Posted: May 07, 2012 4:13 pm
Cito di Pense wrote:IgnorantiaNescia wrote:Cito di Pense wrote:IgnorantiaNescia wrote:
This is incorrect, Occam's Razor clearly argues against Mythicism, which requires either very unusual readings of several texts or establishing interpolations ad hoc.
Well, you know how it is. Occam's Razor only applies to those who are willing to say what distinguishes evidence from non-evidence, other than weeping bitterly, "It's all we have!" The problem with using the phrase "unusual readings", is that it assumes the conclusion of following a consensus. It's all right. We're used to HJ believers making rhetorical gaffes.
Dead wrong. "Unusual readings" refers to meanings projected on words that are often not based on any serious research. The various attestations of a word must be considered in context before daring, revisionist hypotheses are promulgated. Carrier himself has admitted he did not do this research before he suggested his reading of "brother(s) of the Lord". Don't you consider that odd?
Yes, of course. Serious meanings come from serious research.
So, do you think evidence from word research for newly suggested meanings would be relevant, especially before suggesting the conclusion? Or would you rather spend your day posting imagery of cats (if so, then I can recommend Jerry Coyne's blog to you)?
Stein wrote:IgnorantiaNescia wrote:proudfootz wrote:IgnorantiaNescia wrote:
What is your point about Thompson? He is not anything of a relevant authority on the New Testament (nor on ancient Levantine archeology).
What's your point about Thompson?
No one is claiming anyone should take Thompson's word for anything simply because he's an 'authority'.
Thompson is a biblical scholar who's written a book relevant to the topic we're here to discuss.
Good. My point about him is that he is as an amateur on the life of Jesus - and as a result not much of an 'authority' on it at all.
Though I readily admit he is much more relevant than Tom Verenna.
Not much of a reference: Anyone would be more relevant than Tom Verenna/Rook Hawkins!
Stein
Good call! Maybe this is more generous:
Though I readily admit he is much more relevant than Frank Zindler.