Skeptics Annotated Bible

[liquidpele]

Hmmm - you talking about me, perchance? I read the starter book on geochronology, by the way, and that DID shout tautology on an increasingly regular basis regaring evolution, although my favourate bit was where apparently they gave up on the radiometric dating of the Earth in favour of carbon dating because it didn’t fit the cosmological assumption…and carbon dating pretty much did!

Anyway, I never said I took it absolutely necessarily literally… just possibly so! Anyway, nice to see they re-evaluate the hominid they previously decided didn’t walk on 2 legs to, in fact, walk on 2 legs and be the missing link - I’m sure there’s not an ounce of scientific positivism behind that one!

Ummm, no, I was not talking about you.

And you can’t do carbon dating for the age of the Earth… if you want specifics here, I found you a site with a “Christian perspective”:

asa3.org/ASA/RESOURCES/WIENS.html

I’m not familiar with your other reference.

 

[summa8447]

I think you’re coming from a tangent here - this thread is (for me) largely about the kind of (mostly OT) “God told the Israelites to perform genocide” accusations and the like…

You sound like you’re in a similar position to me, or at least my niggling skepticism, which has certainly been more than that at various points - talking of which, I really should go to confession some time soon, preferably with a priest with a high tolerance and high degree of leniency … although the NT never struck me as being especially mythopaic… of course, if evolution turns out to be true, the earliest bits (at least) of Genesis would have to be, and I generally read Job as being such, but there you go…

Also, since you’re talking about the NT, I have to say there’s a certain rejection of the ‘mythopaicism’ idea in all the conflicts with the sadduccess, who come from that kind of angle, as I understand it. It would be a bit odd to have a mythopaic Jesus arguing mythopaically that all this metaphorical interpretation is cobblers!

I saw an entertaining argument on a website somewhere where it was pointed out that there are more primary/secondary witness accounts about Jesus than about most of the figures of the ancient world… was Socrates a myth? Pythagoras? Historians rate reliability according to their opinions, and where the assumption of reality is a physicalistic one, accounts involving supernature are cheerfully rejected - but that’s scientific orthodoxy for you !

Just a disclaimer at the outset here. I assume you are simply conversing as everyone else is here (I’m not assuming anything by anything you said or making any accusations), but I sense you sound like a lady. And this goes to any other ladies out there too… I’m married. There, I’ve made my disclaimer. Everybody knows.

Now on to my response:

I get my questioning mind from listening to debates, debates, debates between atheists and others vs. mostly evangelicals like Gary Habermas (I like him), Mike Licona (him too), William Lane Craig (his cocky approach irritates me), other evangelicals, and Catholics like mostly Dinesh D’souza (He’s good - I’m still reading his What’s so Great About Christianity). I listen to Reginald Finley’s Infidel Guy Podcast where his guests are largely atheist, skeptics in many areas, and he used to have The Debate Hour which are archived (you just need to join to download - I’m not a Gold member I guess you get a better quality feed if you are).

I have listened to Richard Carrier (atheist) on his mythisist theories several times as guest on Infidel Guy and Faith & Reason with Richard Spencer and debating Gary Habermas and Mike Licona at the same time on Infidel Guy, Mike Licona individually on stage, and William Lane Craig. Carrier is very interesting but his theories start to come off as simply unsubstantiated in many details after you listen to him over a few times. Ex: James the “brother of the Lord” as meaning a high ranking member not a biological brother of the lord

Robert M Price is smart but often he is too much of a smart aleck in his overall tone rather than objective.

Earl Doherty is not a scholar but his theories are pretty good, but I think he takes alot of leaps too. I find myself listening and asking why or what is your source or how do you make that leap.
beemp3.com/download.php?file=490866&song=The+God+Who+Wasn%27t+There±-+www.TheGodMovie.com

Most mythisist theories are fraught with problems, yet so is the historical Christ.

Check out this link on refuting the myth that Jesus never existed that I just read
bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm

 

[Mystic_Banana]

Ummm, no, I was not talking about you.

And you can’t do carbon dating for the age of the Earth… if you want specifics here, I found you a site with a “Christian perspective”:

asa3.org/ASA/RESOURCES/WIENS.html

I’m not familiar with your other reference.

Oh hang on, maybe it’s 2 different kinds of radiometric dating - I’m talking about the change from Holmes to Patterson, which was undertaken apparently to come up with something which would date in agreement with what cosmologists reckoned it was… I also forgot they dated it from a meteorite! Bizarre… but I’m sure the theories make a lot of sense to anyone who believes them!

It was in Science magazine, I think - last Friday?

I noticed that uber-creationist argument on a new thread - I may even step in on the other side, just to be even handed…

I should probably have added my ‘progress’ onto the earlier thread, if it’s still round… it’s a bit rude of me to continue it on this one, where it doesn’t belong! Plus I’m forgetting some aspects of it already (as evidenced…)

 

[summa8447]

To anyone who liked the Skeptic’s Annotated bible link you might like this too. It’s about 70 pages printed, and it makes interesting reading when your computer is turned off. packham.n4m.org/bible.htm

Summa8447

 

[Mystic_Banana]

Just a disclaimer at the outset here. I assume you are simply conversing as everyone else is here (I’m not assuming anything by anything you said or making any accusations), but I sense you sound like a lady. And this goes to any other ladies out there too… I’m married. There, I’ve made my disclaimer. Everybody knows.

Now on to my response:

I get my questioning mind from listening to debates, debates, debates between atheists and others vs. mostly evangelicals like Gary Habermas (I like him), Mike Licona (him too), William Lane Craig (his cocky approach irritates me), other evangelicals, and Catholics like mostly Dinesh D’souza (He’s good - I’m still reading his What’s so Great About Christianity). I listen to Reginald Finley’s Infidel Guy Podcast where his guests are largely atheist, skeptics in many areas, and he used to have The Debate Hour which are archived (you just need to join to download - I’m not a Gold member I guess you get a better quality feed if you are).

I have listened to Richard Carrier (atheist) on his mythisist theories several times as guest on Infidel Guy and Faith & Reason with Richard Spencer and debating Gary Habermas and Mike Licona at the same time on Infidel Guy, Mike Licona individually on stage, and William Lane Craig. Carrier is very interesting but his theories start to come off as simply unsubstantiated in many details after you listen to him over a few times. Ex: James the “brother of the Lord” as meaning a high ranking member not a biological brother of the lord

Robert M Price is smart but often he is too much of a smart aleck in his overall tone rather than objective.

Earl Doherty is not a scholar but his theories are pretty good, but I think he takes alot of leaps too. I find myself listening and asking why or what is your source or how do you make that leap.
beemp3.com/download.php?file=490866&song=The+God+Who+Wasn%27t+There±-+www.TheGodMovie.com

Most mythisist theories are fraught with problems, yet so is the historical Christ.

Check out this link on refuting the myth that Jesus never existed that I just read
bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm

Oh dear. One of the big arguments I’ve had is over mythopaicism… and I thought some Christian interpretation of the Bible someimes gets tenuous! I’ve read Joseph Campbell and seen probably similar arguments on t’internet you have, and read a smattering of Freud and Jung… I think the gnostics thought along these lines as well. Well, if you fancy airing any specific arguments, go ahead