About the Testimonium Flavium
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-06-2016, 08:51 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 08:35 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Other than ONE assertion, you have IN NO WAY demonstrated or PROVEN that there even is a "predominant" view.

No, I quoted and referenced a variety of scholars in that particular area, that stated what the predominant views on the topic are. If we assume that these scholars are familiar with the scholarship, then their assessments hold as valid, and any reasonable person can conclude that these assessments are likely valid.

To believe otherwise, is to suggest that scholars in a particular are, are not aware of what the predominant views of scholarship in that area are.


Quote:You failed. You also have NEVER once taken on any one particular argument of Carrier's or Price's and shown exactly what's wrong with them.

Except I have, I've addressed argument such as Paul and quasi-Paul not believing in a historical Jesus, and even addressed those that highlighted a variety of claims from Carrier himself. After addressing them it appears those initially defending to the contrary disappeared.

You just don't pay attention or keep up.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2016, 08:57 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 08:44 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-06-2016 08:05 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  That is not what I have said or insinuated, hence why I pointed out that it is a straw man.

If thats not what you’re insinuating than you don’t have any real argument to present.

Quote:As I have said (in multiple examples) it is one thing for an expert to acknowledge the views and opinions they see as representative of their field, it is another entirely to make the claim that they know what the majority of these experts believe.

Perhaps you need to demonstrate the nuance between a scholar being able to acknowledge the predominant views of their representative field, by familiarity with the scholarship in that area, and the scholar knowing what those views are.

Perhaps you can elaborate on the difference between them being able to acknowledge this based on familiarity with the scholarship in that area, and them knowing it. The difference between acknowledging something is true, and knowing something is true.

Quote:aka, it doesn't fit my religious worldview

Are you personally familiar with the contrary views to the passage regarding James are? Can you defend the contrary position? Or are you particularally ignorant on the topic, and can’t contribute much of anything one way or the other regarding this particular point?

If you believe you do have a solid understanding of the topic, to gauge whether the arguments for against a position are valid or not, then please tell me which view you want to defend, that the James passage is an interpolation, that the Jesus referred to in there was the high priest Yeshua` ben Damn?

My guess is that you don’t understand the argument one way or the other, that folks might as well be speaking a different language when discussing the topic, hence the reason you lack an actual position here to defend.

"If thats not what you’re insinuating than you don’t have any real argument to present."

If you don't understand the criticisms, there is no argument you will ever get.

"Perhaps you need to demonstrate the nuance between a scholar being able to acknowledge the predominant views of their representative field, by familiarity with the scholarship in that area, and the scholar knowing what those views are. "

Factual observation: Belief X in my field of study is held by many scholars
Bullshit conjecture: Belief X is the dominant opinion of scholars in my field

You take a cherry-picked quote and extrapolate the latter from it. YOU assume that because X is a view in a field, and one expert in that field gives their opinion of it with respect to all the other experts in that field, that it is "proof" of its near universal acceptance.

"Perhaps you can elaborate on the difference between them being able to acknowledge this based on familiarity with the scholarship in that area, and them knowing it. The difference between acknowledging something is true, and knowing something is true. "

It should be pretty fucking straightforward and simple.

X is a view/opinion/belief in a given field that has been widely researched and published. (this would be very easy to track down and verify through scanning and reading of the literature)

X is is almost universally accepted among experts in a field. (unless this person has actual census data to demonstrate this, it is bullshit conjecture. One person can not speak for the opinions of others. This is why, as I have pointed out numerous times, people actually take censuses of opinions to assess what the views of groups are instead of extrapolating from anecdotes.)

"Are you personally familiar with the contrary views to the passage regarding James are? Can you defend the contrary position? Or are you particularally ignorant on the topic, and can’t contribute much of anything one way or the other regarding this particular point?

If you believe you do have a solid understanding of the topic, to gauge whether the arguments for against a position are valid or not, then please tell me which view you want to defend, that the James passage is an interpolation, that the Jesus referred to in there was the high priest Yeshua` ben Damn?

My guess is that you don’t understand the argument one way or the other, that folks might as well be speaking a different language when discussing the topic, hence the reason you lack an actual position here to defend."


And you still continue to dodge the points I am making. Have I ever claimed to be a scholar on this subject? Have I even argued the specifics of either side, or given an indication that I am what I would consider to be well versed on this specific subject? No and No. But others on here who are more well versed than I have pointed out the folly in your fallacies. I have pointed out the error in your presumptions, the substance behind your opinion is not something I have personally gone after, I leave that to Bucky or GWG.




Once again, YOU fail to realize the error in your over-generalizations about entire groups of people. In your bias, you then ignore any opinions contra to your own dogma because you don't find them "convincing enough" to penetrate your biases. That brainwashing was thorough. Drinking Beverage

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
02-06-2016, 08:59 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 08:51 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-06-2016 08:35 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Other than ONE assertion, you have IN NO WAY demonstrated or PROVEN that there even is a "predominant" view.

No, I quoted and referenced a variety of scholars in that particular area, that stated what the predominant views on the topic are. If we assume that these scholars are familiar with the scholarship, then their assessments hold as valid, and any reasonable person can conclude that these assessments are likely valid.

To believe otherwise, is to suggest that scholars in a particular are, are not aware of what the predominant views of scholarship in that area are.


Quote:You failed. You also have NEVER once taken on any one particular argument of Carrier's or Price's and shown exactly what's wrong with them.

Except I have, I've addressed argument such as Paul and quasi-Paul not believing in a historical Jesus, and even addressed those that highlighted a variety of claims from Carrier himself. After addressing them it appears those initially defending to the contrary disappeared.

You just don't pay attention or keep up.

Someone sounds desperate and defensive because their bullshit is being called out Drinking Beverage

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2016, 09:00 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 08:51 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  No, I quoted and referenced a variety of scholars in that particular area, that stated what the predominant views on the topic are. If we assume that these scholars are familiar with the scholarship, then their assessments hold as valid, and any reasonable person can conclude that these assessments are likely valid.

Link me to them. I saw ONE.

Quote:To believe otherwise, is to suggest that scholars in a particular are, are not aware of what the predominant views of scholarship in that area are.

Or are biased themselves, just as you are.

Quote:Except I have, I've addressed argument such as Paul and quasi-Paul not believing in a historical Jesus, and even addressed those that highlighted a variety of claims from Carrier himself. After addressing them it appears those initially defending to the contrary disappeared.

Where ? Then you can just copy them, or link me to them.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-06-2016, 09:18 AM (This post was last modified: 02-06-2016 09:24 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 09:00 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(02-06-2016 08:51 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  No, I quoted and referenced a variety of scholars in that particular area, that stated what the predominant views on the topic are. If we assume that these scholars are familiar with the scholarship, then their assessments hold as valid, and any reasonable person can conclude that these assessments are likely valid.

Link me to them. I saw ONE.

No, you can just as easily go through the thread and find the post where I first mentioned this, in fact it was in response to you, from what I remember.


Quote:
Quote:To believe otherwise, is to suggest that scholars in a particular are, are not aware of what the predominant views of scholarship in that area are.

Or are biased themselves, just as you are.

Yes, it's NT scholars, Josephus scholars, that are bias, not the mythicist. It's the scholars who recognize that the Testinomium is an interpolation, but not the James passage that are biased. Clearly it's not because the alternative arguments are unconvincing, but because they're biased against them. Just like scientist are biased again the earth being a few thousand years old.

Clearly the Jewish, non-christian scholar I quoted as well, is bias for Jesus, I mean why else would he state that the passage regarding James in near universally accepted as authentic.

Let's ask a question, is the argument for interpolation in the James passage, as strong as the argument for interpolation in the Testimonium Flavium, or would you consider it a considerably weaker case?

Quote:Where ? Then you can just copy them, or link me to them.

I'm not going through the thread again just to link post to you, that you ignored. You do that. If you're too lazy to do it yourself, than so am I.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2016, 09:23 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 09:18 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  No, you can just as easily go through the thread and find the post where I first mentioned this, in fact it was in response to you, from what I remember.

So you never did it. I get it.


Quote:Yes, it's NT scholars, Josephus scholars, that are bias, not the mythicist. It's the scholars who recognize that the Testinomium is an interpolation, but not the James passage that are biased. Clearly it's not because the alternative arguments are unconvincing, but because they're biased against them. Just like scientist are biased again the earth being a few thousand years old.

There are all sorts of NT scholars who also don't buy the historicity. just proves you are in this WAY WAY over your head. Assertion, per your usual, and no support. Scientists are "biased"about nothing. More proof you don't know anything about science. They have EVIDENCE/

Quote:I'm not going through the thread again just to link post to you, that you ignored. You do that. If you're too lazy to do it yourself, than so am I.

IF you have done any sort of major debunking, you would be able to link it. You're just lying.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-06-2016, 09:32 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 09:18 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-06-2016 09:00 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Link me to them. I saw ONE.

No, you can just as easily go through the thread and find the post where I first mentioned this, in fact it was in response to you, from what I remember.


Quote:Or are biased themselves, just as you are.

Yes, it's NT scholars, Josephus scholars, that are bias, not the mythicist. It's the scholars who recognize that the Testinomium is an interpolation, but not the James passage that are biased. Clearly it's not because the alternative arguments are unconvincing, but because they're biased against them. Just like scientist are biased again the earth being a few thousand years old.

Clearly the Jewish, non-christian scholar I quoted as well, is bias for Jesus, I mean why else would he state that the passage regarding James in near universally accepted as authentic.

Let's ask a question, is the argument for interpolation in the James passage, as strong as the argument for interpolation in the Testimonium Flavium, or would you consider it a considerably weaker case?

Quote:Where ? Then you can just copy them, or link me to them.

I'm not going through the thread again just to link post to you, that you ignored. You do that. If you're too lazy to do it yourself, than so am I.

Scientists are biased against the Earth being a few thousand years old? Do you even know how the age of the earth is determined or the preponderance of evidence for it? Or that scientists used to believe the earth was only thousands of years old and would go back to believing that if there were even a shred of evidence to corroborate that belief?

Your ignorance of science has been demonstrated before, but it is nice of you to offer up a reminder of it.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
02-06-2016, 09:36 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 09:23 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  So you never did it. I get it.

No I did it, anyone who wants to look through the thread can see that I did.


Quote:There are all sorts of NT scholars who also don't buy the historicity. just proves you are in this WAY WAY over your head.

Judging that primarily the same two names (Carrier, Price) get cited over and over again, it appears they're in short stock.

But we can just as well say that there are all sorts of scientists who support ID, and creationism.

Quote:IF you have done any sort of major debunking, you would be able to link it. You're just lying.

Those who care to look through the thread can gauge whether I'm lying about this or not, as well as those who raised those points which I addressed.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2016, 09:39 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 09:32 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Scientists are biased against the Earth being a few thousand years old?

Yes, just as Jewish scholars, teaching at Jewish Universities, are biased in regards to deeming the James passage as authentic.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-06-2016, 09:42 AM
RE: About the Testimonium Flavium
(02-06-2016 09:36 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(02-06-2016 09:23 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  So you never did it. I get it.

No I did it, anyone who wants to look through the thread can see that I did.


Quote:There are all sorts of NT scholars who also don't buy the historicity. just proves you are in this WAY WAY over your head.

Judging that primarily the same two names get cited over and over again, it appears they're in short stock.

But we just as well say that there are all sorts of scientists who support ID, and creationism.

Quote:IF you have done any sort of major debunking, you would be able to link it. You're just lying.

Those who care to look through the thread can gauge whether I'm lying about this or not, as well as those who raised those points which I addressed.

Your example of ID and creationism (actually it's a bastardisation of my example) is laughable.

We can actually cite numbers through a census of scientists to demonstrate the views of the scientific community on evolution, as well as consensus statements from scientific organizations that reflect the views of its members:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/201...arwin-day/

http://ncse.com/news/2009/07/views-evolu...sts-004904

https://www.aclu.org/what-scientific-com...ent-design

Not to mention the preponderance of evidence for evolution and the dearth of evidence for ID/creationism.


Your example fails on many levels.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: