Replacing Wikipedia

[Ron]

So the problem is that I have prejudged Jesus not to be God, and had I accepted that fact I would realise the tomb isn't real???  See the problem there?  You need the religious belief first to make the facts fit your evidence.

Your rejection of Christianity colors your interpretation of the find.

You don't believe so it must be Jesus in the tomb (yippee!)

Are non Christians the only ones blessed with lack of bias?

Whats so controversial about pointing that out?

Relying on so called statistical evidence to prove some point is just silly also. Everyone knows you can skew stats by playing with the inputs. Nobody here is a statistician who has reviewed the work so it is just a baseless appeal to authority.

Much ado about nothing.

[mellestad]

After having hundreds of hours put into these kinds of conversations, a truth was found:

You can't have a serious discussion about the historicity of a religious text unless you and the opposing party agree on whether or not the mythological aspects are objectively true or not. That's true for Christianity (Catholic, Protestant, LDS, etc.), Islam, Asian religiouns, Druidic/Wiccan varieties, and everything you can think of that has a text associated with it.

When people don't agree on that it's impossible to have a reasonable discourse. Standards of evidence will be completely different and foundational assumptions will be incompatible.

The follow-up to that is another truth: The number of people who change their opinions on the topic of a particular religion's mythological component, as adults, is so tiny that arguing about it on the Internet is not productive. People, by and large, believe what they were taught when they were kids. Raised as an atheist? Probably going to stay that way. Raised evangelical? Same.

That's not to say it isn't fun to raise a ruckus about it on forums--but don't expect anything other than a rousing row.

[mellestad]

On Wikipedia--the solution won't ever be to replace it (in this decade). Wikipedia is a part of our culture now and it isn't going anywhere.

If people really care they can go devote thousands of hours to being a Wiki editor, just like the people they're complaining about. There's nothing stopping people from making Wikipedia be "correct" other than a lack of commitment.

[Ron]

After having hundreds of hours put into these kinds of conversations, a truth was found:

You can't have a serious discussion about the historicity of a religious text unless you and the opposing party agree on whether or not the mythological aspects are objectively true or not. That's true for Christianity (Catholic, Protestant, LDS, etc.), Islam, Asian religiouns, Druidic/Wiccan varieties, and everything you can think of that has a text associated with it.

When people don't agree on that it's impossible to have a reasonable discourse. Standards of evidence will be completely different and foundational assumptions will be incompatible.

The follow-up to that is another truth: The number of people who change their opinions on the topic of a particular religion's mythological component, as adults, is so tiny that arguing about it on the Internet is not productive. People, by and large, believe what they were taught when they were kids. Raised as an atheist? Probably going to stay that way. Raised evangelical? Same.

That's not to say it isn't fun to raise a ruckus about it on forums--but don't expect anything other than a rousing row.

Trying to point out that atheism comes with its own host of presuppositions and unfounded premises to an unbeliever is often an exercise in futility.

[Perd Hapley]

That's true for Christianity (Catholic, Protestant, LDS, etc.)

Just had to include the LDS, didn't you? 

[De Selby]

Just had to include the LDS, didn't you? 

Say what you will, they have a ton of eye witness testimony for their miracles.  Don't you find that convincing?

[Ron]

Say what you will, they have a ton of eye witness testimony for their miracles.  Don't you find that convincing?

Stories of the strange, supernatural and miraculous exist from the beginning of recorded to history to this very day.

Jesus said the only sign or miracle for us to look to is the gospel story.
 

 

[De Selby]

Stories of the strange, supernatural and miraculous exist from the beginning of recorded to history to this very day.

Jesus said the only sign or miracle for us to look to is the gospel story.
 

 

Where did jesus say this?  Is it recorded in the same gospel you're telling us to look to?

[mellestad]

Just had to include the LDS, didn't you? 

*shrug*
I know, personally, plenty of evangelicals who don't consider Catholics to be Christians, so I'm not sure where to make the distinction.

[mellestad]

Trying to point out that atheism comes with its own host of presuppositions and unfounded premises to an unbeliever is often an exercise in futility.

Being conscious is a presupposition, but you'll find plenty of philosophers who argue about the merits of objective truth. :)

[Ron]

Where did jesus say this?  Is it recorded in the same gospel you're telling us to look to?

It's in the book of Matthew, ch12.

Then certain of the scribes and Pharisees answered, "Teacher, we want to see a sign from you." But he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, but no sign will be given it but the sign of Jonah the prophet.

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh will stand up in the judgment with this generation, and will condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, someone greater than Jonah is here. The queen of the south will rise up in the judgment with this generation, and will condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, someone greater than Solomon is here.

Again in John ch6

They said therefore to him, "What then do you do for a sign, that we may see, and believe you? What work do you do? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness. As it is written, 'He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.'"

Jesus therefore said to them, "Most certainly, I tell you, it wasn't Moses who gave you the bread out of heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread out of heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world." They said therefore to him, "Lord, always give us this bread."

Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life"

[Perd Hapley]

Say what you will, they have a ton of eye witness testimony for their miracles.  Don't you find that convincing?

Cute, but back to this assertion that all the bible scholars believe the new testament was written last summer, or whatever it was you said. Where did you get this narrative?

[De Selby]

Cute, but back to this assertion that all the bible scholars believe the new testament was written last summer, or whatever it was you said. Where did you get this narrative?

Reading historical books.  Are you dismissing that because you think there aren't eye witnesses to the Mormon miracles?  There are probably even some living ones you could interview.

What's the in principle difference between your faith in eye witness testimony and theirs?

[Scout26]

Just had to include the LDS, didn't you? 

He left out those members of the Churh of the Old Norse (Reformed).   Not sur whether to.be grateful or insulted. 

[makattak]

What's the in principle difference between your faith in eye witness testimony and theirs?

"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."

Miracles/signs are not all from God.

[Ron]

DeSelby makes dubious appeals to authority attempting to bolster his case.

I have a collection of books from Robert Alter. He is a prominent Hebrew scholar and is neither a Christian nor a practicing religious Jew from any information I can find.  

The books I own are his translations of the Pentateuch, Wisdom books and some of the prophets. The translations also contain a running commentary, mostly historical and archaeological in nature with plenty of notes regarding translation choices.  

He often will discuss several options he had in translating and then give the reason he chose a particular direction.

Now as an unbeliever he is not biased towards choosing a translation that is consistent with the whole (Bible). On occasion he points out a translation he rejected but for example the KJV translators chose. His reasons are often his knowledge of Hebrew grammar or word construction. Sometimes the reason is just a personal preference due to nothing more than a "I like this way better than that" .

I don't expect him to view the whole OT as a whole as he doesn't believe it is a whole. But, if it was meant to be a whole then he would be wrong in some of his choices in translation and the translators choosing the option that maintains consistency would be correct.

Appeals to authority only get you so far, especially when you start examining the presuppositions of those authorities. It gets a bit more complicated the deeper you drill.

BTW, the books by Alter often have fascinating archaeological and cultural background information. The commentary can be dense but often truly rewarding.  

[Perd Hapley]

Reading historical books.  Are you dismissing that because you think there aren't eye witnesses to the Mormon miracles?  There are probably even some living ones you could interview.

What's the in principle difference between your faith in eye witness testimony and theirs?

I don't know what kind of law you practice, but I would have thought any law school education would cover this. Is all eyewitness testimony the same? Don't the circumstances make some more credible than others?

[roo_ster]

On Wikipedia--the solution won't ever be to replace it (in this decade). Wikipedia is a part of our culture now and it isn't going anywhere.

Yep, just like myspace.

[KD5NRH]

Are you dismissing that because you think there aren't eye witnesses to the Mormon miracles?

I have personally seen a potluck where someone brought enough deviled eggs.  In my experience, that's about as miraculous as it gets.

[De Selby]

I don't know what kind of law you practice, but I would have thought any law school education would cover this. Is all eyewitness testimony the same? Don't the circumstances make some more credible than others?

Haha, okay, tell me how the circumstances of your bible make for more reliable eye witness testimony than theirs

[Perd Hapley]

Haha, okay, tell me how the circumstances of your bible make for more reliable eye witness testimony than theirs

Tell me about their miracles, and what the witnesses said about them. One of our resident Mormons once gave me a list. I recall finding it rather flimsy, but perhaps you refer to something else.

[De Selby]

Tell me about their miracles, and what the witnesses said about them. One of our resident Mormons once gave me a list. I recall finding it rather flimsy, but perhaps you refer to something else.

So if they had seen the dead risen you'd be more convinced?  That's the problem, their miracles weren't cool enough?

Come on man, this has got to offend your intellect on some level.  There is no historical or scientific basis for any religion.

[Marnoot]

I don't think there's any shortage of modern-day miracles, including those that have happened in LDS history in the 1800's on. Lots of ancient miracles before and after Christ, too. All pale in comparison to the life, mission, atonement and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If you don't believe in that one, asking what we think about other claimed ones is looking beyond the point.

There is no historical or scientific basis for any religion.

Faith is a matter of . . . faith, by design. There is evidence aplenty of the reality of Christ, but you have to be of mind to look for it and more correctly, experiment on it and experience it. You're not, at least not at the moment. There's nothing that can be said on this thread that's going to change that.

[Scout26]

And that looks and sounds like a good place to end this one...