centuries, one must take this evidence with a bigger dose of salts than usual.
f |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 06:43:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
TD asks: quote:
Can anyone point out a reliable source other than the NT that mentions a historical Jesus?
Not that you need a source "other than [eyewitness accounts in]the NT"
You have a funny definition of "eyewitness". If someone writes a book decades after an event supposedly took place, just what "eyewitnesses" were they interviewing for their material?
quote:
but here's a couple,Joesphus' Antiquities...and Tacitus,Annals
Oh please.
This is why discussion with you is pointless and repetative. The same things are pointed out again and again, and you just plug your ears and say "la la la!".
Just to be clear, I asked:
quote:
Can anyone point out a reliable source other than the NT that mentions a historical Jesus?
Note the emphasis. Josephus' references were obviously forgeries, and Tacitus is very likely only repeating what people of the time are telling him, not reporting from historical record. |
| Edited by - Tokyodreamer on 12/03/2002 06:46:15 |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 10:48:45 [Permalink]
|
LordofEntropy proclaims: quote:
Wow! So eyewitness accounts == fact!
Besides being facetious have you really thought about the implications of your comment?For example,are you saying that a historian should do his/her work like Slater on wild guesses and unproven assumptions?How would you tell the tale of the past?  |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 11:03:22 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
All this time I thought UFOs, Loch Ness, posthumous Elvis, and Sasquatch didn't exist =(
Of course they exist! I've see them all through the bottom of the bottle.
Actually, they call those things "worms." |
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 11:43:45 [Permalink]
|
TD Laments: quote:
Oh please.
This is why discussion with you is pointless and repetative. The same things are pointed out again and again, and you just plug your ears and say "la la la!".
Really TD, it seems your the one who can't THINK FOR HIMSELF, including your mimicking your mentor Slater's"plug your ears,,la la la!"
As for your parroting of the traditional Christ-Myth mantra:
quote:
Note the emphasis. Josephus' references were obviously forgeries, and Tacitus is very likely only repeating what people of the time are telling him, not reporting from historical record
I've done quite of bit of research on this particular quote to which Classical Scholar can you cite to support your position? Here's a few I consulted:1.Prof.John Warwick Montgomery:2.Dr.Edwin Yamauchi;3.Dr.Bruce Metzger;4.Dr F.F. Bruce;5Dr.Craig Bloomberg;6.Dr.R.T.France;7.Dr.Jhon Meier;8.Dr.Shlomo Pines;9.Dr.J.P.Moreland;10.Prof.William Lane Craig.
Needless to say they wholeheartedly disagree with your unwarranted pessimism.The same could be said of your confusing reconstructionist attempt at Tacitus,pray tell even if Good Old Tac was "repeating what people of the time [were] telling him"SO WHAT?Does that mean YOU KNOW he didn't investigate it?Are you and Slater sharing the same crystal ball so you can read between the lines of whats recorded in history to give us the TRUE SCOOP?    |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 12/03/2002 11:46:11 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 13:03:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
Ideally taking two fundamental premises of historical inquiry into consideration, namely: 1. Aristotle's Maxim that we "should give the ancient document in question the benefit of the doubt" since we weren't there and its writer claims that he/she was; 2. The Ancient Document Rule, which states that a document which is found in its normal custodial place should be received as long as it's free from both internal contradictions and found not to be in error about external known facts. With these two principals in mind the entire New Testament would qualify. However, I'll just take three for starters:(1). John 19:25-37, ...
Thanks for responding to my question. Please: - cite the source of Aristotle's Maxim,
- cite references confirming consensus regarding your "two fundamental premises of historical inquiry", and
- confirm that you maintain John 19:25-37 to be inerrant.
And, while you're at it, tell me if the reports of this unnamed man constitutes 1st-hand testimony, 2nd-hand testimony, nth-hand testimony, or pure fabrication, and how do you know? |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 13:05:26 [Permalink]
|
I just sat here and fed the names of each of DA 's 10 "experts' into the MSN scearch engine.
7.Dr.Jhon Meier; 8.Dr.Shlomo Pines both came up empty.
The other eight all had multiple hits. Every one Christian Apologetics, not classical scholars.
Is anyone surprised?
Ya know DA I can only hope that there are lurkers who are reading this trying to come to terms with religion in their own minds. You couldn't pay someone to act like such a cliche of a Protestant bufoon as you do. I can hardly believe you're real myself. |
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 13:33:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The Ancient Document Rule, which states that a document which is found in its normal custodial place should be received as long as it's free from both internal contradictions and found not to be in error about external known facts. With these two principals in mind the entire New Testament would qualify. However, I'll just take three for starters:(1). John 19:25-37, ...
John 19:25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.
Mt 27:55 And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him:
Mk 15:40 There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome;
Lk23:49 And all his acquaintance, and the women that followed him from Galilee, stood afar off, beholding these things.
-------------------------------------
John 19:29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.
Mt27:34 They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.
Mk 15:23 And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not.
---------------
John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
Mt 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Lk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
------------------------------
Now it's Johnny you say has the actual story, is it, and not the others?
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 13:52:24 [Permalink]
|
Damn! And just when I thought we had discovered the one inerrant book of the NT. Oh, well, easy come, easy go.
BTW: Meier is the Catholic professor of Theology who wrote The Marginal Jew. Professor Shlomo Pines is the discoverer of the Arabic translation of the TF. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 14:24:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
Really TD, it seems your the one who can't THINK FOR HIMSELF, including your mimicking your mentor Slater's"plug your ears,,la la la!"
Err, right... It's a common reference, and it fits perfectly. Anyway...
quote:
Needless to say they wholeheartedly disagree with your unwarranted pessimism.
Of course they do. They want to believe it. Do you really need more than the fact that numerous church writers quoted Josephus extensively for years, except for these amazingly distinct and clear passages, until all of a sudden they appeared, to tell that they were forged and added at a later date?
And do you know what pessimism means?
quote:
The same could be said of your confusing reconstructionist attempt at Tacitus,pray tell even if Good Old Tac was "repeating what people of the time [were] telling him"SO WHAT?
Could you at least try to follow the thread? The previous posts are there for your perusal to remind you of context.
The answer to "so what?" is in what you were claiming Tacitus' writings to be. |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 15:03:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
For example, there had never been any historical record of the court where Jesus Christ was tried by Pilate - called the "Gabbatha" or pavement in John 19:13. Many said, "It's a myth. See ... the Bible is not historical."
Many? OK - give three citations. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
LordofEntropy
Skeptic Friend
USA
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 15:53:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
Besides being facetious have you really thought about the implications of your comment?For example,are you saying that a historian should do his/her work like Slater on wild guesses and unproven assumptions?How would you tell the tale of the past?
Yes I have thought about my comment!
However, you said:
quote:
Originally posted by darwin alogos
Not that you need a source "other than [eyewitness accounts in]the NT
You are claiming the NT "eyewitness accounts" are PROOF of the existance of Jesus X. Not only are you saying they are PROOF, but that those accounts alone are all anyone should need!
Eyewitness accounts in freakin' book that half of you Xtians claim is fact, the other half claim its allegorical(naturally after contradictions are pointed out.) A book that has been used as the centerpiece by a church, who throughout history has delighted in destroying, burning, and murdering whomever the current MAN(not God)in charge has a problem with. You expect me to believe that, the bible hasn't been altered, mistranslated *wink* *wink*, or revised to serve the purposes of your murderous church of the past 1500 years or so.
Historians will note and place many eyewitness accounts of the Holocaust into historical texts. But those accounts will also be backed up by the EVIDENCE of the concentration camps and mass graves. This is why the laughable claims of people saying the Holocaust was a hoax hold no water. If there was only eyewitness accounts, there could be doubt, but there is EVIDENCE to accompany those accounts.
|
Entropy just isn't what it used to be.
|
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/03/2002 : 16:30:46 [Permalink]
|
| FYI - EYE WITNESS TESTIMONY |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
