Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   CrashFrog vs. Juhrahnimo: A friendly discussion
CK
Member (Idle past 4128 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 76 of 164 (178454)
01-19-2005 3:56 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by simple
01-19-2005 2:05 AM


Re: the eyes have it
This is not the actual the thread to get into it - but we are not even sure about the eyewitnesses let along what they say!
If you are really interested in looking at this in an objective manner - take a look at what the big thinkers and political figures of the time were saying.
best
Charles

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by simple, posted 01-19-2005 2:05 AM simple has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 2:30 PM CK has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 77 of 164 (178510)
01-19-2005 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Juhrahnimo
01-18-2005 9:36 PM


To Believe or Not to Believe
quote:
George Washington crossed the Delaware and made history. YOU cannot know that for a fact, simply because it's not possible for you (or me) in particular. But there are written eye-witness accounts that it happened. You can choose to believe it or not.
It amazes me that you don't see the difference in believing or not believing that Washington crossed the Delaware and believing or not believing in what Christianity is asking all mankind to believe and follow.
If I choose not to believe that Washington crossed the Delaware, nobody cares. I probably would have failed my history class in school, but on a daily basis, nobody cares whether I believe it or not.
I won't lose my job because I don't believe that Washington crossed the Delaware or that Roosevelt lead a group called the "Rough Riders". Even if I don't believe that Luther nailed gripes on a door, my job would not be in jeopardy. Most people don't know this information themselves. Hey, some people don't believe we landed on the moon.
No one will be sending me junk mail requesting that I donate money to help them in their mission to convince people all over the world that these accounts are actually true and that they need to believe.
No one will be pressuring me into weekly gatherings to discuss why these accounts are true and how to convince others they need to believe in these accounts.
BTW, do you believe that George Washington threw a silver dollar across the Potomac? (Yes I really want an answer to this question.)
If I choose not to believe the magical portions of the Bible, but choose to understand the reality that inspired the authors, that should be my choice. Unfortunately Christianity (as a whole) doesn't accept that choice.
If my culture has a different religion and I do not wish to accept the Christian theology, that should be my choice, but again Christianity does not truly accept the individual's choice.
Christianizing the Natives in the New World set them up for slaughter. Which is ironic since they were slaughtered by many who were considered Christians.
All Natives were eventually forbidden to speak their language or perform any of their ceremonies that Christianity deemed unholy.
When were people tortured and forced to believe in historical trivia?

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-18-2005 9:36 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 12:45 PM purpledawn has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 78 of 164 (178515)
01-19-2005 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by simple
01-19-2005 2:05 AM


There were all kinds of people watching this thing.
Who?
So, eyewitnesses? You bet you life.
Who are they? Where do we find their direct testimony?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by simple, posted 01-19-2005 2:05 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 2:25 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 97 by simple, posted 01-19-2005 2:49 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 164 (178555)
01-19-2005 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by crashfrog
01-18-2005 9:49 PM


"Apparently" is the key word...
CF writes:
There's perhaps accounts of those accounts - maybe - but none of the authors of the Bible were eyewitnesses, or claimed to be.
CF writes:
But nobody has ever been observed to rise from the dead after three days; it's apparently impossible.
Well, that's true, Luke. From a certain point of view, of course. I'm not talking about an eyewitness who sat there for a couple of days, watched & smelled the body slowly begin to rot, when all of a sudden the flies scattered like rats, the heart began pumping, the arteries filled with blood, the chest began to heave.... Well, you know what I mean (they didn't have stethoscopes or heart monitors in those days). I'm talking about the accounts by the four gospel writers (as you basically mentioned). Jesus was dead and numerous people could verify that, including the Roman executioner and his well trained, staff. Jesus was indeed buried, and the tomb is empty despite having been guarded by a Roman garrison of trained killers. I understand all the refutations of the gospels and the gospel writers, etc, but the preponderance of written evidence is, in my humble opinion, quite overwhelming. Thoughts?
Also:
CF writes:
There's perhaps accounts of those accounts...
Again, true. But we can't forget that their written testimony wasn't really courtroom testimnony that could only include what they themselves actually saw and heard; they were also telling a true story and had to include many points that were also hearsay in order maintain the story structure and context without leaving gaping holes, as well as maintaining numerous important parts of the story. Still, in order to keep the wrritten account at a readable length, they couldn't include each and every little detail either. The basics of some of Jesus' teachings, etc, deeds, etc, followed by the death and ressurrection are of great importance. In a courtroom, hearsay would naturally not be admitted.
But, Jesus was verfied to be dead by the Roman professionals, as well as by disciples who were there (John at the cross specifically) and Joseph of Arimathea (who owned the tomb Jesus was buried in and who also laid him there). Since the stone was far too large for any one man to roll over the grave, Joseph certainly had help although we're not sure how many people actually helped out (Nicodemus was indeed there); they are witnesses just the same.
CF writes:
What eyewitnesses?
The four gospels writers record eyewitness accounts. Just as a court recorder or transcriber might not be the actual eyewitness of events, he/she certainly had access to the eyewitness. Since not everyone could write in those days, or even had access to writing materials, well... you can guess the rest.
But specifically to the four gospels, there is a preponderance of evidence that the Matthew was indeed written by Matthew, who was an apostle of Christ. A strong preponderance indicates Mark was dictated by Peter, also an apostle. Luke was a gentile writer, so he most obviously wasn't there as a witness, but reading his gospel indicates he clearly had access to actual eyewitnesses. As to John's gospel, despite much disputing among scholars who the actual author was, it's clear to me that he wrote it (and he was an apostle as we at the cross with Jesus). There are also much disputed gospels written by Thomas and Philip, but let's steer clear of those or this thread will start spinning out of control within the next 30 minutes.
Let's just stick with John for now; he was at the cross and he was the gospel writer who reported that Jesus' side was pierced, out of which came blood and water (John 19:34). Sorry about all the wind so far; but just consider what John writes. Jesus appeared to MANY after he rose. Jesus was seen to be clearly dead, then seen to be clearly alive. We can choose to believe the testimony or reject it, no matter how believable or unbelievable it might be.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 01-18-2005 9:49 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2005 12:43 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 80 of 164 (178561)
01-19-2005 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Juhrahnimo
01-19-2005 12:23 PM


I'm talking about the accounts by the four gospel writers (as you basically mentioned).
Who weren't there. Whose earliest accounts still weren't written until some 60 years after the events they describe. Whose later accounts are based not on testimony but on the earlier Gospels.
I'm sorry but I don't find that compelling, and I certainly don't see the eyewitness accounts that you refer to.
Jesus was dead and numerous people could verify that, including the Roman executioner and his well trained, staff.
And do you have their verifications? No, you don't.
Jesus was indeed buried, and the tomb is empty despite having been guarded by a Roman garrison of trained killers.
Do you have any witnesses to that? No, you don't.
Thoughts?
None of your "written evidence" is the account of an eyewitness. Of course the Gospels largely agree with each other; they were copied from each other. Plagarized.
But we can't forget that their written testimony wasn't really courtroom testimnony
It's not any kind of testimony, because there's no evidence the writers were there. At best it's hearsay; at worst it's their own invention.
But, Jesus was verfied to be dead by the Roman professionals, as well as by disciples who were there (John at the cross specifically) and Joseph of Arimathea (who owned the tomb Jesus was buried in and who also laid him there).
Do you have copies of those verifications? Direct statements from the hand of those people? No, you don't.
The four gospels writers record eyewitness accounts.
The accounts of who, specifically?
Just as a court recorder or transcriber might not be the actual eyewitness of events, he/she certainly had access to the eyewitness.
Yes, of course. And should verification of that transcript be required, that witness can be summoned to testify again, because we have their name and address.
What you have is a written record of "some people say they saw this." That's not testimony of any kind. You have no eyewitnesses whatsoever.
Let's just stick with John for now
If you insist. Now, I'm not much of a Biblical scholar, but I can detect bullshit when I see it, and I can read clearly written articles on the subject. Here's excerpts from the Wiki article on the Gospel of John:
quote:
Almost all critical scholars place the writing of the final edition of John at some time in the late first or early second century. The text states only that the Fourth Gospel was written by an anonymous follower of Jesus referred to as the Beloved Disciple. Traditionally he was identified as John the Apostle, who was believed to have lived at the end of his life at Ephesus.
Scholarly research since the 19th century has questioned the apostle John's authorship, however, and has presented internal evidence that the work was written many decades after the events it describes. The text provides strong evidence that it was written after the destruction of the Temple in AD 70 and after the break between Judaism and Christianity.
Today, most critical scholars are of the opinion that John was composed in a number of stages (probably two or three) beginning at an unknown time (AD 50-70?) and culminating in the final edition (our Gospel of John) around AD 95-100
John doesn't sound like the reliable testimony of an eyewitness to me; it sounds, like the rest of the Gospels, as a frequently-redacted manuscript that evolved and changed as the early church evolved and changed.
The truth of Jesus's life and death is, at this point, lost to history. I see no evidence to ascribe supernatural or miraculous doings to Jesus any more than I see reason to ascribe them to Gilgamesh, or Beowulf (my favorite), or King Arthur, who might themselves all been real figures who were blown out of proportion, just like Jesus.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 12:23 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 1:35 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 164 (178563)
01-19-2005 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by purpledawn
01-19-2005 10:34 AM


Re: To Believe or Not to Believe
PD writes:
It amazes me that you don't see the difference in believing or not believing that Washington crossed the Delaware and believing or not believing in what Christianity is asking all mankind to believe and follow.
If I choose not to believe that Washington crossed the Delaware, nobody cares.
You veered away from my point. I was saying that we can CHOOSE to believe or CHOOSE to reject evidence or testimony. I wasn't talking about the importance of what we believe. (look at the quote you used from me). Even though we weren't there to see it, we can still believe based on eyewitness accounts or other evidence.
PD writes:
BTW, do you believe that George Washington threw a silver dollar across the Potomac? (Yes I really want an answer to this question.)
I know where you're going with that; "WHO CARES" is the answer you would give, right? But again, that's not my point. So in the spirit of my discussion (and point) my answer to your question is: I don't know. I haven't seen any evidence either way, whether eyewitness testimony, forensic, material, or otherwise. Show me the available evidence, then I'll deliberate and make a decision as to whether I believe it or not. If he threw the silver dollar, I wasn't an eyewitness to the event so I'm FORCED to look at evidence. (Or I could just shoot back a cocky answer like: No, they didn't even HAVE silver dollars when George crossed the Delaware that night! But I'm guessing that's not the answer you were looking for).
PD writes:
Christianizing the Natives in the New World set them up for slaughter. Which is ironic since they were slaughtered by many who were considered Christians.
Sadly, this was foretold. John 16:2
John 16:2 writes:
...yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service...
Your key words were "CONSIDERED to be Christians". That could lead us to a whole new thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by purpledawn, posted 01-19-2005 10:34 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2005 12:48 PM Juhrahnimo has replied
 Message 83 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2005 12:49 PM Juhrahnimo has replied
 Message 86 by Abshalom, posted 01-19-2005 1:59 PM Juhrahnimo has replied
 Message 109 by purpledawn, posted 01-19-2005 5:41 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 82 of 164 (178568)
01-19-2005 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Juhrahnimo
01-19-2005 12:45 PM


I was saying that we can CHOOSE to believe or CHOOSE to reject evidence or testimony.
Yes, based on the quality of the evidence and the burden of proof required to support the claim.
I may not need a number of independant verifiers to believe that my friend's story about walking down to the corner store is true. I do, on the other hand, need those verifiers to believe that a murder occured the way the prosecution says it did. There's a greater burden of proof on the second claim; there's a remarkably high bruden of proof on a claim of a miraculous rise from the dead, which the Gospels do not even come close to meeting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 12:45 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 2:06 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 83 of 164 (178569)
01-19-2005 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Juhrahnimo
01-19-2005 12:45 PM


If he threw the silver dollar, I wasn't an eyewitness to the event so I'm FORCED to look at evidence. (Or I could just shoot back a cocky answer like: No, they didn't even HAVE silver dollars when George crossed the Delaware that night! But I'm guessing that's not the answer you were looking for).
But some people said he did, and there would have been eyewitnesses if he did, so surely he must have? By your logic from the other post?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 12:45 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 1:37 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 164 (178581)
01-19-2005 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by crashfrog
01-19-2005 12:43 PM


...
As I stated, you can accept or reject anything. No surpise there.
CF writes:
Yes, of course. And should verification of that transcript be required, that witness can be summoned to testify again, because we have their name and address.
True, you can call them to testtify again. Unless they've moved to the cemetary. Then they can't be called back. Then the written record can either be accepted or rejected. But even IF they ARE still alive, their testimony can STILL be accepted or rejected.
So, just because there are
CF writes:
Of course the Gospels largely agree with each other; they were copied from each other. Plagarized.
I've read all four, and they don't seemed plagarized to me. As a matter of fact, some contradictions even surface (that opponents have trumpeted loudly) which is exactly what happens when you interview people who witnessed the exact same event. Shows they're human. But that doesn't mean an investigator will consider the event to have never happened. Eyewitnesses often get some details wrong, but if some guys get together and plagarize, wouldn't they get it right? And if they copied off "each other", which came first; the chicken or the egg? Who wrote what first? Perhaps Matthew went first, then Mark copied off Matthew. Then Luke copied off Mark. Then John copied off Luke. All containing different levels of detail and perspective (which can also indicate who was an actual eyewitness or not; check the gospel of Mark AKA gospel of Peter).
CrashFrog writes:
...but I can detect bullshit when I see it,...
Reminds me of a old movie where Don Knotts was warned to not get cheated by the local shopkeeper. Don Knotts: "...well, he'll have to get up PRETTY EARLY in the morning for that..." (scene from "Shakiest gun in the west".)
Basically, you chose sources that support what you wish to believe. There are NUMEROUS other sources that refute what your sources state. But, since you're satisfied with what you've found, you're content to believe that whatever happened during Jesus time is "lost to history". This leaves you the standard contingency plan that you might try to use at the throne of judgement ("I plead ignorance, your honor"), which won't work in your case since you aren't ignorant; you've simply chosen to reject. But now we're headed back to debating the evidence of God found in his creation, which is already being debated in other threads (DUCK! Here comes ADMIN! )
Anyway, there are many people who have set out to discredit the Bible, and they've done exactly that (books, lectures, etc). Many Bible scholars don't believe the Bible any more than a Shakespeare scholar believes Macbeth killed his king. But what they say (in your quotes) is not supported with evidence EITHER. Only pure speculation. And there are also enough of the SAME people who started out trying to discredit the Bible, only to wind up believing it. (Who are they? Doesn't matter because we can find ways to discredit them.) You can discredit the Republicans if you you'd like, or the Democrats if you'd like. It's all about whether we choose to accept or reject.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2005 12:43 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2005 2:55 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 164 (178582)
01-19-2005 1:37 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by crashfrog
01-19-2005 12:49 PM


I need to see or hear the testimony of those who saw it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2005 12:49 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Abshalom, posted 01-19-2005 2:09 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 86 of 164 (178586)
01-19-2005 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Juhrahnimo
01-19-2005 12:45 PM


Seeing is Believing
News Flash! Gen. Washington crosses Delaware and surprises British and Hessian forces occupying Trenton on a snowy December 26, 1776. Film at http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/gw/el_gw.htm
The Spanish 8 Reales was the universal standard silver dollar from about 1530 to 1850. In the U.S., the Spanish milled silver dollar was legal tender until the U.S. mint began producing sufficient coinage to replace the milled dollar a few years prior to the Civil War.
http://www.coinsite.com/content/faq/8RealesMilledPillar.asp

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 12:45 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 2:09 PM Abshalom has not replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 164 (178587)
01-19-2005 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by crashfrog
01-19-2005 12:48 PM


...there's a remarkably high bruden of proof on a claim of a miraculous rise from the dead...
No kidding. Thomas said the same thing, and he was allowed to touch Jesus' hands and put his hand in his side before he believed.
John 20:25b, 28-29 writes:
...But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.... ...and Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
So, let's say Thomas had an unfair advantage and he could believe while we can't. How could god rectify that in our lives?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2005 12:48 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 88 of 164 (178588)
01-19-2005 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Juhrahnimo
01-19-2005 1:37 PM


You Need First-Hand Accounts?
Re: Washington’s Crossing by David Hackett Fischer:
In this well-written and documented history, the author relies on an impressive mix of primary and secondary sources. The firsthand accounts and personal stories of major players from both sides add color to the narrative. (Library Journal)
Online Bookstore: Books, NOOK ebooks, Music, Movies & Toys | Barnes & Noble®

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 1:37 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Juhrahnimo, posted 01-19-2005 2:11 PM Abshalom has replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 164 (178589)
01-19-2005 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Abshalom
01-19-2005 1:59 PM


Re: Seeing is Believing
Got it. It was just a wild guess to be lighten up the post a little. It wasn't important to the post at all. But thanks anyway. Now we at least know George COULD have thrown it!
Back to the topic (duck!)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Abshalom, posted 01-19-2005 1:59 PM Abshalom has not replied

  
Juhrahnimo
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 164 (178590)
01-19-2005 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by Abshalom
01-19-2005 2:09 PM


Re: You Need First-Hand Accounts?
Maybe I missed your purpose. Do you think we have enough evidence to make a decision now?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Abshalom, posted 01-19-2005 2:09 PM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Abshalom, posted 01-19-2005 2:15 PM Juhrahnimo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024