RE: So...guess I'm the new guy
August 31, 2012 at 1:03 pm
(This post was last modified: August 31, 2012 at 1:04 pm by Cyberman.)
(August 31, 2012 at 2:02 am)idunno Wrote: What would qualify as evidence in that discussion? I should of asked before.
(Please, it's "should have" or "should've"; the abuse of the word "of" in those sentence constructions sets my teeth on edge!)
Evidence would depend on whatever is being claimed or proposed, but generally and especially when we're discussing claims of historicity, evidence would be anything that maps onto reality. Any kind of logical gymnastics intended to define the conclusion into existence might be a fun exercise but unless it corrrespnds in some way to reality, it can't be considered as evidence for anything. If this is what Ehrman is trying to do then he is either being incredibly, and sorry to say say, typically dishonest or else he's so desperate to cling onto his delusions about history that he'll grab hold of any straw in the hope it'll carry the weight.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
