The Jesus Myth

[jelly]

Peer review is the standard in any discipline: Science and medicine included. I think it's funny that a self-proclaimed "non-scholar" would dis the idea of peer review. It's like a non-cook saying, "You don't really need heat to cook the food..."

Since the mob is so disdainful as to ignore the scholarship, I guess they feel justified in giggling at the concept of sensationalism among the bottom-feeders.

yeah you wouldn't want me to disagree with your scholars and their movements would you?

 

[Caladan]

the end.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

just apply the same criteria that you use to justify jesus' existence to the claim that I can show you jesus in a petroglyph.

Let's play a game:

For one frubal, name that logical fallacy!

 

[angellous_evangellous]

yeah you wouldn't want me to disagree with your scholars and their movements would you?

If you were to do so intelligently, I'd pay for it.

 

[jelly]

the end.

hopefully of your opinions.

 

[jelly]

If you were to do so intelligently, I'd pay for it.

why should I be intelligent when the criteria for history is belief in testimony?

 

[sojourner]

yeah you wouldn't want me to disagree with your scholars and their movements would you?

Disagreement based upon solid scholastic research is fine -- expected and solicited. But simple "Did not!" kinds of skepticism don't add anything to the mix. They're more like flies at a picnic. They're waved off. Personally, I don't give a tinker's damn if you disagree or not. Until you come up with something of substance, your disagreement carries no weight on the subject.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

why should I be intelligent when the criteria for history is belief in testimony?

As I said, if it were intelligent, it really would be worth something.

Some elementary understanding of history might just possibly help you criticize it.

Just a thought.

 

[sojourner]

why should I be intelligent when the criteria for history is belief in testimony?

Why do you believe that? Sounds like you're confusing some definitions here, namely of "history" and "testimony."

 

[jelly]

As I said, if it were intelligent, it really would be worth something.

Some elementary understanding of history might just possibly help you criticize it.

Just a thought.

like the history of you believing testimony?

 

[jelly]

Why do you believe that? Sounds like you're confusing some definitions here, namely of "history" and "testimony."

oh, please opine on the "subject"...

 

[Caladan]

hopefully of your opinions.

Yes I can see my opinions sneaking into your brain. before you know it you will pick up a scholarly book about early Christianity, and how Jesus became a god.
resistance is useless.

 

[sojourner]

like the history of you believing testimony?

Do I hear the desperate scrabbling for a handhold on a slick wall of sensibility?

 

[fallingblood]

what are the facts about this peer review you are referring to?

Journals.

 

[sojourner]

oh, please opine on the "subject"...

:ignore::sleep:

 

[jelly]

Do I hear the desperate scrabbling for a handhold on a slick wall of sensibility?

so you didn't read about history?

 

[fallingblood]

just apply the same criteria that you use to justify jesus' existence to the claim that I can show you jesus in a petroglyph.

Why would I even want to try such a ridiculous exercise? Can you just give me the reasons why you believe that Jesus didn't exist? I will be happy to then discuss those with you (also, that is the point of this thread in the first place).

 

[jelly]

Journals.

do you mean interpreted writings or do you mean paperweights?

 

[fallingblood]

why should I be intelligent when the criteria for history is belief in testimony?

You haven't done any research into history have you?

 

[jelly]

You haven't done any research into history have you?

is that why your story is believable?