Originally posted by Adrift
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Gary & Rhinestone's Thread on Burial and Resurrection of Christ
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Doug Shaver View PostBut an argument from authority is logically rigorous?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Doug Shaver View PostThe quotations I have seen from the relevant literature of the period seem to support that. I have never seen a quotation supporting the claim that women's testimony had no credibility in any situation at all.
The standard apologetic claim that, in that time and place, women had no credibility period is inconsistent with human nature. The modern feminist notion that there is no limit to how sexist a society can be is not plausible.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by Adrift View PostCheck your fallacies. An argument from an authority is perfectly valid when the authorities are recognized for having expertise in the subject.
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostThankee. You wouldn't off hand have a suitable scholar's name that I could cite?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Doug Shaver View PostThat is not what the Wikipedia article says.
The above doesn't apply in this case though, since you disagree with Adrift about the reliability of NT scholars and their arguments.Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostIt does say that: "It avoids being fallacious when arguers agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context.".
The above doesn't apply in this case though, since you disagree with Adrift about the reliability of NT scholars and their arguments.
Eh, the footnotes for the context for that sentence seem to be making the case that "reliable", in this instance (a word that neither source uses), means that both parties agree that the authority/authorities in question are actual authorities on the subject, and that their authority is recognized as pertinent to the discussion. But I suppose even that may not be the case with Doug who believes that every single one of the thousands of New Testament scholars, no matter their background, no matter how qualified and reputable they are, no matter if they be Christian, Jew, Muslim, atheist, or agnostic, no matter how much they've written on the historical Jesus, that they all of them (barring perhaps three Mythicists), are wrong about the historicity of Jesus.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostThe above doesn't apply in this case though, since you disagree with Adrift about the reliability of NT scholars and their arguments.
Later in the article, the editors say this:
by definition invalid. An inductive argument that does what it is supposed to do is not called valid. It is called strong. There are philosophers, with whom I happen to agree, who claim that a strong inductive argument is valid in some relevant sense, but this position has not been generally accepted within the philosophical community. Most logicians, so far as I have been able to determine, still insist on there being a distinction between deductive validity and inductive strength.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostActually, Paul affirms the physical Resurrection.
So contrary to what apologists claim, the evidence in Paul for a physical resurrection is severely lacking.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Postoften with metaphorical meaning: "to see with the mind" (i.e. spiritually see), i.e. perceive (with inward spiritual perception).
So contrary to what apologists claim, the evidence in Paul for a physical resurrection is severely lacking.
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostWrong passage - you can't refute a point when you are guessing incorrectly. Paul's affirmation isn't in the Damascus recount.
Paul says his experience was an "inner revelation" in Gal. 1:12-16, tells us that the Risen Jesus was experienced through "visions and revelations" in 2 Cor 12:1, was "known through revelation and the scriptures" in Rom. 16:25-26, and his "mystery was made known through revelation" in Eph. 3:3-5. Paul's notion of the Risen Jesus seems to be purely spiritual/mystical. "Visions" and "revelations" are the only ways Paul says the Risen Jesus was experienced. The later author of Acts calls Paul's experience a "vision from heaven" involving a bright light and a voice - Acts 26:19.Last edited by RhinestoneCowboy; 01-24-2018, 11:58 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RhinestoneCowboy View Postoften with metaphorical meaning: "to see with the mind" (i.e. spiritually see), i.e. perceive (with inward spiritual perception).
So contrary to what apologists claim, the evidence in Paul for a physical resurrection is severely lacking.
Romans 10:9 uses "egeiro" with regard to Jesus' resurrection - the same word that is used of Lazarus' resurrection by Jesus. 1 Cor 6:14 uses exegeiro - which with regard to illness or death indicates recovery. anastasis (stand again) is used in 1 Cor 15:13, and is shown to be interchangeable with egeiro.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 04-22-2024, 06:28 PM
|
17 responses
104 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
04-23-2024, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
70 responses
397 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-26-2024, 05:47 AM | ||
Started by Neptune7, 04-15-2024, 06:54 AM
|
25 responses
163 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cerebrum123
04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
238 responses
1,113 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 01:32 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 02-04-2024, 05:06 AM
|
149 responses
768 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
Yesterday, 10:04 PM
|
Comment