Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-13-2017 7:35 PM
349 online now:
kbertsche, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Percy (Admin) (3 members, 346 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,104 Year: 28,710/21,208 Month: 776/1,847 Week: 151/475 Day: 44/17 Hour: 2/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12345
6
78Next
Author Topic:   Science proves that the tomb of Jesus (Christ ?)and James the Just have been found.
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 76 of 110 (824077)
11-22-2017 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by LamarkNewAge
11-20-2017 11:54 PM


Re: Evidence that Apostolic tradition that Catholics and Protestants accept is FALSE.
My point is that a reader is generally not interested in reading through your source material. They are more interested in your argument in your own words...rather than simply saying "I believe this because...
quote:
source material
"

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-20-2017 11:54 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2017 1:35 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11841
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


(3)
Message 77 of 110 (824080)
11-22-2017 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Phat
11-22-2017 1:09 PM


Re: Evidence that Apostolic tradition that Catholics and Protestants accept is FALSE.
My point is that a reader is generally not interested in reading through your source material.

I scroll right passed those big blocks of copypasta...

They are more interested in your argument in your own words.

Exactly.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Phat, posted 11-22-2017 1:09 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-22-2017 4:11 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 143
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 78 of 110 (824082)
11-22-2017 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Phat
01-20-2017 7:05 AM


Re: Conclusion
Yes, it did throw doubt. In my opinion, there is a motive to distract people from the truth. You call it a myth, I know. Lack of evidence, you say. I try and explain that faith comes by hearing and believing. You cite evidence to dismiss the story.
My irritation arises because people seem to want to not believe rather than to believe. You would perhaps say that you prefer reality over fantasy. I would tell you that reality is not always how it appears and that belief will be helpful.

Hi Phat,

The problem with believing in things without evidence is that it gives you the luxury of believing anything you want to be true or wish were true. I was talking in class just this morning about the relative masses of stars (It was waaaay off class topic). One of the students from Saudi Arabia interrupted me and started wondering aloud how you could possibly understand this information and not believe in God. It blew his mind that people could be atheists in a universe as immense and breathtaking as ours. Of course, I chuckled inwardly a little as I knew the God he was thinking of was very different than the God I was raised to worship. But my student and you both speak of your respected invisible beings in the exact same awed voices. He dismisses your reality in the same off-handed way you dismiss his or any other's religious reality. I find it frighteningly sad.

I DO call your God a myth, in the exact same way I call HIS God a myth, or any other magical, invisible being humans have ever worshiped a myth. It's not because I don't want to believe; it's that I have no actual reason to believe. I was raised a christian and until my early thirties believed I was truly called into full-time ministry, but believing without reason to believe; believing despite evidence to the contrary became less and less satisfying.

If you can truly give me a reason to believe that is not based on ancient religious text (loads of religions have those), or from personal feelings (loads of religions have those), or from some magical revelation (loads of religions have those) I am truly open to listening.

You may ask how. I'm still thinking how to answer you.

I invite you to think long and very carefully. If you are really honest with yourself, you may find that there is actually NO answer to anyone asking you "How."


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Phat, posted 01-20-2017 7:05 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2017 2:21 PM Aussie has responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11841
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 79 of 110 (824084)
11-22-2017 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Aussie
11-22-2017 1:58 PM


Re: Conclusion
The problem with believing in things without evidence is that it gives you the luxury of believing anything you want to be true or wish were true.

I don't think so.

I found God. I don't really know that it is God, but I believe that it is without evidence.

That doesn't mean, to me, that I can believe that I can fly off a cliff even though I really want that to be true.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 1:58 PM Aussie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 3:10 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 143
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


(1)
Message 80 of 110 (824091)
11-22-2017 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by New Cat's Eye
11-22-2017 2:21 PM


Re: Conclusion
I found God. I don't really know that it is God, but I believe that it is without evidence.

That doesn't mean, to me, that I can believe that I can fly off a cliff even though I really want that to be true.

Well, You certainly believe in God without evidence, that's your prerogative. BUT you do not believe you can fly off a cliff without evidence. There is a mountain of evidence at your disposal that should lead you to a very accurate prediction of what will happen to you should you actually try. Flight off of cliffs is a scientific proposition and is testable. People manipulate physical laws all the time to do it safely; in hand gliders for example. Belief in invisible entities that can manipulate nature through what amounts in any other scenario to magic words... "Let there be..." THAT is untestable and unevidenced belief.


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2017 2:21 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2017 3:49 PM Aussie has responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11841
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 81 of 110 (824095)
11-22-2017 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Aussie
11-22-2017 3:10 PM


Re: Conclusion
Okay. Still though, believing in an unevidenced thing doesn't mean I can believe whatever I want.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 3:10 PM Aussie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 4:14 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 82 of 110 (824096)
11-22-2017 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by New Cat's Eye
11-22-2017 1:35 PM


Re: Evidence that Apostolic tradition that Catholics and Protestants accept is FALSE.
A combo reply to the choir.

The choir said:

quote:

My point is that a reader is generally not interested in reading through your source material.

I scroll right passed those big blocks of copypasta...

They are more interested in your argument in your own words.

Exactly.


Do you even know why I posted (with the paste) what I did?

Several reasons.

First, Phat made it sound like I was looking for what I found.

I was showing him that I read journals and books long ago which alerted me to certain vital facts.

Then the actual issue.

A major factor was my getting a handle on how to deal with this issue of people living to the second half of the second century who were held up as associates of the Apostle John (who is also said to be the author of the 4th Gospel).

I have read the writings of this supposed "disciple of John the Apostle", Polycarp, but it isn't easy to read and be able to catch the author's quotations and - especially! - allusions to very many parts of the whole body of New Testament writings (I find it massively difficult and I just don't trust my reading to be able catch everything from "Apostle John's Gospel" in Polycarp THOUGH THERE IS NOTHING IN HIS EPISTLE QUOTING OR ALLUDING TO THE GOSPEL OF JOHN so ironically I suppose I did the job perfectly fine).

I actually need to see what scholars (and fundamentalists) say about Polycarp's allusions and quotations from the New Testament.

They have the advantage of several hundred years' of scholarship (with critical debate) behind them, while I am only reading English translations of 1900 year old Greek letters.

They will be able to map out the text and provide the concordance which might possibly link it to something in the Gospel of John (I only can definitively once I have read what the results of hundreds of years' of critical scholarship have brought us).

I RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF POLYCARP'S WEIGHTY WORDS.

(He and Irenaeus didn't seem to fully understand that some would use their own words against them, though the latter was very slick about words, quotations, and every other aspect of fabrication otherwise)

But, then again, I actually care to address and engage the issue.

I suspect that is what gets me off way into the far side of the left field (and frankly, out of the stadium).

People want a Coke verse Pepsi theological debate while I am seen as smuggling ( I dunno?)vegetarian pizza (or at least a milk shake) into the conversation.

Have you read Polycarp of Smyrna?

One of the churches of Revelation (which was seen as a good one) which was a book that was claimed, again, to have been written by the Apostle John?

Polycarp was into his 30s when the book of Revelation was said to have been written by the Apostle John.

This man seen as is a (the?) lynchpin for the Apostolic authority of the 2nd century apologists (Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, etc. )

I don't see how you can scroll past a paste of scholars making a microscopic examination of the vital 2nd century texts (plus Clement of Rome).

What research have you done?

Do you care about the basis of Roman Catholic (with the fundamentalist Protestant followers) claims?

What research have you done?

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2017 1:35 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

    
Aussie
Member
Posts: 143
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 83 of 110 (824097)
11-22-2017 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by New Cat's Eye
11-22-2017 3:49 PM


Re: Conclusion
Okay. Still though, believing in an unevidenced thing doesn't mean I can believe whatever I want.

What I said was in no way an insult. I have read your posts with great interest for years! But in the religious arena you DO believe what you want, what you want to be true. Every religious person in the modern world is believing what they want, with zero evidence. Faith is a fancy sounding way of saying "I believe in vastly improbable things without a good reason to." That's why religions have profoundly mutually exclusive articles of faith; because there is no way to validate the veracity of their claims. Religions are simply "People believing whatever they want." And the religious beliefs on Earth are almost as vast as the human imagination. That should be a giant, flashing warning sign.


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2017 3:49 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-22-2017 4:22 PM Aussie has responded
 Message 106 by New Cat's Eye, posted 12-04-2017 11:32 AM Aussie has not yet responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 84 of 110 (824100)
11-22-2017 4:22 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Aussie
11-22-2017 4:14 PM


Re: Conclusion
quote:

Every religious person in the modern world is believing what they want, with zero evidence

I think it is an issue of whether one is a hypocrite or not.

I admit that I find it annoying that people claim to care about God when they ignore studying the things required that would clue them in on what is more likely than not to distinguish between what is more likely to be fabrication on the one hand verses what is more likely to indicate what is historically possible (and possible in this case means somewhat credible).

There are those who are religious AND who also care enough to try to uncover all the details possible to get close to the truth of what they claim to care about.

Helmut Koester was a great example.

He passed away in 2016 at the age of 89.

He made great contributions way back in the 1950s.

The whole issue of Clement of Rome quoting Matthew (if he did at all) always was framed as whether one had views that were closer to Masseaux or Koester. That was said at the outset whenever a scholar would address the issue of when Matthew was first quoted (and often without any introduction to the two).

I can give an example from a commentary on Matthew (by a first rate scholar). (if anybody cares)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 4:14 PM Aussie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 4:43 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

    
Aussie
Member
Posts: 143
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 85 of 110 (824104)
11-22-2017 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by LamarkNewAge
11-22-2017 4:22 PM


Re: Conclusion
There are also a very great many serious Islamic scholars who think very deeply about their articles of faith, and what they believe. I mean, you don't think Christianity is all alone with its share of Scholars, do you?

But again, these intelligent, deeply thinking Scholars are commenting on things with absolutely no evidence at all! Your Christian Scholars have the exact quality of evidence as Islamic scholars, or Scholars of any religion. You naturally give more Credence to the Christian Scholars, because they confirm to you what you want to be true, without evidence again.


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-22-2017 4:22 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-22-2017 4:59 PM Aussie has responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 86 of 110 (824107)
11-22-2017 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Aussie
11-22-2017 4:43 PM


Tabor is accused of being a semi-closeted JEW-by-choice
quote:

There are also a very great many serious Islamic scholars who think very deeply about their articles of faith, and what they believe. I mean, you don't think Christianity is all alone with its share of Scholars, do you?
But again, these intelligent, deeply thinking Scholars are commenting on things with absolutely no evidence at all! Your Christian Scholars have the exact quality of evidence as Islamic scholars, or Scholars of any religion. You naturally give more Credence to the Christian Scholars, because they confirm to you what you want to be true, without evidence again.

So I'm not too sue you picked the right thread (or the right person) to make this accusation in this light.

quote:

Revisiting New Testament: Was Jesus Just a Normal Human Being?

In a new book, Prof. James Tabor of the University of North Carolina says that history clearly shows Jesus never claimed to be G-d in his lifetime.

Susan Wolf, 14/06/09

....
A Ben Noah
In The Jesus Dynasty, Tabor presented a historical investigation of Jesus and his family with ideas that naturally antagonize many from the Roman Catholic Church. When asked why he doesn’t consider conversion to Judaism, Tabor explains that alongside his love for Judaism and his knowledge that the Jews are G-d’s chosen people, he believes the Jews are meant to be a minority in G-d’s divine plan, and he is comfortable with his place as a declared Ben Noah or Noahide. The belief in Israel’s mission to bring light to the world does not necessitate that everyone be Jewish, he says.

Moreover, Prof. Tabor believes that he can accomplish substantially more from outside of Judaism, and therefore continues his research and writings with the hope that he can expose Christianity and all religions to a proper historical investigation.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/131857


So, that might have to be my response. (however pasted it might be)

(You managed to read quite a lot into my post)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 4:43 PM Aussie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 5:15 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

    
Aussie
Member
Posts: 143
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 87 of 110 (824110)
11-22-2017 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by LamarkNewAge
11-22-2017 4:59 PM


Re: Tabor is accused of being a semi-closeted JEW-by-choice
I'm actually not reading much into your post at all. Even if Jesus was a historical figure, he was almost certainly not magical. I know this sounds like an insult, but in the real world Miracles are indistinguishable from Magic. In the same way, Muhammad was a historical figure, that people have taken and placed in a magical context. Muslims believe that Muhammad rode up to heaven on a flying horse, but you believe Jesus Christ will return as per the Book of Revelation, on a flying horse. Historical figures, wrapped up in magic. And all you have given are commentaries on a book describing magical events. Why should I believe your Scholars anymore than any other Scholars of any other religion?

"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-22-2017 4:59 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-22-2017 5:22 PM Aussie has responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 88 of 110 (824111)
11-22-2017 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Coyote
11-21-2017 12:22 AM


Science can actually be flawed massively?
quote:

The IP starts out, "Science proves that..."
What follows is pages of religious belief and closely related matters, with no appreciable relationship to science.

This is particularly true as science does not "prove" anything, but comes up with verifiable explanations for given sets of facts. Belief, scriptures, and the like have nothing to do with science.


What do you think about this?

quote:

DISCOVER MAGAZINE
NOVEMBER 2009

The Super Cell
by Jeanne Lenzer

....
P.36
Many patients may not really know what they are getting into when they agree to stem cell treatments beyond the very few that have proved effective. The researchers themselves may not know the real risks, in part because doctors may be reluctant to report bad outcomes. In the medical community, there is a tendency not to publish negative results, and if such data are submitted, medical journals may be less likely to accept them for publication. As a result, researchers can end up repeating the same failed experiments, putting patients at unnecessary risk.

To assess risk, Thomas Adamkiewicz, co director of the Hemoglobinopathy/Genomics Training Program at Morehouse School of Medicine in Atlanta, surveyed four medical centers and fond that seven children with sickle-cell disease had been treated with umbilical cord blood from unrelated donors. Only four of the seven cases had been published, and the three unpublished cases had worse outcomes overall, including one death. “Doctors who want to treat patients with stem cells might look at the published data and conclude, ‘Oh, this is good,’” Adamkiewicz says, “but when you see the results for all seven, it’s not as rosy a picture.


Is there a selection bias among medical journals?

This means that science-minded communities don't take in the WHOLE truth, right?

They don't take not or publish everything relevant to getting the total picture, right?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Coyote, posted 11-21-2017 12:22 AM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Coyote, posted 11-22-2017 10:07 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 89 of 110 (824112)
11-22-2017 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Aussie
11-22-2017 5:15 PM


Re: Tabor is accused of being a semi-closeted JEW-by-choice
quote:

but you believe Jesus Christ will return as per the Book of Revelation, on a flying horse. Historical figures, wrapped up in magic. And all you have given are commentaries on a book describing magical events. Why should I believe your Scholars anymore than any other Scholars of any other religion?

You seem to have already decided what you want to say.

I don't know where to begin, with all of these non-starter comments (do you mistake me for another poster?)

Martin Luther didn't even believe in Revelation being authored by John the Apostle or any inspired writer.

As I am all alone in pointing out.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 5:15 PM Aussie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Aussie, posted 11-22-2017 5:30 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

    
Aussie
Member
Posts: 143
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 90 of 110 (824113)
11-22-2017 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by LamarkNewAge
11-22-2017 5:22 PM


Re: Tabor is accused of being a semi-closeted JEW-by-choice
You seem to have already decided what you want to say.

I have decided in only the sense that I have thought a lot about it over the last 15 years. But I don't know everything, and I'm willing to learn if you have things to teach me.

I don't know where to begin, with all of these non-starter comments (do you mistake me for another poster?)

In what sense are my comments non-starters? And I'm replying to you at this point.

Martin Luther didn't even believe in Revelation being authored by John the Apostle or any inspired writer.

I don't really care what Martin Luther believed. Martin Luther was able to believe anything he wanted, because religious people without evidence can make up anything they like! That was my original point to Phat and CatSci.


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-22-2017 5:22 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

    
Prev12345
6
78Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017