Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 49 (9215 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Cifa.ac
Post Volume: Total: 920,218 Year: 540/6,935 Month: 540/275 Week: 57/200 Day: 16/35 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did Jesus Exist? by Bart Ehrman
Percy
Member
Posts: 23083
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.3


(2)
Message 537 of 563 (917630)
04-12-2024 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 528 by LamarkNewAge
04-11-2024 9:13 PM


Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
LamarkNewAge in Message 528 writes:
Much more relevant than Percy making jokes about Jewish historians being single.
Serious responses are more likely to be drawn from addressing things actually said. I definitely have not made any comments about the methods of historians.
I started this exchange because you were running your mouth on Carriers application of statistics.
First you think Theodoric said he owned The Historicity of Jesus by Carrier, and then you think he's made comments about "Carriers applications of statistics." How is one to respond but with humor and ridicule to your imagined happenings.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 528 by LamarkNewAge, posted 04-11-2024 9:13 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 538 by Theodoric, posted 04-12-2024 8:24 AM Percy has not replied
 Message 539 by LamarkNewAge, posted 04-12-2024 8:26 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 23083
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.3


Message 540 of 563 (917633)
04-12-2024 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 539 by LamarkNewAge
04-12-2024 8:26 AM


Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
LamarkNewAge in Message 539 writes:
You seem to be quite evasive, when it comes to giving us all a nuts & bolts reason for why 99 percent of historians disagree with you.
They're religious scholars, not historians, and the primary reasons are the ones I gave before and haven't changed: religious beliefs prevent objectivity, and the consensus itself causes its own feedback loop, strengthening faith in the belief.
Your earlier quip about not knowing whether Jewish historians being single, seemed to be part of an effort, on your part, to sidestep the issue of whether mainstream historians are doing work in a really fucked up way, or - conversely - if you are fairly wack in your ability to analyze evidence.
You haven't offered any evidence, and you ignore all requests for it. Primarily you only offer a combination of the "argument from authority" and "50,000 Frenchmen can't be wrong" fallacies.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 539 by LamarkNewAge, posted 04-12-2024 8:26 AM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 541 by LamarkNewAge, posted 04-12-2024 9:32 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 23083
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.3


Message 542 of 563 (917637)
04-12-2024 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 541 by LamarkNewAge
04-12-2024 9:32 AM


Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
LamarkNewAge in Message 541 writes:
How about you try to exegate Romans 1:1-4
I think you mean exegete, and even then you're trying to verb a noun. If you've got something to say about how the passage provides evidence for the historicity of Jesus then go ahead. Here's the passage again:
quote:
Romans 1: 1Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— 2the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David, 4and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.
(Don't execute the text anymore than you have evaded it)
No one's evading anything. It's just that there are no lackeys here to follow your commands. If you have a case to make then make it.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 541 by LamarkNewAge, posted 04-12-2024 9:32 AM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 543 by LamarkNewAge, posted 04-12-2024 10:04 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 23083
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.3


(1)
Message 544 of 563 (917640)
04-12-2024 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 543 by LamarkNewAge
04-12-2024 10:04 AM


Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
LamarkNewAge in Message 543 writes:
You seemed to be complaining about those with theological degrees having too much influence in historical conclusions.
I'm not complaining about them at all. My only mentions of them is in response to inquiries from you. My interest lies in the evidence these gentleman have uncovered. The minutia of interactions between Carrier and Price do not much interest me.
Price was quoted to show two possible interpretations experts reached on the text of Romans 1:1-4.
What is *your* interpretation so far as it bears upon the historicity of Jesus?
Why is Doctor History better equipped to interpret the text than Dr Theology?
Speaking generally, a Doctor of Theology is handicapped by his religious beliefs.
Again, my interest is drawn to the evidence for the historical Jesus.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 543 by LamarkNewAge, posted 04-12-2024 10:04 AM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 546 by LamarkNewAge, posted 04-12-2024 10:44 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 547 by Phat, posted 04-12-2024 10:51 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025