Australian Politics Forum - How gullible are some people?

longweekend58 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 45675 Gender:	Re: How gullible are some people? Reply #525 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:50am greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:31am: longweekend58 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2014 at 5:21pm: There has been some pretty stupid arguments made here mainly by john smith and greggary. Link, to one of my "pretty stupid arguments"? almost all of them. change PRETTY to PETTY and it sums them up perfectly.
Back to top	AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..." IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137136
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #526 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:52am

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:50am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:31am:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2014 at 5:21pm:

There has been some pretty stupid arguments made here mainly by john smith and greggary.

Link, to one of my "pretty stupid arguments"?

almost all of them. change PRETTY to PETTY and it sums them up perfectly.

No link then?

White flag accepted.

That didn't take long.

Back to top

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #527 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:57am

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 8:54am:

Paul says nothing about Jesus???? Have you ever read the Pauline books of te Bible? He refers to Jesus in every chapter and almost every verse. He didn't go over his life story for the very real reason that people of that time didn't need convincing of His existence.

Paul evangelised far away from Palestine where nobody had heard of Jesus. This was precisely the genesis of his problem with the Jerusalem Council... Because no one had ever heard of Jesus where Paul evangelised, he was free to invent the story of Jesus as he went along. However, he mentioned almost nothing of Jesus' life to them, because, most probably, there were no detailed stories or texts of his life to refer to.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

aquascoot

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 34602
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #528 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 10:05am

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 13^th, 2014 at 7:55pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2014 at 7:33pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 13^th, 2014 at 7:02pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2014 at 5:21pm:

There has been some pretty stupid arguments made here mainly by john smith and greggary. SOB has of course made a few incomprehensible posts as well.

Virtually EVERYTHING is essentially unprovable and you can easily make a case that introduces an element - how ever infinitesimally small - that brings doubt to any thing. But that is not how we operate. We live by STANDARDS of proof and 'absolute' is not one of them. The courts use 'beyond reasonable doubt' and scientific theory is not absolutely proven but rather proven beyond any REASONABLE standard.

This debate regarding Jesus' existence has to be discussed alongside a consistent standard of historical evidence - the same standard as applied to any other figure of history. By any consistent standard, the evidence of Jesus' existent is irrefutable and while many have tried, all have failed.

There is no reason or rational, consistent method by which you would determine that Jesus did not exist. The evidence for His existence is substantial and consistent. No other conclusion is possible unless you want to be pedantic, anal or Greggary.

There is no reasonable doubt at all.

Do you think King Arthur's historicity is also beyond doubt?

the evidence is pretty slim. But the point was about CONSISTENT TREATMENT. So I ask you the same. Do you think the existence of Jesus is beyond reasonable doubt?

Well. if on a scale of 1 to 10, the evidence for, say, Einstein's existence is 10 (or 9.99999 if you like), then I'd say that the evidence of existence for :

Plato = 8
Socrates = 7
Jesus = 5
King Arthur = 0.05
Robin Hood = 0.05

Why do you accept that the evidence for King Arthur is slim?

I like that north.
well thought out.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 137136 Gender:	Re: How gullible are some people? Reply #529 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 10:07am John Smith wrote on Apr 13^th, 2014 at 7:52pm: The whole concept of religion depends on one thing and one thing only ... faith. It cannot be proven so stop trying to talk yourself up. Hallelujah!
Back to top	IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 74452
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #530 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 10:08am

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:31am:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2014 at 5:21pm:

There has been some pretty stupid arguments made here mainly by john smith and greggary.

Link, to one of my "pretty stupid arguments"?

careful Greg ... whenever anyone asks longy for a link to support his statements he runs away ..... this won't be any different!

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #531 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 12:51pm

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:57am:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 8:54am:

Paul says nothing about Jesus???? Have you ever read the Pauline books of te Bible? He refers to Jesus in every chapter and almost every verse. He didn't go over his life story for the very real reason that people of that time didn't need convincing of His existence.

Paul evangelised far away from Palestine where nobody had heard of Jesus. This was precisely the genesis of his problem with the Jerusalem Council... Because no one had ever heard of Jesus where Paul evangelised, he was free to invent the story of Jesus as he went along. However, he mentioned almost nothing of Jesus' life to them, because, most probably, there were no detailed stories or texts of his life to refer to.

that is assumptive nonsense. For starters, Paul's letters to the churches were AFTER he had established them and taught them of Jesus' life and ministry.

It is always a bad argument to depend on what people are NOT saying rather than what they are.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #532 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 1:35pm

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 12:51pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:57am:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 8:54am:

Paul says nothing about Jesus???? Have you ever read the Pauline books of te Bible? He refers to Jesus in every chapter and almost every verse. He didn't go over his life story for the very real reason that people of that time didn't need convincing of His existence.

Paul evangelised far away from Palestine where nobody had heard of Jesus. This was precisely the genesis of his problem with the Jerusalem Council... Because no one had ever heard of Jesus where Paul evangelised, he was free to invent the story of Jesus as he went along. However, he mentioned almost nothing of Jesus' life to them, because, most probably, there were no detailed stories or texts of his life to refer to.

that is assumptive nonsense. For starters, Paul's letters to the churches were AFTER he had established them and taught them of Jesus' life and ministry.

And that's really the problem, isn't it. Everything is written after the supposed death of Jesus. Apparently he's so unremarkable before his supposed death that nothing is written about him.

Then there's Acts... As elusive of the historicity of Jesus as the rest.

As I have said, none of this means that there is no evidence at all... Just that its weak evidence at best.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137136
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #533 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 1:47pm

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 1:35pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 12:51pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:57am:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 8:54am:

Paul says nothing about Jesus???? Have you ever read the Pauline books of te Bible? He refers to Jesus in every chapter and almost every verse. He didn't go over his life story for the very real reason that people of that time didn't need convincing of His existence.

Paul evangelised far away from Palestine where nobody had heard of Jesus. This was precisely the genesis of his problem with the Jerusalem Council... Because no one had ever heard of Jesus where Paul evangelised, he was free to invent the story of Jesus as he went along. However, he mentioned almost nothing of Jesus' life to them, because, most probably, there were no detailed stories or texts of his life to refer to.

that is assumptive nonsense. For starters, Paul's letters to the churches were AFTER he had established them and taught them of Jesus' life and ministry.

And that's really the problem, isn't it. Everything is written after the supposed death of Jesus. Apparently he's so unremarkable before his supposed death that nothing is written about him.

Then there's Acts... As elusive of the historicity of Jesus as the rest.

As I have said, none of this means that there is no evidence at all... Just that its weak evidence at best.

Correct.

And it certainly doesn't mean his existence is "beyond doubt".

Back to top

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 17258 Gender:	Re: How gullible are some people? Reply #534 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 2:43pm greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 1:47pm: Correct. And it certainly doesn't mean his existence is "beyond doubt". Yes, weak evidence at best... As with Matthew 21 10: "And when he was come into Jerusalem, all the city was moved, saying, Who is this?" Well may we ask the same question!!
Back to top	Conviction is the art of being certain IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 26906 Canberra Gender:	Re: How gullible are some people? Reply #535 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 3:08pm There are plenty of atheists who accept the concept of Jesus existing. Whether or not he was anything more than that
Back to top	In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act. No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy) IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #536 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 3:27pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 3:08pm:

There are plenty of atheists who accept the concept of Jesus existing. Whether or not he was anything more than that

That's fine... Certainly the tradition of his existence cannot be doubted....

If an atheist is prepared to accept that the evidence for his existence is weak but accept Jesus' historicity with that caveat, that's OK.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

Quantum

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3373

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #537 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 3:33pm

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 1:35pm:

Then there's Acts... As elusive of the historicity of Jesus as the rest.

In what way? Acts was written by Luke, who also wrote Luke's gospel.

Luke 1:1-4

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Acts 1:1-3

In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.

Why would Acts (part B) go over the same events as Luke (Part A)?

Scrolls have a maximum length. From what we know of those times, the book of Luke is about as long as a scroll can get. The books of Acts likewise pushes maximum lengths. Luke's history is therefore written in a Part A/Part B format.

Complaining that Acts doesn't cover the history of Jesus is completely unjustified. It is the second half or a larger record, and the first half covered the very thing you are after.

Back to top

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #538 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 4:00pm

Quantum wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 3:33pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 1:35pm:

Then there's Acts... As elusive of the historicity of Jesus as the rest.

In what way? Acts was written by Luke, who also wrote Luke's gospel.

Luke 1:1-4

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Acts 1:1-3

In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.

Why would Acts (part B) go over the same events as Luke (Part A)?

Scrolls have a maximum length. From what we know of those times, the book of Luke is about as long as a scroll can get. The books of Acts likewise pushes maximum lengths. Luke's history is therefore written in a Part A/Part B format.

Complaining that Acts doesn't cover the history of Jesus is completely unjustified. It is the second half or a larger record, and the first half covered the very thing you are after.

Luke suggests he was also not an eyewitness to Jesus himself :

Luke 1 1:2
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

Actually Luke doesn't claim to have had any closer association with the historical Jesus than Paul.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #539 - Apr 14^th, 2014 at 4:09pm

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 1:35pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 12:51pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 9:57am:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2014 at 8:54am:

Paul says nothing about Jesus???? Have you ever read the Pauline books of te Bible? He refers to Jesus in every chapter and almost every verse. He didn't go over his life story for the very real reason that people of that time didn't need convincing of His existence.

Paul evangelised far away from Palestine where nobody had heard of Jesus. This was precisely the genesis of his problem with the Jerusalem Council... Because no one had ever heard of Jesus where Paul evangelised, he was free to invent the story of Jesus as he went along. However, he mentioned almost nothing of Jesus' life to them, because, most probably, there were no detailed stories or texts of his life to refer to.

that is assumptive nonsense. For starters, Paul's letters to the churches were AFTER he had established them and taught them of Jesus' life and ministry.

And that's really the problem, isn't it. Everything is written after the supposed death of Jesus. Apparently he's so unremarkable before his supposed death that nothing is written about him.

Then there's Acts... As elusive of the historicity of Jesus as the rest.

As I have said, none of this means that there is no evidence at all... Just that its weak evidence at best.

And yet the vast majority of historians totally disagree. Funny that.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged