|
Author
|
Topic: Did Jesus Exist? by Bart Ehrman
|
LamarkNewAge
Member Posts: 2497 Joined: 12-22-2015
|
|
Message 526 of 563 (917618)
04-11-2024 9:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 525 by Percy
04-11-2024 8:44 PM
|
|
Re: Just to be clear when I lament close-mindedness and hostility to science
I (slightly) asked you about demographic profiles of the scholars)historians, and you followed with a crack about dating single Jewish historians. I will ask again: I assume you feel like the historians are a group that is disproportionately white, and specifically Christian and Jewish. I would argue that Jewish scholars won't be predisposed to Jesus existing, and many will be secular, anyway. I would also counter that polls have Americans at 63 percent Christian, and I think whites are only 58 to 61 percent Christian. Germany has more historians & scholars per capital than anywhere else (except perhaps Israel), and I think Germany has been generally a liberal Christian (theologically liberal) country since World War 2, with alot of educated secular individuals. You don't really make your case that methods are flawed, and I mean you don't make it at all
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 525 by Percy, posted 04-11-2024 8:44 PM | | Percy has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 536 by Percy, posted 04-12-2024 7:25 AM | | LamarkNewAge has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 6.1
|
Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
How is that relevant? I own lots of books. I have four bibles. I have copies of the Communist Manifesto and Wealth of Nations.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
LamarkNewAge
Member Posts: 2497 Joined: 12-22-2015
|
Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
Much more relevant than Percy making jokes about Jewish historians being single. I don't hold a grudge against you, even if you own an ebook on sexting. But the Richard Carrier issue is relevant. I started this exchange because you were running your mouth on Carriers application of statistics. But you did not apply anything Carrier tried to teach you.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 527 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2024 9:06 PM | | Theodoric has replied |
|
LamarkNewAge
Member Posts: 2497 Joined: 12-22-2015
|
|
|
Message 529 of 563 (917621)
04-11-2024 9:52 PM
|
|
|
Why I feel Percy could be very wrong about Jesus Historians
I will use my personal observations and discussions as an example. I have had 30+ minute conversations, in my younger life, with (for example) a U.S. congressman. We had a good conversation on Porphyry the Canaanite, the founder of Neoplatonism, and Julian the Apostate. It was a conversation which carried over weeks, and 3 encounters. The historian R Joseph Hoffman came up, in our conversations. An influential atheist historian, who is a great scholar of the first four centuries of the Christian period. I mentioned his 1984 book on Marcion earlier. Hoffman is still writing and translating. I think he was a Jesus Myth believer in the 1990s, and possibly earlier. Perhaps only briefly. Hoffman is a critic of Jesus Mythic work now, but he has been a vocal atheist all along the way
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 531 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2024 10:38 PM | | LamarkNewAge has replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 6.1
|
Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
I just went through all my posts here and I mentioned Bayesian statistics once and that was downplaying it. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 6.1
|
Re: Why I feel Percy could be very wrong about Jesus Historians
Still no evidence I see.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
LamarkNewAge
Member Posts: 2497 Joined: 12-22-2015
|
|
|
Message 532 of 563 (917624)
04-11-2024 10:52 PM
|
Reply to: Message 531 by Theodoric
04-11-2024 10:38 PM
|
|
Re: Why I feel Percy could be very wrong about Jesus Historians
Evidence for what? Honestly. Wtf?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 531 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2024 10:38 PM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
LamarkNewAge
Member Posts: 2497 Joined: 12-22-2015
|
|
|
Message 533 of 563 (917625)
04-11-2024 10:55 PM
|
Reply to: Message 530 by Theodoric
04-11-2024 10:37 PM
|
|
Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
You were saying Carrier was a "hell of a scholar", and you were playing up his statistical analysis techniques. How the fuck can you say you were downplaying it?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 530 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2024 10:37 PM | | Theodoric has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 534 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2024 11:34 PM | | LamarkNewAge has replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 6.1
|
Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
I started this exchange because you were running your mouth on Carriers application of statistics. So this is a lie? How does this get to evidence that there was a historical Jesus. Tell you what. I am going to stop feeding the troll. Good day, Sir.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
|
LamarkNewAge
Member Posts: 2497 Joined: 12-22-2015
|
|
|
Message 535 of 563 (917627)
04-11-2024 11:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 534 by Theodoric
04-11-2024 11:34 PM
|
|
Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
The fucking post title has Carrier using the word "evidence". Just not particularly strong evidence, to Carrier. You did not tell us this when I bought up Romans 1:1-4. You just kept saying that I had no evidence. Years ago, I showed Robert M Price admitting to "strong" evidence in another area. You kept saying that I had no evidence. You are the troll with one trillion disruptive posts.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 534 by Theodoric, posted 04-11-2024 11:34 PM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22953 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 6.9
(2)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Just to be clear when I lament close-mindedness and hostility to science
LamarkNewAge in Message 526 writes: I assume you feel like the historians are a group that is disproportionately white, and specifically Christian and Jewish. Not historians but Biblical and Quranic (the Quran mentions Jesus) scholars. I've made no assumptions about race.
You don't really make your case that methods are flawed, and I mean you don't make it at all I never mentioned methods. It's their conclusions I think are wrong. What's important is not what the consensus of religious scholars think but the evidence upon which their thinking is based. --Percy
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22953 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 6.9
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
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
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 6.1
|
|
|
Message 538 of 563 (917631)
04-12-2024 8:24 AM
|
Reply to: Message 537 by Percy
04-12-2024 7:48 AM
|
|
Troll alert
Hard to tell if trolling, delusion, mental illness or defect. Either way it is impossible to have a conversation that is this disjointed. "The sky is blue" "You stated water is not blue?" WTF? Done with this joker.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up, why would you have to lie?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 537 by Percy, posted 04-12-2024 7:48 AM | | Percy has not replied |
|
LamarkNewAge
Member Posts: 2497 Joined: 12-22-2015
|
|
|
Message 539 of 563 (917632)
04-12-2024 8:26 AM
|
Reply to: Message 537 by Percy
04-12-2024 7:48 AM
|
|
Re: Richard Carrier: “I still counted Romans 1:3 as evidence for historicity!”
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. 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.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 537 by Percy, posted 04-12-2024 7:48 AM | | Percy has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 540 by Percy, posted 04-12-2024 8:41 AM | | LamarkNewAge has replied |
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22953 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 6.9
|
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
|
™ Version 4.2