The Sun Will Be Darkened

[ippy]

What theological qualifications do you have?  I wonder if any atheist on here has any:  or any other qualifications, either?

I'm not a member of "The Magic Circle", don't know that much about them, even the not knowing much about them I still know that there isn't any magic involved just as I'm sure you know this as well BA.

I don't need to be a member of the M C to know they're only  performing tricks.

I don't need to be a member/follower of any religion to know etc etc etc, there's no evidence that___________

ippy 

[BashfulAnthony]

I'm not a member of "The Magic Circle", don't know that much about them, even the not knowing much about them I still know that there isn't any magic involved just as I'm sure you know this as well BA.

I don't need to be a member of the M C to know they're only  performing tricks.

I don't need to be a member/follower of any religion to know etc etc etc, there's no evidence that___________

ippy

All of which is as clear an admission of ignorance as you could make.  Well said, Ippy:  I admire your honesty!

[Outrider]

Yes, but when it comes to being specific about aspects of the Bible, to discuss them with any degree of authority you need some learning background.

No, you just need the knowledge. If you're employing someone, a relevant qualification save you having to test them, but you employ them for the capacity, not the certificate. In an argument you can cite your certificates as much as you like, but it doesn't make an invalid argument valid.

This is, perhaps, why you think that saying 'Midrash' justifies all sorts of cherry picking and selective interpretations, but it doesn't, it just describes them - you still need to explain.

As to Google:  it is useful ad long as you use it intelligently, and not merely as an adjunct  to your particular slant.

It's entirely possible to do both.

And How many people here quote from google having checked the credentials and authorship of the site?  Not many I suggest.

Perhaps not, but then if their detail is wrong you have the opportunity to point that out.

O.

[BashfulAnthony]

Perhaps not, but then if their detail is wrong you have the opportunity to point that out.

O.

It is incumbent on the person quoting to ensure, as fully as possible, that what they are saying is accurate, and not on the recipient to do so. 

[Outrider]

It is incumbent on the person quoting to ensure, as fully as possible, that what they are saying is accurate, and not on the recipient to do so.

It's good practice, yes, but people aren't perfect, and even checking up the source doesn't always help. I could be referred to, say, the encyclicals of the Catholic Church which many would consider to be an expert source, but I'm suggesting that you - amongst others - would dispute some of their statements.

O.

[BashfulAnthony]

It's good practice, yes, but people aren't perfect, and even checking up the source doesn't always help. I could be referred to, say, the encyclicals of the Catholic Church which many would consider to be an expert source, but I'm suggesting that you - amongst others - would dispute some of their statements.

O.

Fair enough.  But then I think you should not only say what your source is, but indicate that it may only be an opinion.

[Shaker]

Fair enough.  But then I think you should not only say what your source is, but indicate that it may only be an opinion.

I'm sure we all look forward to you following your own advice there, Bashers

[BashfulAnthony]

I'm sure we all look forward to you following your own advice there, Bashers

As I've said often enough, I don't rely on googling for my opinions, unlike yourself, and a few others, who cannot get by without it.

[Shaker]

Except you've never been able to show this to be the case, have you?

[Outrider]

Fair enough.  But then I think you should not only say what your source is, but indicate that it may only be an opinion.

Perhaps, perhaps not - is quoting the New Testament as 'what Jesus said' a fact, or an opinion? Some would say it's a fact, they think the New Testament is an accurate historical account, whereas I'd say that it's an opinion.

By contrast, is saying 'Gravity is not actually a force' a fact or an opinion? The current scientific understanding is that gravity is an effect on space-time rather than actually a force, but scientific findings are technically provisional...

All you can do in a forum like this where the epistemology is as open to debate as anything else is make your point and be ready to support it if it's challenged.

O.

[BashfulAnthony]

Except you've never been able to show this to be the case, have you?

IF you mean how do I know that people rely on it for their views, then it if it were not so we have to acknowledge that we have amongst us some of the country's leading theologians, philosophers, scientists, etc.  Very likely!

[floo]

Some things are facts like gravity, as it appears to be provable, other things cannot be proved like much of what is recorded in the Bible.

[Shaker]

IF you mean how do I know that people rely on it for their views, then it if it were not so we have to acknowledge that we have amongst us some of the country's leading theologians, philosophers, scientists, etc.  Very likely!

More likely, less likely or about as likely that some people like reading books (proper ones, with pages and not USB slots) and remember what they've read?

[BashfulAnthony]

More likely, less likely or about as likely that some people like reading books (proper ones, with pages and not USB slots) and remember what they've read?

Of course: the atheists are all avid readers of religious tomes, I'm sure!!

[Outrider]

Of course: the atheists are all avid readers of religious tomes, I'm sure!!

Well, readers about religion at the very least: http://www.pewforum.org/2010/09/28/u-s-religious-knowledge-survey/

Atheists are one of the highest scoring groups on general religious knowledge...

O.

[Shaker]

Of course: the atheists are all avid readers of religious tomes, I'm sure!!

Apart from the use of the word avid, some of them, certainly, yes. I'm not one of them but a great many atheists were once believers.

[floo]

Apart from the use of the word avid, some of them, certainly, yes. I'm not one of them but a great many atheists were once believers.

Very true.

[ippy]

All of which is as clear an admission of ignorance as you could make.  Well said, Ippy:  I admire your honesty!

I can understand why say the above B A perhaps you could now explain to me how all of this deeply learned knowledge of yours has made you believe that these magic tricks and more really happened such as: comming back from the dead, talking snakes, burning bushes, walking on water, feeding the thousands with a few fish, Lazerous, the parting of the sea etc etc and on.

And how you are so learned you really believe this stuff, all without the slightest bit of credible evidence that might have supported, at the very least, some of it?

Ippy

[BashfulAnthony]

I can understand why say the above B A perhaps you could now explain to me how all of this deeply learned knowledge of yours has made you believe that these magic tricks and more really happened such as: comming back from the dead, talking snakes, burning bushes, walking on water, feeding the thousands with a few fish, Lazerous, the parting of the sea etc etc and on.

And how you are so learned you really believe this stuff, all without the slightest bit of credible evidence that might have supported, at the very least, some of it?

Ippy

Ippy, I am much offended that you take so little notice of what I say.  I have been saying for months that I don't believe all the OT stuff you quote. 

[Shaker]

So forget items 2, 3 and 7 on ippy's list and deal with the rest, which are all NT stories and which you do supposedly accept.

[BashfulAnthony]

So forget items 2, 3 and 7 on ippy's list and deal with the rest, which are all NT stories and which you do supposedly accept.

Yes.

[Shaker]

Yes.

Fire away then.

[BashfulAnthony]

Fire away then.

?

[Shaker]

?

Your response to ippy's questions in #92.

[BashfulAnthony]

Your response to ippy's questions in #92.

I accept the witness accounts as the NT presents them.  That is all.