Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-10-2015, 08:02 AM
Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 07:54 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-10-2015 06:25 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Complete bullshit. One does not have to offer anything in the face of mythical crap. You continue to dance around the fact that you are supporting, by this line of preposterous nonsense, ALL bullshit claims of ALL bullshit claimants. No one has to present alternative competing explanations for bigfoot or unicorns.

If you want to argue a mythicist/ahistorical position then yes you have to offer something. If you want to argue that a position that Jesus was a historical person, is not a valid one, then yes you'd have to develop a spine and arguing why it isn't.

If you think that no reasonable person should conclude that there was a historical Jesus, the sort that folks like Ehrman conclude existed, then you have to offer something to validate that claim.

False dichotomy.

One does not have to postulate an alternative to reject a bullshit claim.

Dumbass:
"The earth is flat!"

Not-a-dumbass
"No it isn't."

DA
"Unless you present an alternative to the flat-earth, then you can't logically reject the earth as flat!"

NAD
"Yes I can, because your evidence is shoddy for the earth being flat. It's based on anecdotal evidence with no real support that is limited in scope and perspective."

DA
"Nu-uh. You can't reject it unless you prove another alternative."

NDA
"The burden of proof is on you to back up your claims. Your claims don't meet their burden of proof. Therefore, I reject your claims and it isn't necessary for me to present an alternative in order to do so. Because that's how logic and science work."

DA
"God did 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
19-10-2015, 08:02 AM
Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:00 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-10-2015 06:18 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Still peddling your religion with logical fallacies?

"Either they're evidence supportive of the conclusion that they are based on a non-historical Jesus, or they are historical ones. "

False Dichotomy Drinking Beverage

Equivocation Fallacy

Laugh out load

You wish

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
19-10-2015, 08:18 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:02 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  False dichotomy.

One does not have to postulate an alternative to reject a bullshit claim.

Dumbass:
"The earth is flat!"

Not-a-dumbass
"No it isn't."

DA
"Unless you present an alternative to the flat-earth, then you can't logically reject the earth as flat!"

NAD
"Yes I can, because your evidence is shoddy for the earth being flat. It's based on anecdotal evidence with no real support that is limited in scope and perspective."

DA
"Nu-uh. You can't reject it unless you prove another alternative."

NDA
"The burden of proof is on you to back up your claims. Your claims don't meet their burden of proof. Therefore I reject your claims and it isn't necessary for to present an alternative to do so. Because that's how logic and science work."

DA
"God did it."

In reality an honest version of NDA would be a person who holds that earth is round, and can show why DA information is incomplete here, in lieu of the available complete information that shows why the earth is round. He can offer a better explanation, then one DA concludes.

NDA presented in your example is a dishonest individual, a mythical trope often paraded around by atheists as some ideal, but whose closely guarded dishonesty should be an embarrassment. . If your son believed based on his intuitions some false conclusion, you'd likely correct his assumptions, show him what the more accurate conclusion is here.

"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
19-10-2015, 08:24 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:18 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-10-2015 08:02 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  False dichotomy.

One does not have to postulate an alternative to reject a bullshit claim.

Dumbass:
"The earth is flat!"

Not-a-dumbass
"No it isn't."

DA
"Unless you present an alternative to the flat-earth, then you can't logically reject the earth as flat!"

NAD
"Yes I can, because your evidence is shoddy for the earth being flat. It's based on anecdotal evidence with no real support that is limited in scope and perspective."

DA
"Nu-uh. You can't reject it unless you prove another alternative."

NDA
"The burden of proof is on you to back up your claims. Your claims don't meet their burden of proof. Therefore I reject your claims and it isn't necessary for to present an alternative to do so. Because that's how logic and science work."

DA
"God did it."

In reality an honest version of NDA would be a person who holds that earth is round, and can show why DA information is incomplete here, in lieu of the available complete information that shows why the earth is round. He can offer a better explanation, then one DA concludes.

NDA presented in your example is a dishonest individual, a mythical trope often paraded around by atheists as some ideal, but whose closely guarded dishonesty should be an embarrassment. . If your son believed based on his intuitions some false conclusion, you'd likely correct his assumptions, show him what the more accurate conclusion is here.

You still don't understand the idiocy in your false dichotomy and now you are trying to contort my example (about the burden of proof) into a half-assed insult.

Getting desperate because people don't buy your bullshit or allow you to get away with such blatantly dishonest tactics? Like the plethora of logical fallacies you commit.

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
19-10-2015, 08:45 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:24 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  You still don't understand the idiocy in your false dichotomy and now you are trying to contort my example (about the burden of proof) into a half-assed insult.

Getting desperate because people don't buy your bullshit or allow you to get away with such blatantly dishonest tactics? Like the plethora of logical fallacies you commit.

And you're just being dishonest. And you just conceal your dishonesty behind a word game.

"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
19-10-2015, 08:50 AM
Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:45 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-10-2015 08:24 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  You still don't understand the idiocy in your false dichotomy and now you are trying to contort my example (about the burden of proof) into a half-assed insult.

Getting desperate because people don't buy your bullshit or allow you to get away with such blatantly dishonest tactics? Like the plethora of logical fallacies you commit.

And you're just being dishonest. And you just conceal your dishonesty behind a word game.

Someone sure seems to be projecting 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
19-10-2015, 08:53 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:18 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-10-2015 08:02 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  False dichotomy.

One does not have to postulate an alternative to reject a bullshit claim.

Dumbass:
"The earth is flat!"

Not-a-dumbass
"No it isn't."

DA
"Unless you present an alternative to the flat-earth, then you can't logically reject the earth as flat!"

NAD
"Yes I can, because your evidence is shoddy for the earth being flat. It's based on anecdotal evidence with no real support that is limited in scope and perspective."

DA
"Nu-uh. You can't reject it unless you prove another alternative."

NDA
"The burden of proof is on you to back up your claims. Your claims don't meet their burden of proof. Therefore I reject your claims and it isn't necessary for to present an alternative to do so. Because that's how logic and science work."

DA
"God did it."

In reality an honest version of NDA would be a person who holds that earth is round, and can show why DA information is incomplete here, in lieu of the available complete information that shows why the earth is round. He can offer a better explanation, then one DA concludes.

NDA presented in your example is a dishonest individual, a mythical trope often paraded around by atheists as some ideal, but whose closely guarded dishonesty should be an embarrassment. . If your son believed based on his intuitions some false conclusion, you'd likely correct his assumptions, show him what the more accurate conclusion is here.

This is the view I never grasp why you constantly persist. You're often postulating this is what would be the Honest or IF I was an Atheists I would only view it in THIS regard.. and so on. There are far too many. You keep wanting to pose what these scenarios would be as if you demonstrate a "right" way as if there is some way it should be.

You have some proclamation that disbelief is an impolite dishonest or unjust position to stake an argument around. Yet it's a concept going back to a point of Socrates or others in that nature to accurate get to truth better. It has a history and demonstration of being far more trustworthy than starting from a, my assumption VS your assumption. Starting saying, let's take no assumptions, makes the evidence less judged in a jaded form.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like ClydeLee's post
19-10-2015, 08:57 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:50 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(19-10-2015 08:45 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  And you're just being dishonest. And you just conceal your dishonesty behind a word game.

Someone sure seems to be projecting Drinking Beverage

If some creationist came in here. Claiming to lack a belief in evolution. Declaring that every person in here has the burden of proof to convince him that it's true. His dishonesty would be readily apparent to everyone here.

"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
19-10-2015, 09:05 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:57 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-10-2015 08:50 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Someone sure seems to be projecting Drinking Beverage

If some creationist came in here. Claiming to lack a belief in evolution. Declaring that every person in here has the burden of proof to convince him that it's true. His dishonesty would be readily apparent to everyone here.

There has been honest threads of people asking for evolutionary evidence on here int he past because of a lack of understanding. And they were filled with posting of a bunch of details upon it and they were mostly smooth.. until other people not the questioning initial curious parties started riling up or trolling in the threads.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
19-10-2015, 09:06 AM
RE: Richard Carrier On the Historicity of Jesus
(19-10-2015 08:57 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-10-2015 08:50 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Someone sure seems to be projecting Drinking Beverage

If some creationist came in here. Claiming to lack a belief in evolution. Declaring that every person in here has the burden of proof to convince him that it's true. His dishonesty would be readily apparent to everyone here.

No, try again. (the burden of proof is on evolution)

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: