Where the **** was Paul?

Create a topic and discuss! No subject is off limits, but moderators have the right to remove asshat posts. What's an asshat post? Selling stuff, trolling, harassing--the usual stuff you don't want to see either. Happy posting!
User avatar
SEG
Posts: 1229
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by SEG » Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:39 am

Og3 wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:34 pm
So what you're really protesting is not so much whether the town, the cliff or the synagogue was or wasn't really there, but whether moderns who revere certain places as "The house of Mary" have gotten the right spot?

There are simply layers of bad logic in that...
No, I am saying during a there was a long hiatus in settlement in the Nazareth basin between the Late Iron Age (c. 700 BCE) and Middle Roman times (c. 100 CE). There is a dearth of any evidence of human habitation in the town at the supposed time of Jesus. No cliff or synagogue has ever been found in Nazareth. The farcical Nazareth village, designed to rip off gullible Christian tourists has built a representation of "The house of Mary" where their Christian archaeologists have declared the site was the actual home of Mary.

What these pioneering intrepid Christian archaeologists did not know was that the area that they had worked out was the birthplace of Jesus was actually a Necropolis of tombs. So every time they found a tomb, they declared it "The Tomb of Joseph", for example. What these guys didn't realise was that Jewish tradition forbids building houses anywhere near cemeteries. The Talmud instructs that tombs be a minimum distance (“fifty ells,” or about twenty-five meters) from the nearest habitation.
“There are no known non-biblical references to a historical Jesus by any historian or other writer of the time during and shortly after Jesus's purported advent.” His so-called life was a farce.

Og3
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Fri Jan 11, 2019 8:43 pm

SEG wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:39 am
Og3 wrote:
Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:34 pm
So what you're really protesting is not so much whether the town, the cliff or the synagogue was or wasn't really there, but whether moderns who revere certain places as "The house of Mary" have gotten the right spot?

There are simply layers of bad logic in that...
No, I am saying during a there was a long hiatus in settlement in the Nazareth basin between the Late Iron Age (c. 700 BCE) and Middle Roman times (c. 100 CE). There is a dearth of any evidence of human habitation in the town at the supposed time of Jesus. No cliff or synagogue has ever been found in Nazareth. The farcical Nazareth village, designed to rip off gullible Christian tourists has built a representation of "The house of Mary" where their Christian archaeologists have declared the site was the actual home of Mary.

What these pioneering intrepid Christian archaeologists did not know was that the area that they had worked out was the birthplace of Jesus was actually a Necropolis of tombs. So every time they found a tomb, they declared it "The Tomb of Joseph", for example. What these guys didn't realise was that Jewish tradition forbids building houses anywhere near cemeteries. The Talmud instructs that tombs be a minimum distance (“fifty ells,” or about twenty-five meters) from the nearest habitation.
so you're objecting to a modern day tourist rip-off, and conflating it with a historical argument from silence.

Anyway, you've got the facts wrong: Jesus was born in Bethlehem, not Nazareth. Far end of the country.

Honestly, SEG, I'm starting to give up on a reasonable discussion. You are fixed in your belief that Jesus of Nazareth never existed, and you are fixed further in your belief that there is no God. If God met with you and spoke to you like Morgan Freeman in Bruce Almighty, you'd write it off as a hallucination or a magic trick. There is literally nothing that would convince you, because you have so firmly fixed the fore-drawn conclusion in your mind.

I've shown you that your type of reasoning -- judging evidence by whether it agrees with you, instead of judging your conclusion by evidence -- is known as Kripkean Dogmatism, and that it's poor reasoning.

I've shown you that a person who is not willing to be reasonable can lock onto any belief set -- for example, that there is no Australia -- and can follow the same kinds of arguments that you use when you refuse to consider that you may be wrong.

I've shown you by example, naming times in my life when I have rethought and sometimes changed very deeply-held convictions, based entirely on evidence, and despite my feelings in the matter. I've even challenged you and the others to name a time when they analyzed beliefs objectively with a resolution to belief what they concluded to be true in spite of prior convictions. I don't believe that you responded -- if you did I missed it.

Quite simply, if you're going to be a Kripkean Dogmatist, I see no point in further discussion.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 1229
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by SEG » Sat Jan 12, 2019 2:51 am

Og3 wrote:
Fri Jan 11, 2019 8:43 pm
so you're objecting to a modern day tourist rip-off, and conflating it with a historical argument from silence.
Yes, and it is a very strong argument from silence as most Christians assert that there was a Jesus of Nazareth with very little evidence to support a thriving city or town. Or hamlet.
Anyway, you've got the facts wrong: Jesus was born in Bethlehem, not Nazareth. Far end of the country.
There are no facts, there is no archaeological evidence of Bethlehem existing at the time of Jesus either.
Honestly, SEG, I'm starting to give up on a reasonable discussion. You are fixed in your belief that Jesus of Nazareth never existed, and you are fixed further in your belief that there is no God.
Not at all, change my mind with some verifiable evidence outside of your storybook.
If God met with you and spoke to you like Morgan Freeman in Bruce Almighty, you'd write it off as a hallucination or a magic trick.

Correct, that's what most rational people that haven't been indoctrinated into believing invisible supernatural powers would deduce. Why? Because we have evidence that people have hallucinations everywhere and in all cultures. We also have evidence that people have been tricked by clever magicians. We don't, and never had any evidence of gods existing or having supernatural powers.
There is literally nothing that would convince you, because you have so firmly fixed the fore-drawn conclusion in your mind.
Wrong. Show me the evidence and I will believe. Whereas it is very unlikely that you will ever stop believing in gods with invisible supernatural powers.
I've shown you that your type of reasoning -- judging evidence by whether it agrees with you, instead of judging your conclusion by evidence -- is known as Kripkean Dogmatism, and that it's poor reasoning.
Which I am not guilt of it. You however, will never be convinced that your life long obsession with the Christian gods of Jesus and Yahweh don't exist. Do you consider yourself to be a Kripkean Dogmatist, and if not, why not?
I've shown you that a person who is not willing to be reasonable can lock onto any belief set -- for example, that there is no Australia -- and can follow the same kinds of arguments that you use when you refuse to consider that you may be wrong.
It boils down to this Og. There are mountains of all types of verifiable evidence of Australia and there is none for ANY gods, supernatural events, or archaeological evidence for Nazareth or Bethlehem existing as cities or towns in the 1st century. So why should I believe any of those?
I've shown you by example, naming times in my life when I have rethought and sometimes changed very deeply-held convictions, based entirely on evidence
You should know by now the value of emotional anecdotal evidence. It doesn't rate as anything convincing. Just because something happened to you that was unusual and affected your emotions doesn't equate to it being true.
I've even challenged you and the others to name a time when they analyzed beliefs objectively with a resolution to belief what they concluded to be true in spite of prior convictions.
I think that the trouble with your beliefs is that the criteria isn't well established. You keep talking about a god, spiritual beings or events when you can't define what those things actually are. For example if you tell me that God is love, or spirits and souls are energy, they are meaningless phrases unless you clearly define what these "things" are or why they are important to my life.

I'm open to being convinced of anything that may be valuable to my life, but you and other believers have not come up with anything at all convincing.
“There are no known non-biblical references to a historical Jesus by any historian or other writer of the time during and shortly after Jesus's purported advent.” His so-called life was a farce.

Og3
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:37 pm

You are "open to being convinced." Wonderful. But that wasn't the question.

Are you willing to go find the evidence, and to weigh ALL evidence, whether it supports your chosen theory or not, with an equal and objective scale, as I have done? Are you willing to know not merely WHAT you believe, but WHY you believe it, and justify it in logic?

It means not waiting for someone to come plead with you to believe the evidence that they bring to you, but for you to actually go and look for evidence, and decide based on objective pre-determined criteria whether that evidence is reasonable. It demands a level playing field for all evidence.

I don't think you are capable of leveling your playing field, and you certainly can't be bothered to try to find out what's actually true.

Humanguy
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2018 9:48 pm

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Humanguy » Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:41 pm

Og3 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:37 pm
Are you willing to know not merely WHAT you believe, but WHY you believe it, and justify it in logic?
Are you?

Og3
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:47 am

Humanguy wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:41 pm
Og3 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:37 pm
Are you willing to know not merely WHAT you believe, but WHY you believe it, and justify it in logic?
Are you?
I spent several months back in 1985 trying to reach the conclusion that there was no God. I read, I researched, I spent hours asking how a man can know whether or not there is a god. In the end, it came down to Lewis: "If Hamlet talks with Shakespeare, it must be Shakespeare's doing." I had a great many reasons for not wanting to believe in God. But I had set the rule for myself that a man must believe what is true. And despite my best efforts, I found that God must be true.

Yes. Yes, I am, I have, I do, and I will.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 1229
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by SEG » Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:37 pm

Og3 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:37 pm
You are "open to being convinced." Wonderful. But that wasn't the question.

Are you willing to go find the evidence, and to weigh ALL evidence, whether it supports your chosen theory or not, with an equal and objective scale, as I have done? Are you willing to know not merely WHAT you believe, but WHY you believe it, and justify it in logic?

It means not waiting for someone to come plead with you to believe the evidence that they bring to you, but for you to actually go and look for evidence, and decide based on objective pre-determined criteria whether that evidence is reasonable. It demands a level playing field for all evidence.

I don't think you are capable of leveling your playing field, and you certainly can't be bothered to try to find out what's actually true.
How can you go and look for something that is invisible and undetectable by science?
“There are no known non-biblical references to a historical Jesus by any historian or other writer of the time during and shortly after Jesus's purported advent.” His so-called life was a farce.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 1229
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by SEG » Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:42 pm

Plus just like the Wizard of Oz, if Oz didn't exist, neither did the wizard. So if there was no Nazareth, how could there be a Jesus of Nazareth?
“There are no known non-biblical references to a historical Jesus by any historian or other writer of the time during and shortly after Jesus's purported advent.” His so-called life was a farce.

Og3
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Tue Jan 15, 2019 8:30 pm

SEG wrote:
Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:37 pm
Og3 wrote:
Mon Jan 14, 2019 8:37 pm
You are "open to being convinced." Wonderful. But that wasn't the question.

Are you willing to go find the evidence, and to weigh ALL evidence, whether it supports your chosen theory or not, with an equal and objective scale, as I have done? Are you willing to know not merely WHAT you believe, but WHY you believe it, and justify it in logic?

It means not waiting for someone to come plead with you to believe the evidence that they bring to you, but for you to actually go and look for evidence, and decide based on objective pre-determined criteria whether that evidence is reasonable. It demands a level playing field for all evidence.

I don't think you are capable of leveling your playing field, and you certainly can't be bothered to try to find out what's actually true.
How can you go and look for something that is invisible and undetectable by science?
You begin by questioning your assumptions.

The first question to examine might be whether science is all-inclusive ("Catholic") and if not, then "detectable by science" becomes a moot point.
The second question is whether God is "undetectable by science" by definition, or if this is merely a prejudice you've created.
The third question might be whether God is detectable, irrespective of science.
The fourth question might be whether God is invisible.

Having removed these assumptions, you might then ask how one can determine or preclude the existence of God.
In the scientific method, this falls under step one: Clearly defining the question to be determined. For example, are you asking in general whether anything numinous exists, or are you asking whether any god previously known to mankind may exist, or are you specifically asking about the Christian God?

Now, part and parcel of a level playing field is that you must not assume any answer until you have a reasonable inference of its validity and its truth. Ideally, you would submit your logic to a neutral observer for outside examination and correction, but we can reasonably infer that a truly neutral observer is as rare as hen's teeth. In place of this, you must be the neutral observer. You must make yourself neutral, and lean only on those inferences that are rational and reasonable, that is, supportable by logic.

I can offer as guides in rationality these three books:
Textbook of Logic, by Alexander Wolf
Logic, by Wesley P Salmon, online here: http://www.ditext.com/salmon/logic.html
The Lady or the Tiger, by Raymond Smullyan

Read any one of them and you'll be on a good footing; read and apply all three, and you'll be more rational than most people you see every day.

Og3
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Tue Jan 15, 2019 8:54 pm

Incidentally, none of those three is expressly Christian in nature. In fact, Smullyan was a Taoist.

So I'm not trying to trick you into reading Christian books.

Post Reply