RE: Mary's 10 Year Pregnancy!
September 18, 2013 at 10:56 pm
(This post was last modified: September 18, 2013 at 11:00 pm by DeistPaladin.)
(September 18, 2013 at 9:24 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: We’re not talking about Evolution. We’re talking about historical facts and your rejection of them in the face of overwhelming scholarly consensus to the contrary on the matter.Show me the facts that convinces the scholars then.
EDIT TO ADD: And nice dodge, by the way. I think we both know why.
Quote:Do you know why even Bart Ehrman cites scriptures in order to justify Jesus’ existence? Because he knows that the New Testament is the best attested works we have from antiquity and it is absurd to rule out using it in reference to Jesus.Maybe someday we'll live in a truly rational world where referring to religious mythology as "historical documents" will get you laughed out of the room.
Do historians like Ehrman also consider the Iliad to be a historical document or are Christian myths being given special treatment?
Quote:To say that a historian is not allowed to reference Christian writings to establish the existence of Jesus is like saying we cannot reference Tacitus and Suetonius in order to establish facts about ancient Rome simply because they were Roman.The problem is not one of association. The problem is one of the nature of the source material. Mythology isn't history.
Quote:Ehrman has no motive whatsoever to believe Jesus existed and yet he laughs at people like you, why is that?I'm not concerned who is laughing at whom. I'm concerned with the facts. Show me the facts and I will believe.
Quote:I used to believe you were fairly open-minded, but after learning that you ascribe to the Jesus Myth, I now know you’re not.What you believe about me or don't believe is not important. What can you prove?
Quote:Even someone as biased as Richard Dawkins admits that Jesus existed.Richard Dawkins can believe whatever he wants. If he wants to convince others, he needs to provide reasons.
I don't believe in evolution because Richard Dawkins says so. I accept evolution because of the evidence.
Quote:It doesn’t matter; you’re appealing to the testimony on experts with one but rejecting the testimony of experts on the other. It’s inconsistent.
No, it's not and I've already explained why.
Quote:The same evidence that convinces them that other historical figures existed- just more of it, ancient manuscripts.
What manuscripts?
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
