Jesus historicity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-11-2014, 11:34 PM
RE: Jesus historicity
No, citing sources and precedence has merit because it's evidence. Citing another person's remark is lazy.

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2014, 11:44 PM
RE: Jesus historicity
(22-11-2014 11:34 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  No, citing sources and precedence has merit because it's evidence. Citing another person's remark is lazy.


Lazy! I had to research them just as much to make my point. Lol.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2014, 11:47 PM
RE: Jesus historicity
Exactly.

Anyway, welcome to the forum.

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-11-2014, 11:48 PM
RE: Jesus historicity
(22-11-2014 11:19 PM)Luckyluciano Wrote:  
(22-11-2014 10:59 PM)Full Circle Wrote:  Censorship feeds the dirty mind more than the four-letter word itself.
~Dick Cavett


You can call it censorship, I'll call it having respect for others. My wife was reading this thread along with me in the beginning until she witnessed the attacks and profanity and immediately was no longer interested.

Respect is earned. Drinking Beverage

If you're so easily offended, might I make some purchasing recommendations?

[Image: breathable-chest-waders-clothes-for-fishing.jpg]

[Image: toxic_baby_shampoo.jpg]

[Image: original_CW.jpg?16%2F12%2F2011+3%3A55%3A01+PM]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like EvolutionKills's post
23-11-2014, 07:37 AM
RE: Jesus historicity
(22-11-2014 11:29 PM)Luckyluciano Wrote:  
(22-11-2014 11:09 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  This is an atheist forum, right? I hate it when people use quotes to make a point; it just tells me you can't come up with something original or you can't think for yourself.

Yes right, this is an atheist forum. Too bad you hate it when people use quotes. You must cringe every time someone posts a link as supposed evidence to prove their point. Does that mean they are not original and can't think for themselves? I don't see much of a difference with what I did really. I'm just proviiding evidence others dislike locker room style profanity as I do.

There's an apt word for you (and your wife):

prig
noun /prɪɡ/ disapproving
› a person who obeys the rules of correct behaviour and considers himself or herself to be morally better than other people

>A self-righteously moralistic person who behaves as if they are superior to others
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Machias's post
23-11-2014, 08:38 AM
RE: Jesus historicity
(22-11-2014 11:44 PM)Luckyluciano Wrote:  
(22-11-2014 11:34 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  No, citing sources and precedence has merit because it's evidence. Citing another person's remark is lazy.


Lazy! I had to research them just as much to make my point. Lol.

I love good quotes as much as the next guy so keep them coming.
The fact that you can find a quote to uphold or refute a position, especially off the top of your head, means you've taken the time read. Thumbsup

Now, as far as profanity and colorful language on this forum "Jo, you need to accept that we are going to lose, and lose big." from A Few Good Men.

Legislating speech is like legislating morality, everyone has a different definition of what constitutes each and thereby making it near impossible to have a standard. As for me I prefer to use it sparingly, I find that in real life it packs a much greater punch when used infrequently. However who am I to tell anyone here what they can or can't say? The best you can do is ignore it or find another place where language is strictly moderated.

At this point is where I say to you...(don't click here, it'll only upset you...really don't click on the spoiler...I beg you don't...)
Now go fuck off Big Grin

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Full Circle's post
23-11-2014, 09:23 AM
RE: Jesus historicity
(22-11-2014 06:52 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The trouble is, pretty much the only people who care or study the "Historicity of Jesus" at all, are religious people who are BOUND to say that he existed, (have an inherent conflict of interest, because they are employed by religious institutions who would FIRE them if they said otherwise).

Ah yes, the logic of creationism 101:

The trouble is, pretty much the only people who care or study the "Theory of Evolution" at all, are godless heathens who are BOUND to say that it is true, (have an inherent conflict of interest, because they are employed by secular institutions who would FIRE them if they said otherwise).

Or to quote the wikipedia summary of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed:

"The film contends that the mainstream science establishment suppresses academics who believe they see evidence of intelligent design in nature and who criticize evidence supporting Darwinian evolution and the modern evolutionary synthesis as a "scientific conspiracy to keep God out of the nation's laboratories and classrooms."

Creationist and Mythicist, and Ahistoricist think their views are rejected by academia as a whole, because of a conspiracy against them, when in fact they are rejected because their claims and beliefs are just plain stupid. But I would love, and even support a Kickstarter for atheists to create a documentary in support of the mainstream suppression of academics who believe that Jesus did not exists, for no other reason other than for a good laugh.

Quote:Dr. Richard Carrier IS a "serious scholar" with serious POINTS to rebut. No one ever rebuts his POINTS.

Of course they do. Bart Ehrman wrote an entire book refuting the beliefs of folks such as Carrier, and we can find a plethora or sources taking apart each and every aspect of Carrier's claims online, some good, some excellent, and some not so good. In fact I've personally refuted many of his claims as well, when he entered in a debate about historicity on Jerry Coyne's Website.

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/...-of-jesus/

It has been several months, and he has yet to respond to the numerous objections raised by me regarding his claims.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2014, 10:39 AM
RE: Jesus historicity
I rub elbows with a few scientists on an ongoing basis and all of them give each other crap about their "findings" and hypotheses until proven to be correct. This doesn't just happen to those who in some way study evolution but in all the sciences.

The reason we don't hear about creationists throwing daily hissy fits at say researchers in the field of chemistry or animal husbandry is that these fields don't upset their apple cart as much as evolutionary findings do.

I am pretty certain that if tomorrow a geologist found evidence of a land bridge between Asia and Europe that disappeared within the last 4000 years he'd be given a Nobel Prize. Such is the quest for verifiable and quantifiable evidence and knowledge. So while you can challenge that scientists scoff at anything outside the status quo I say that is their professional duty UNTIL proven otherwise.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2014, 02:29 PM
RE: Jesus historicity
(23-11-2014 08:38 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  
(22-11-2014 11:44 PM)Luckyluciano Wrote:  Lazy! I had to research them just as much to make my point. Lol.

I love good quotes as much as the next guy so keep them coming.
The fact that you can find a quote to uphold or refute a position, especially off the top of your head, means you've taken the time read. Thumbsup

Now, as far as profanity and colorful language on this forum "Jo, you need to accept that we are going to lose, and lose big." from A Few Good Men.

Legislating speech is like legislating morality, everyone has a different definition of what constitutes each and thereby making it near impossible to have a standard. As for me I prefer to use it sparingly, I find that in real life it packs a much greater punch when used infrequently. However who am I to tell anyone here what they can or can't say? The best you can do is ignore it or find another place where language is strictly moderated.

At this point is where I say to you...(don't click here, it'll only upset you...really don't click on the spoiler...I beg you don't...)
Now go fuck off Big Grin


Now here is an interesting question.....

Do you think most of those here who regularly resort to profanity and cry freedom of speech, then wailing against censorship, use the same profanity culturally in their day today lives among those they do not know and have never met, or do they only do so here under the safety of Anonymity.......
through their all powerfully plastic keyboard?

"If you wouldn't write it and sign it, don't say it." - Earl Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-11-2014, 03:00 PM
RE: Jesus historicity
(23-11-2014 02:29 PM)Luckyluciano Wrote:  
(23-11-2014 08:38 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  I love good quotes as much as the next guy so keep them coming.
The fact that you can find a quote to uphold or refute a position, especially off the top of your head, means you've taken the time read. Thumbsup

Now, as far as profanity and colorful language on this forum "Jo, you need to accept that we are going to lose, and lose big." from A Few Good Men.

Legislating speech is like legislating morality, everyone has a different definition of what constitutes each and thereby making it near impossible to have a standard. As for me I prefer to use it sparingly, I find that in real life it packs a much greater punch when used infrequently. However who am I to tell anyone here what they can or can't say? The best you can do is ignore it or find another place where language is strictly moderated.

At this point is where I say to you...(don't click here, it'll only upset you...really don't click on the spoiler...I beg you don't...)
Now go fuck off Big Grin


Now here is an interesting question.....

Do you think most of those here who regularly resort to profanity and cry freedom of speech, then wailing against censorship, use the same profanity culturally in their day today lives among those they do not know and have never met, or do they only do so here under the safety of Anonymity.......
through their all powerfully plastic keyboard?

"If you wouldn't write it and sign it, don't say it." - Earl Wilson

I don't think this place is going to change to suit you. Facepalm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Machias's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: