Materialist Bias?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-12-2013, 03:53 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 03:33 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(30-12-2013 03:08 PM)Chas Wrote:  These are not first-hand accounts. The authors are not witnesses of the alleged events. It is hearsay.
Much of it is, but it's not certain that it all is hearsay as you assert. And so what if it is? Much, possibly most, of what we think we know was learned through hearsay.
Well that certainly sounds unreliableBig Grin
You know what hearsay is, don't you?

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-12-2013, 04:00 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 03:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  They are uncorroborated
The NT books largely corroborate each other. The Bible is a collection you know.
Quote:hearsay.
As noted above:
- you haven't shown that it's all hearsay, and
- you haven't explained why hearsay is necessarily unreliable.

Josephus wasn't a witness to Quirinius' governorship. What he wrote was hearsay. I don't recall you arguing that he therefore carried no weight on the subject.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-12-2013, 04:07 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 04:00 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(30-12-2013 03:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  They are uncorroborated
The NT books largely corroborate each other. The Bible is a collection you know.


Circular "reasoning" is circular.

[Image: break-the-cycle.jpg]

[Image: circular-reasoning.png]

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Taqiyya Mockingbird's post
30-12-2013, 04:47 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 08:47 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
Quote:What would it take for you to believe it?
You could fly it in front of me.

So, you feel it's reasonable for me to be skeptical of any particular god until he physically reveals himself to me? I feel this is fair.


(30-12-2013 12:46 PM)alpha male Wrote:  OK. It demonstrates an important point - author intent. Sometimes Jesus is compared to IPU, FSM or Harry potter. The IMO most glaring difference is that the authors of the latter three didn't intend for people to believe these were actual beings, while the authors of the NT did.

So, given that Luke had an agenda, and makes a bunch of claims he can't possibly back up (I've never seen this god), why should I take him seriously? His goal is to convince people of Jesus' existence, which gives him reason to fudge things, if needed.


(30-12-2013 08:47 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(30-12-2013 07:26 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Now, what if I told you I flew my Pegasus?
I'd likely think you're joking.

So, why should I take Luke seriously?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like RobbyPants's post
30-12-2013, 04:50 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 04:00 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(30-12-2013 03:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  They are uncorroborated
The NT books largely corroborate each other. The Bible is a collection you know.

They corroborate each other on some things and contradict each other on other things. Given the contradictions they have, how do we know that when they do match up, that the data is even accurate? Given that they make a bunch of claims that would leave outsiders thinking "they're joking" (your words), why should we care that the stories sometimes match?

What about the other dozens of gospels that never got included in the Bible?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RobbyPants's post
30-12-2013, 05:47 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 04:47 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  So, you feel it's reasonable for me to be skeptical of any particular god until he physically reveals himself to me? I feel this is fair.
Go right ahead. I never argued otherwise. In fact, even if god did reveal himself physically to you, you could still be skeptical. It could be an alien or a human from the future with advanced technology.

Quote:So, given that Luke had an agenda, and makes a bunch of claims he can't possibly back up (I've never seen this god), why should I take him seriously? His goal is to convince people of Jesus' existence, which gives him reason to fudge things, if needed.
So don't take him seriously - doesn't bother me. Josephus likewise had agendas, was relying on hearsay, and made claims you can't possibly back up. I assume you likewise don't take him seriously.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-12-2013, 05:48 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 04:50 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  They corroborate each other on some things and contradict each other on other things. Given the contradictions they have,
Er, no, that's not a given.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-12-2013, 07:34 PM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 05:47 PM)alpha male Wrote:  So don't take him seriously - doesn't bother me. Josephus likewise had agendas, was relying on hearsay, and made claims you can't possibly back up. I assume you likewise don't take him seriously.

Was Josephus' agenda in any way related to the census?


(30-12-2013 05:48 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(30-12-2013 04:50 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  They corroborate each other on some things and contradict each other on other things. Given the contradictions they have,
Er, no, that's not a given.

What's not a given? That there are no contradictions? Please, elaborate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RobbyPants's post
31-12-2013, 06:31 AM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 05:48 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(30-12-2013 04:50 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  They corroborate each other on some things and contradict each other on other things. Given the contradictions they have,
Er, no, that's not a given.

Right, so what was Jesus' birth-date?

What date was Jesus crucified?

Do I even need to go on? Of course not, cause you're an empty shill. You're not really that stupid, you're just a sub-rate forum troll. Drinking Beverage

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
31-12-2013, 07:07 AM
RE: Materialist Bias?
(30-12-2013 07:34 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Was Josephus' agenda in any way related to the census?
No. Neither was Luke's. People were able to go to Bethlehem for many reasons. A census wasn't necessary to get them there.

Quote:What's not a given? That there are no contradictions?
It's not a given that there are contradictions.
Quote:Please, elaborate.
Contradictions were your point - you elaborate if you like, although a different thread would probably be appropriate.

Regarding agendas - you have an agenda. I have an agenda. Most everyone has agendas. Scientists have agendas. As Dawkins said, "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."

It's fine to exercise increased skepticism when someone has an incentive to promote a claim. It's easy to spot agendas in opponents. However, it's more difficult to spot the agenda in yourself or your allies. If you don't take Luke seriously because he has an agenda, yet you take others with agendas seriously, what's the difference? Maybe that materialist bias that we're considering?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: