RE: which version of christianity is correct?
March 11, 2020 at 5:23 pm
(This post was last modified: March 11, 2020 at 5:24 pm by Simon Moon.)
(March 10, 2020 at 3:39 pm)Drich Wrote:(March 9, 2020 at 7:07 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: This is laughable, considering you base your theistic belief off texts, written decades or more after the alleged events, by anonymous authors, that were not eyewitnesses. Your beliefs don't quite even rise to the level of speculation. Ehrman's research, is based on the same texts as you believe, plus much more.
That is not what is going on here, at all.
I do not demand 'proof' for any claim, just evidence, that provides warrant to support the claim. And there is no amount of textual evidence alone, that is enough (for critical and rational thinking, and correct application of skepticism) to support any supernatural claims. Including: zombies rising from their graves and entering Jerusalem, people living in fish for several days, talking serpents, demons living in pigs, etc, etc,
The fact that you are convinced that texts that have stories about these, are relating true events, doesn't say anything about Ehrman being a snake oil salesman, it speaks to your gullibility. Your standards of evidence is lower for your chosen theology, than it is for other supernatural claims.
The existence of an itinerant, messianic rabbi named Yeshua, existing in 1st century Palestine, is a perfectly acceptable position, and one that Ehrman supports. He agrees with all the scholarship with regards to this position. He is not outside the mainstream scholarship on this at all. It's the supernatural claims where he happens not to be as credulous and gullible as you are.
glob...
proof
/pro͞of/
[/url]Learn to pronounce
[url=https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS743US744&sxsrf=ALeKk00AdZMMJsr6k_DoDz4bpmh5VRlt4w:1583869079330&q=how+to+pronounce+proof&stick=H4sIAAAAAAAAAOMIfcRozi3w8sc9YSm9SWtOXmPU4OINKMrPK81LzkwsyczPExLkYglJLcoV4pRi52ItKMrPT7NiUWJKzeNZxCqWkV-uUJKvABTNywfqSFUAywMAitty_FUAAAA&pron_lang=en&pron_country=us&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjghuCO1JDoAhWlmuAKHTASC6kQ3eEDMAB6BAgEEAQ]
noun
- 1.
evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.
Similar:
evidence
verification
corroboration
authentication
asking for proof IS IN FACT ASKING FOR EVIDENCE!!!
Sorry Dritch, but when I am having discussions or debates, I avoid colloquial definitions. It helps to avoid equivocation fallacies, as theists are known to use (Kalam cosmological argument; I'm looking at you).
Proof has a very specific definition when discussing philosophy and math.
With regards to epistemology and existential claims, we are not looking for proofs, only good standards of evidence that warrants acceptance for the claim under discussion.
But even if we use your definition of proof (meaning the same as evidence), that doesn't help the point you were attempting to make anyway. The evidence I am looking for, is the evidence that supports all the supernatural claims being made in the Bible.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
