|
|
Post by James Hannam on Jun 3, 2008 14:56:08 GMT
|
|
Mike D
Master of the Arts
Posts: 204
|
Post by Mike D on Jun 3, 2008 15:10:52 GMT
The link seems to be blank.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Hannam on Jun 3, 2008 17:44:11 GMT
The link seems to be blank. Not sure what went wrong but I've broken it out and it works now. Best wishes James |
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jun 3, 2008 20:25:13 GMT
After reading that and how she thinks about the Jesus Myth theory and all those myths about the middle ages, I can only conclude that either
a) James is indeed lying to us and deliberately hiding the strength of the Jesus Myth theory and the myths about the middle ages are true, or
b) This woman is not only clueless, but also has no idea that she is so clueless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joel on Jun 3, 2008 21:30:04 GMT
Good grief. She didn't even do her homework on the people who she says support her. Ehrman does not question Jesus's existence, and Harpur and Acharya S are not historians. She could have at least cited Price and Carrier...
|
|
|
|
Post by humphreyclarke on Jun 4, 2008 19:05:43 GMT
Shame on you James for calling Richard Dawkins a historian!. For future reference, his full title is Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Atheism.
|
|
|
|
Post by bjorn on Jun 4, 2008 19:23:44 GMT
Is it a parody?
Somehow, I don't think so.
A hoot, though rather tragic one. Hopefully she has some friends that may help her.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamierobertson on Apr 24, 2009 17:53:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by humphreyclarke on Apr 24, 2009 18:57:40 GMT
Hooray
Wouldn't be a proper blog without Stephen Carr and his 'devastating' one sentence paragraphs.
|
|
|
|
Post by ratbag on Apr 24, 2009 20:15:59 GMT
I rarely bother reading atheist sites and reading this I am reminded why.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Hannam on Apr 25, 2009 8:01:00 GMT
James, can I just clarify - are we allowed to feed the troll, or not? Steven Carr is a bit tragic. He and I first met on the net in 1998. Since then, he has not moved on a jot. He's still posting the same random one-liners on message boards and blogs without appearing to have read anything or learnt anything in the intervening period. Feed him if you like but don't expect any thanks from him in return.... Best wishes James |
|
|
|
Post by humphreyclarke on Apr 25, 2009 9:29:55 GMT
Still there is something ennobling about one Welshman's crusade to rid the world of 'superstition' by sheer weight of blog comments alone. He is almost the anti-St Paul.
|
|
|
|
Post by jim_s on Apr 25, 2009 11:24:17 GMT
I hadn't seen Steven's comments. Jamie asked a good question: is it better to respond to him and encourage his trollishness or not? Shall we take a poll?
|
|
|
|
Post by jamierobertson on Apr 26, 2009 11:45:58 GMT
I'm quite happy to, although I realise it may be like talking to a brick wall. But hey, if it helps inform myself and other readers of the blog...
|
|
|
|
Post by humphreyclarke on Apr 26, 2009 12:10:27 GMT
I'm something of a novice on NT technicalities so I would be interested in your replies. I'm guessing the first thing he brings up is the later Gospel of Thomas where the infant Jesus zaps a few of his peers. The second is just a reductio ad absurdum based on the NT miracles. This highlights the huge gulf that separates 'moderns' and 'ancients'. Given the ancient literature I have read, it seems an account wouldn't have been taken seriously if it didn't have a few miraculous events in it, particularly if describing events of dramatic importance. The last comment doesn't appear to me to be of any great importance. Although I would like to know where did this idea that Paul didn't believe in bodily resurrection come from?.
This comment is stupendously ironic:
'All there are are myths and legends which are lapped up by Christians as gullible now as they were 2000 years ago'
...and how many myths have the materialists created since the enlightenment?, and how many of them are swallowed unquestionably by their gullible acolytes today?.
|
|
