Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-10-2015, 01:10 PM
RE: Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 01:07 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(01-10-2015 01:00 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Well, we're not particularly arguing that Jim Jones didn't exists are we?

So yea, Jesus, an early cult leader, who convinced his flock that he was the messiah, and perhaps God, is fine as well. An early Jim Jones.

A plausible early cult leader that doesn't corroborate any claims of the validity of the bible or New Testament in any way.

Even if the NT authors based their character on a cult leader, their fiction doesn't become fact.

The validity of what? Are you talking about the supernatural, miraculous shit ascribed to Jesus, and validity of his claim to divinity and messiahship?

"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
01-10-2015, 01:13 PM
Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 01:10 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-10-2015 01:07 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  A plausible early cult leader that doesn't corroborate any claims of the validity of the bible or New Testament in any way.

Even if the NT authors based their character on a cult leader, their fiction doesn't become fact.

The validity of what? Are you talking about the supernatural, miraculous shit ascribed to Jesus, and validity of his claim to divinity and messiahship?

THE BIBLE OR NEW TESTAMENT IN ANY WAY.

I mean, I wrote that in the post you're replying to 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
01-10-2015, 01:22 PM
RE: Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 01:13 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(01-10-2015 01:10 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  The validity of what? Are you talking about the supernatural, miraculous shit ascribed to Jesus, and validity of his claim to divinity and messiahship?

THE BIBLE OR NEW TESTAMENT IN ANY WAY.

I mean, I wrote that in the post you're replying to Drinking Beverage

So you're saying secular historians like Ehrman can't use the Gospels, or the NT writings in support of the existence of a Jesus, absent of all his miraculous and supernatural abilities?

You basically want to claim that historians shouldn't be able to use the the New Testament sources to recreate what happened in first century Jerusalem, to suggest what gave rise to the Christian movement, and the various beliefs, and writings associated with it?

"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
01-10-2015, 01:26 PM
Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 01:22 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-10-2015 01:13 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  THE BIBLE OR NEW TESTAMENT IN ANY WAY.

I mean, I wrote that in the post you're replying to Drinking Beverage

So you're saying secular historians like Ehrman can't use the Gospels, or the NT writings in support of the existence of a Jesus, absent of all his miraculous and supernatural abilities?

You basically want to claim that historians shouldn't be able to use the the New Testament sources to recreate what happened in first century Jerusalem, to suggest what gave rise to the Christian movement, and the various beliefs, and writings associated with it?

What part of "a guy named Yeshua existing doesn't corroborate any biblical or New Testament stories" do you not understand?

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
01-10-2015, 01:42 PM (This post was last modified: 01-10-2015 01:49 PM by Tomasia.)
RE: Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 01:26 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(01-10-2015 01:22 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  So you're saying secular historians like Ehrman can't use the Gospels, or the NT writings in support of the existence of a Jesus, absent of all his miraculous and supernatural abilities?

You basically want to claim that historians shouldn't be able to use the the New Testament sources to recreate what happened in first century Jerusalem, to suggest what gave rise to the Christian movement, and the various beliefs, and writings associated with it?

What part of "a guy named Yeshua existing doesn't corroborate any biblical or New Testament stories" do you not understand?


So historians who don't believe Jesus was the son of God, the messiah, performed miracles, resurrected etc... still hold that he went around preaching a lot of what's captured in the Gospels, was an apocalyptic preacher, going around preaching about the kingdom of God, and was eventually strung up by the Romans, under Pontius Pilate. Pretty much this entire picture is derived by the New Testament writings.

And in your opinion they should be prohibited from doing this?

"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
01-10-2015, 02:06 PM
RE: Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 11:48 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(30-09-2015 04:31 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  Absence of evidence IS evidence of absence. Until it can be proven to be true, its false and must be assumed to be so.

Argument from Silence sounds an awful lot like a pitiful way of trying to remove themselves from the burden of proof.

And trying to exclude the greco-roman biographies, commonly referred to as the gospel, and NT sources, such as accounts those who met his discloses and brother, to be excluded as evidence, is just silly.

To account for the Christian movement, history, writing, etc... without a historical Jesus, would require an explanation that would out maneuver the best of conspiracy theory. I don't mind that there's number of atheists who believe this is the case, but it just shows that creationist type mentality exist among supposed rationalist just the same as the folks they deride.

As has been pointed out to you, MANY MANY times before, the gospels are NOT Greco-Roman "biographies".

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/...spels.html

Wiki :
"Argument from ignorance (Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance stands for "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there is insufficient investigation and therefore insufficient information to prove the proposition satisfactorily to be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,
1.true
2.false
3.unknown between true or false
4.being unknowable (among the first three).[1]

In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used in an attempt to shift the burden of proof."

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
01-10-2015, 02:08 PM
RE: Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 01:42 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-10-2015 01:26 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  What part of "a guy named Yeshua existing doesn't corroborate any biblical or New Testament stories" do you not understand?


So historians who don't believe Jesus was the son of God, the messiah, performed miracles, resurrected etc... still hold that he went around preaching a lot of what's captured in the Gospels, was an apocalyptic preacher, going around preaching about the kingdom of God, and was eventually strung up by the Romans, under Pontius Pilate. Pretty much this entire picture is derived by the New Testament writings.

And in your opinion they should be prohibited from doing this?

Provide us a complete list of these "historians" of which you speak, what they believe, and how you know what they believe.

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
01-10-2015, 02:12 PM
Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 01:42 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(01-10-2015 01:26 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  What part of "a guy named Yeshua existing doesn't corroborate any biblical or New Testament stories" do you not understand?


So historians who don't believe Jesus was the son of God, the messiah, performed miracles, resurrected etc... still hold that he went around preaching a lot of what's captured in the Gospels, was an apocalyptic preacher, going around preaching about the kingdom of God, and was eventually strung up by the Romans, under Pontius Pilate. Pretty much this entire picture is derived by the New Testament writings.

And in your opinion they should be prohibited from doing this?

You. Are. Too. Stupid. To. Interact. With.

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
01-10-2015, 02:27 PM
RE: Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
(01-10-2015 02:12 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(01-10-2015 01:42 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  So historians who don't believe Jesus was the son of God, the messiah, performed miracles, resurrected etc... still hold that he went around preaching a lot of what's captured in the Gospels, was an apocalyptic preacher, going around preaching about the kingdom of God, and was eventually strung up by the Romans, under Pontius Pilate. Pretty much this entire picture is derived by the New Testament writings.

And in your opinion they should be prohibited from doing this?

You. Are. Too. Stupid. To. Interact. With.

Yea, says the guy who thinks the Gospels, the NT Writings, the early Christian cult, are better explained by a non-existing Jesus.

But run along, and don't forget your tinfoil hat.

"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
01-10-2015, 02:29 PM
RE: Argument from Ignorance vs. Argument from Silence
All I know is that if the mythical yeshua ever comes up, Tomasia always argues against it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Iñigo's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: