Posted on 11/04/2021 11:50:10 AM PDT by fishtank
“Are we so human centric that we cannot imaging a day other than 24 hours?”
Well God intentionally specified not just “day” but for each day in Genesis He wrote “evening, and morning, was the first day”, etc. There is a reason God did that, since every word in the Bible is written with intent.
Since the Hebrews measured their days from one evening (sunset) to the next, this would have been a very explicit reference to them that God was talking about the same days that they measured, since he referenced the very means that they used to measure them, and referenced it over and over so that nobody could miss it.
I hope covid and climate change have shown that “science” can be manipulated. More proof of the Biblical account than ever in evolution which genetically has a probability of zero. Love truth. Thanks for posting.
Yep!
It’s got air conditioning.
And the entire universe was created with the appearance of age. So how can we be faulted for noticing that it has the appearance of age?
Even Wikipedia labels that a FRINGE theory.
The Christ myth theory is a fringe theory that is rejected by virtually all scholars and supported only by few tenured or emeritus specialists in biblical criticism or cognate disciplines.[q 3][9][10][11] It is criticised for its methodology, conclusions, and its outdated reliance on comparisons between mythologies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
The question of the historicity of Jesus is part of the study of the historical Jesus as undertaken in the quest for the historical Jesus and the scholarly reconstructions of the life of Jesus.[1][2][3] While the Christ myth theory proposes that Jesus never existed, virtually all scholars reject the Christ myth theory and accept that a human Jesus existed,[a]
You're "strawmanning" me! Never claimed that Christ was a myth!
Only claimed that the evidence supporting the existence / historicity of certain other individuals of approx. that era was better.
Regards,
I also posted the historicity of Christ page to you. And it says almost the same thing, that it’s basically a fringe theory.
There used to be a historicity of christ keyword, you should look through it to familiarize yourself with the historical evidence.
Exactly!
He could have otherwise simply said, "And then, during the sixth incredibly long period of time spanning many, many, many human lifetimes, He created Man.
But he didn't say that - rather, he said "days," each consisting of an evening and a morning.
Regards,
You said: ‘The historical evidence of the existence of Julius and Augustus Caesar is qualitatively and quantitatively incomparably better than the evidence supporting the existence of an actual individual named Jesus of Nazareth... or Bethlehem.’
That is directly bringing up the EXISTENCE into question, which is the Christ Myth Theory. So it aint a straw argument.
Unbelievers gonna not believe, that’s what they do...
Any "scientist" or "rationalist" who is only kept from believing in the latter because he has trouble believing in the former is not very scientific or rational.
That is directly bringing up the EXISTENCE into question, which is the Christ Myth Theory. So it aint a straw argument.
To note that there is more evidence supporting the existence of, e.g., Abraham Lincoln than there is of some other person - say, a blacksmith who died in North Dakota in 1909, who never married, had no children, and was never photographed; a man for whom there was only a bare-bones entry in the birth registry, and whose name appeared exactly once in a newspaper - is NOT "questioning" his existence; it is merely stating a FACT.
To note that an observer, standing on a smooth plain, cannot directly perceive the curvature of the Earth is NOT to subscribe to or advocate the "Flat Earth" Theory. Rather, it is merely stating a FACT.
You are attempting to put me into a box, and I will not accede to that.
Regards,
To note that there is more evidence supporting the existence of, e.g., Abraham Lincoln
***You posted the examples of “Julius and Augustus Caesar” which for historians is far more difficult than Abraham Lincoln due to the advent of the printing press, and in Lincoln’s time, photography & electronic communication.
In essence, trying to use Lincoln is “moving the goalposts”.
We don't have it all figured out, but the preponderance of the evidence suggests that the world and the universe have been around a very, very long time. Evolution is a theory, but so are the alternatives and they may be even less open to the mystery of things.
To note that there is more evidence supporting the existence of, e.g., Abraham Lincoln than there is of some other person - say, a blacksmith who died in North Dakota in 1909, who never married, had no children, and was never photographed;
***Interesting analogy, bringing up the photography thing like I did. But your analogy falls incredibly flat because of the huge amount of manuscript evidence for Jesus of Nazareth, which is at least 17,000 extant manuscripts while Julius Caesar has less than one dozen. Christ has more than a thousand times the historicity of J Caesar based on that one metric. And there are other historicity metrics.
a man for whom there was only a bare-bones entry in the birth registry,
***Historians acknowledge the existence of Jesus. They don’t have a problem with it. It is antichristian bigots who try to erase His imprint on history but it fails in the face of the evidence.
https://freerepublic.com/tag/historicityofjesus/index?tab=articles
and whose name appeared exactly once in a newspaper - is NOT “questioning” his existence; it is merely stating a FACT.
***His name appears in dozens of letters across several continents and thousands of people died in His name just in the first few years. Once Julius Caesar was dead, pretty much no one died in his name.
To note that an observer, standing on a smooth plain, cannot directly perceive the curvature of the Earth is NOT to subscribe to or advocate the “Flat Earth” Theory. Rather, it is merely stating a FACT.
***Interesting but inapplicable analogy. Historians acknowledge the existence of Christ and put the historical evidence for him at very high levels of reliability — a FACT.
You are attempting to put me into a box, and I will not accede to that.
***You put yourself into the fringe box. You’re no historian, you’re simply another antichristian activist who wants to deny the obvious historical evidence for Jesus as a historical person.
Regards,
alex: Corrigo.
Warning to third-party observers of this discussion: It will essentially be a discussion of phenomenology.
But your analogy falls incredibly flat because of the huge amount of manuscript evidence for Jesus of Nazareth, which is at least 17,000 extant manuscripts while Julius Caesar has less than one dozen. Christ has more than a thousand times the historicity of J Caesar based on that one metric.
By that (coarse, undifferentiated) metric, "Spider Man" has "more existence" than you, Kevmo, since there is more "documentary evidence" (comic books, merchandise, films, t.v. shows, etc.) supporting the existence of "Spider Man" than there is supporting your existence.
Here, we must (unfortunately) note that not all "documents" are equal (equally valid for use as evidence).
Questions:
1. How many coins were struck during the lifetime of Julius Caesar, bearing his name and likeness? How many statues of him were erected during his lifetime? After all: Historians consider coins and statues to be "urkundliche Erwähnungen" just like public monuments or written records. They might even be accorded more believability than testimonials by ardent admirers their camp-followers trying desperately to disseminate a new religions.
2. Were those "17,000 extant manuscripts" written during the Life of Christ - or after? (This is NOT a trivial question.)
3. Were those "17,000 extant manuscripts" written by unbiased observers with no "skin in the game?" Or by crazed fanatics? People whose whole psychological make-up / whose whole identity had become dependent upon a certain belief-system? In contrast, the evidence we have that Julius Caesar exists was produced / left behind by people who were, by and large, disinterested parties.
4. See my tagline. If someone wants to prove something that flies in the face of all commonsense, accepted wisdom, plausibility, everyday experience, medical knowledge, and scientific understanding (as been proven experimentally in the lab a thousand thousand times over), then the evidence he presents must be of a quality and quantity surpassing mere "word of mouth," "hearsay," and "but your elders said."
I would demand that it be at least of forensic-level quality.
Historians acknowledge the existence of Jesus. They don’t have a problem with it.
Too-broad an assertion! Some historians might acknowledge that. But some don't. I suspect that the majority might concede that, somewhere in Palestine in the beginning of the First Century (C.E.), various things were done and said by person or persons going by the name of "Jesus" or variants thereof (there was no scarcity of itinerant "miracle-workers" back then in that part of the world). That, in subsequent years, the stories surrounding that person / those persons gradually congealed and coalesced and stabilized. Portions thereof that didn't "jibe" with the streamlined narrative that was evolving were casually discarded, allowed to "drop out," or were even harshly suppressed by the increasingly powerful clergy in statu nascendi- even though there may have been more factual evidence backing them up than some of the more-preposterous claims.
alex: To note that an observer, standing on a smooth plain, cannot directly perceive the curvature of the Earth is NOT to subscribe to or advocate the “Flat Earth” Theory. Rather, it is merely stating a FACT.
Kevmo: ***Interesting but inapplicable analogy. Historians acknowledge the existence of Christ and put the historical evidence for him at very high levels of reliability — a FACT.
Non sequitur! My analogy stands! Because I merely pointed out the FACT that there is more evidence supporting the existence of one person as compared to the amount/quality of evidence supporting another, you threw me into the "adherents of the 'Christ Is Complete Fabrication" camp, thus allowing you to dismiss me as a mere "camp follower" and/or to ascribe "guilt/invalidity by association" and/or permitting you to combat my standpoint by attacking "Christ Myth" supporters rather than addressing my arguments ("Straw Man" tactic!). That is invalid of you!
Kevmo: It is antichristian bigots who try to erase His imprint on history [...] You’re no historian, you’re simply another antichristian activist who wants [...]
So, it's come to this now, has it? Ad hominem attacks? You can't find legitimate weaknesses in my arguments, so you resort to name-calling? How unworthy of you!
[...] who wants to deny the obvious historical evidence for Jesus [...]
"Begging the question" ("I'm right because it's obvious that I'm right!") / Circular reasoning!
And you started off so well, Kevmo.
Regards,
By that (coarse, undifferentiated) metric, “Spider Man” has “more existence” than you, Kevmo, since there is more “documentary evidence” (comic books, merchandise, films, t.v. shows, etc.) supporting the existence of “Spider Man” than there is supporting your existence.
***AGAIN your analogy falls flat because I exist but Spider Man is just a comic strip character. Ya might as well try to compare the manuscript evidence of Homer’s Iliad (650 or so) to the 17,000 manuscripts relating to Christ and His ministry. No one ever died for claiming that whatever Homer wrote was absolute fact. That’s a very strong historical lynchpin.
Here, we must (unfortunately) note that not all “documents” are equal (equally valid for use as evidence).
***Not until you start coming up with analogies that don’t immediately fall flat.
By that (coarse, undifferentiated) metric, “Spider Man” has “more existence” than you, Kevmo, since there is more “documentary evidence” (comic books, merchandise, films, t.v. shows, etc.) supporting the existence of “Spider Man” than there is supporting your existence.
***AGAIN your analogy falls flat because I exist but Spider Man is just a comic strip character. Ya might as well try to compare the manuscript evidence of Homer’s Iliad (650 or so) to the 17,000 manuscripts relating to Christ and His ministry. No one ever died for claiming that whatever Homer wrote was absolute fact. That’s a very strong historical lynchpin.
Here, we must (unfortunately) note that not all “documents” are equal (equally valid for use as evidence).
***Not until you start coming up with analogies that don’t immediately fall flat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.