Archaeology of the New Testament

[Into the Night]

The Cross is the symbol of Salvation.

An instrument of torture and death is a symbol of salvation?? How do you figure??

 

[Dutch Uncle]

An instrument of torture and death is a symbol of salvation?? How do you figure??

Hypocrite much or just so delusional you don't remember this?:

I am a Christian.

 

[Into the Night]

... and that doesn't stop you from pretending that you are some sort of thuper geniuth on the matter.

He never claimed to be here.

It's a strawman fallacy for you to mischaracterize what others are saying.

Fallacy fallacy. No strawman occurred here.

How were you planning on supporting that statement?

People that live off the land are more in tune with the land and nature. Talk to any farmer or rancher, and they can describe a knowledge quite foreign to any city dweller.

People that live in the cities, live in an artificial world, confined to the city. To them, they care not where their power comes from, their water comes from, their food comes from, or their other supplies come from. They use it without this knowledge, similar to the way a driver drives his car without understanding anything about the engine or other mechanical systems that makes that car possible, or even the methods and materials required to build the road to drive it on, or how to make the gasoline that fuels it.

When one of these fail, it's catastrophe time in the city.

A farmer can grow his own food, even produce his own power. He might even be able to distill his own gasoline (if he has the crude oil to start with!). He's closer to that power plant, and may even have a good friend that works there. He can fix his own car, truck, and other machinery.


This is what he means. All the modern inventions that didn't exist just a generation or two back didn't exist at all in 33AD.

How do you know? Maybe some were, right? Maybe a few were downright stupid.

Just as today. What's the difference? Does that invalidate ALL the writings of today?

The New Testament, the way it is written, is pure hagiography. That is neither good nor bad, it is just the way it is.


There really aren't any of those. It's hagiography; it has to be. It's the Son of God.


None of it is historical. All of it is story that does not meet the required rigor to be history.

There is no 'rigor'. A hagiography can indeed be historical.

Thank you. When you apply the rigorous vetting required for history, so much goes away.

No 'rigor'. No 'vetting'. History has none of these things.

This is a version of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

Fallacy fallacy. No 'True Scotsman' occurred here.

You are trying to establish what is valid skepticism and what is not, with the criteria being how it aligns with what you believe.

True, but that is not a True Scotsman fallacy.

Dismissed.


Errors from the late first century and second century are still errors.

Argument of the Stone fallacy. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

I am convinced. You are no longer an atheist. You can no longer claim that status.

All Climate Change nutjobs are quite sure that Climate Change is real.

True, but they can't even define what is 'changing', or even what 'climate' means. To them, 'climate change' IS real.

 

[Into the Night]

If you consider yourself to be a Christian, don't you have to believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus?

He is not a Christian, and neither are you. Neither of you believe in the divine nature of Jesus Christ.

 

[Into the Night]

My wife is a devout Christian and sincere believer in miracles. Although Christian in philosophy, I don't believe in magic, miracles or anything that breaks the rules of the Universe as created by God or whatever force you care to call the creation of this universe and, probably, others.

You are not Christian, Sybil.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

If you consider yourself to be a Christian, don't you have to believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus?

If you believe that a human body can be brought back to life, after 3 days of being dead, then why wouldn't you believe in other miracles?

No. I'm a philosophical Christian. More of a Gnostic Christian who sees Jesus as a teacher and someone to emulate.

I've mentioned this before to you about the magic thing. Do you have memory problems or are you simply so anti-Christian that you see anyone who supports Christianity to be your enemy?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

He is not a Christian, and neither are you. Neither of you believe in the divine nature of Jesus Christ.

See, @ZenMode ? You have an ally who supports you against me.

 

[Cypress]

How were you planning on supporting that statement?

Galilee was an agricultural province. They were in tune with nature in a way people on this board are not. Ancient Galileans understood the natural cycles of the land, the agricultural and seasonal cycles, the astronomical cycles of the night sky, the cycles of life and behavior of animals better than anyone on this board.

You would like to pat us on the back for science and technology. But the fact is, people on this board are only trained to use technology in a superficial way. Nobody on this board really understands science at the level of physics, chemistry, math, and genetics. Nobody on this board really understands how a cell phone works at the level of quantum physics, or how to make them.

So you really should stop patting yourself on the back, and pointing and laughing at the ancient Galileans as primitive idiots.

The New Testament, the way it is written, is pure hagiography!

There is practically nothing hagiographic about the New Testament. Jesus meekly submitted and was tortured and hung on a cross. That did not fit Jewish expectations for a Messiah, who was supposed to be a powerful prophet capable of fighting and expelling the occupying Romans.

The disciples were portrayed as cowards who abandoned Jesus in his hour of most need.

These are unflattering and embarrassing details that would only be written down if they were roughly true. Nobody would have written this as propaganda to glorify a Jewish messiah.

 

[Into the Night]

No. I'm a philosophical Christian.

You are not a Christian. The Church of No God is not Christianity.

More of a Gnostic Christian who sees Jesus as a teacher and someone to emulate.

DON'T TRY TO DENY YOUR OWN POSTS!

I've mentioned this before to you about the magic thing. Do you have memory problems or are you simply so anti-Christian that you see anyone who supports Christianity to be your enemy?

You are describing yourself again.

 

[Into the Night]

Galilee was an agricultural province.

Galilee contains farms, ranches, cities, rivers, animals, and of course, people.

 

[Cypress]

Galilee contains farms, ranches, cities, rivers, animals, and of course, people.

"First-century Galilee was a vibrant, predominantly agrarian society under Roman rule, renowned for its fertility, rich red soil, and high-intensity farming, particularly around the Sea of Galilee. The economy relied on agriculture (wheat, barley, olives, grapes) and fishing, with 80-90% of the population involved in farming or fishing. It was a period of high taxes, intense labor, and subsistence living for most farmers."

AI summary

 

[ZenMode]

No. I'm a philosophical Christian. More of a Gnostic Christian who sees Jesus as a teacher and someone to emulate.

I've mentioned this before to you about the magic thing. Do you have memory problems or are you simply so anti-Christian that you see anyone who supports Christianity to be your enemy?

If you consider yourself to be gnostic, you still believe in some type of salvation and deity (deities). If you go that far, why not believe in miracles?

 

[IBDaMann]

He never claimed to be here.

False.

Fallacy fallacy.

Fallacy fallacy fallacy.

No strawman occurred here.

It was a strawman. Do you need me to teach you what that is?

People that live off the land are more in tune with the land and nature.

What does it mean to be "in tune with the land" ? Is that AM or FM?

Talk to any farmer or rancher, and they can describe a knowledge quite foreign to any city dweller.

Are you saying that farmers know more about farming than pilates instructors?

People that live in the cities, live in an artificial world, confined to the city.

... whereas ranchers and farmers live in a real world, confined by farms and ranches?

To them, they care not where their power comes from, their water comes from, their food comes from, or their other supplies come from. They use it without this knowledge, similar to the way a driver drives his car without understanding anything about the engine or other mechanical systems that makes that car possible, or even the methods and materials required to build the road to drive it on, or how to make the gasoline that fuels it.

I don't know if you are aware, but farmers and ranchers don't care where their power comes from, their water comes from, etc... They use it without understanding the mathematics needed to build electrical power plants or the refineries needed to produce their fuel.

When one of these fail, it's catastrophe time in the city.

If a farmer can't operate his equipment, its catastrophe time on the farm.

A farmer can grow his own food, even produce his own power.

... but he can't pay the mortgage and taxes if he doesn't have any crops to sell.

All the modern inventions that didn't exist just a generation or two back didn't exist at all in 33AD.

I am happy to stipulate that modern conveniences didn't exist in 33AD.

There is no 'rigor'.

... then you have no history. You really need to brush up on your vocabulary.

A hagiography can indeed be historical.

You really need to brush up on your logic.

When you agree with me, you shouldn't be pretending to disagree with me. A hagiography that is historical ... is nonetheless a hagiography.

No 'rigor'. No 'vetting'. History has none of these things.

You are doubling down on ignorance. Fine. So be it.

Fallacy fallacy.

Fallacy fallacy fallacy. Again. You sure like this one.

No 'True Scotsman' occurred here.

I never accused you of being any good at logic. Let me know when you'd like a primer.

True, but that is not a True Scotsman fallacy.

The term "No True Scotsman" applies to the category of fallacy, into which his fallacy falls. The category is not limited to fallacies about Scotsmen. Learn a little bit more on the subject. The moment he pretended to distinguish which kind of skepticism is true skepticism and which is not, he committed a No True Scotsman fallacy. Pay attention, I'm not going to go over this again with you.

I am convinced. You are no longer an atheist. You can no longer claim that status.

Then you're a moron. You're trying to blame me for your shortcomings in logic and reason.

 

[IBDaMann]

Galilee was an agricultural province. They were in tune with nature in a way people on this board are not.

Since @Into the Night has abandonded all logic and reason, I'll step in to fill the void.

Are you claiming that you lived back then? Do you have a time machine with which we can verify the harmonious rythms of the ancient agrarian provincials?

Otherwise, neither you nor @Into the Night get to speak for dead people.

Ancient Galileans understood the natural cycles of the land,

Are you claiming that you lived back then? Do you have a time machine with which we can verify the understanding of natural cycles of the ancient Galileans?

Otherwise, neither you nor @Into the Night get to speak for dead people.

You would like to pat us on the back for science and technology.

Nope. Especially the "us" part, in which you surreptitiously included yourself in that ... as @Into the Night continues to insist that you don't do that and that you never did. Too funny.

But the fact is, people on this board are only trained to use technology in a superficial way.

Stupid comment. I hope you realize that stupid comments comprise the bulk of what you make. I wonder if @Into the Night will have anything to say about the purely "superficial" way farmers use technology.

Nobody on this board really understands science at the level of physics, chemistry, math, and genetics.

Speak for yourself. I'll stipulate that you don't understand any science whatsoever. We can leave it at that.

Nobody on this board really understands how a cell phone works at the level of quantum physics,

Everybody does. Electrons flow through circuits and create electromagnetic waves that flow. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't understand that. You might be JPP's only example.

So you really should stop patting yourself on the back,

Again, speak for yourself. I'm not aware of anyone who is patting anyone on the back. All I see is you bitching and crying that the documentation for the story of Jesus doesn't meet the criteria for being historical. At least you have @Into the Night to cry with you.

and pointing and laughing at the ancient Galileans as primitive idiots.

Primitive Galileans were, in fact, primitive. How were you convinced that they weren't? Their time period should be a dead give-away.

There is practically nothing hagiographic about the New Testament.

There is nothing about the New Testament that isn't hagiographic. I'm guessing that you have never read it.

Jesus meekly submitted and was tortured and hung on a cross.

Thank you. The same hagiography as the legend of Rosa Parks.

 

[Into the Night]

"First-century Galilee was a vibrant, predominantly agrarian society under Roman rule, renowned for its fertility, rich red soil, and high-intensity farming, particularly around the Sea of Galilee. The economy relied on agriculture (wheat, barley, olives, grapes) and fishing, with 80-90% of the population involved in farming or fishing. It was a period of high taxes, intense labor, and subsistence living for most farmers."

AI summary

Galilee contains farms, ranches, cities, rivers, animals, and of course, people.
AI is F'ing dumb. AI is not God, Cyborg.

 

[Into the Night]

False.


Fallacy fallacy fallacy.


It was a strawman. Do you need me to teach you what that is?

Denial of logic. Fallacy fallacy.

What does it mean to be "in tune with the land" ? Is that AM or FM?

Go learn what 'in tune' means.

Are you saying that farmers know more about farming than pilates instructors?

... whereas ranchers and farmers live in a real world, confined by farms and ranches?

Go learn what 'real' means.

I don't know if you are aware, but farmers and ranchers don't care where their power comes from, their water comes from, etc... They use it without understanding the mathematics needed to build electrical power plants or the refineries needed to produce their fuel.

They do know where their power comes from. They can even generate it themselves quite easily. They know where their water comes from. They often treat it themselves as well. Distilling petroleum does not require mathematics. It only requires the will to build the equipment, which is inherently pretty simple.

If a farmer can't operate his equipment, its catastrophe time on the farm.

Depends. But a farmer can repair his own equipment in most cases.

... but he can't pay the mortgage and taxes if he doesn't have any crops to sell.

He does have crops to sell. Why wouldn't he?

I am happy to stipulate that modern conveniences didn't exist in 33AD.

So?

... then you have no history. You really need to brush up on your vocabulary.

Inversion fallacy.

You really need to brush up on your logic.

Inversion fallacy.

When you agree with me, you shouldn't be pretending to disagree with me. A hagiography that is historical ... is nonetheless a hagiography.

So? Are you trying to make a point here?

You are doubling down on ignorance. Fine. So be it.

Inversion fallacy.

Fallacy fallacy fallacy. Again. You sure like this one.

Denial of logic.

I never accused you of being any good at logic. Let me know when you'd like a primer.

Inversion fallacy.

The term "No True Scotsman" applies to the category of fallacy, into which his fallacy falls.

It is not a category. It is a fallacy in and of itself. Fallacy fallacy. No such fallacy occurred.

The category is not limited to fallacies about Scotsmen.

Not a category.

Learn a little bit more on the subject. The moment he pretended to distinguish which kind of skepticism is true skepticism and which is not, he committed a No True Scotsman fallacy. Pay attention, I'm not going to go over this again with you.

Denial of logic.

Then you're a moron. You're trying to blame me for your shortcomings in logic and reason.

Inversion fallacy. Mantra 1a.

 

[Into the Night]

Since @Into the Night has abandonded all logic and reason, I'll step in to fill the void.

Inversion fallacy. Denial of logic. You are not providing any reasoning. You are whining.

Are you claiming that you lived back then? Do you have a time machine with which we can verify the harmonious rythms of the ancient agrarian provincials?

No, IBD. I never made any such claim.

Otherwise, neither you nor @Into the Night get to speak for dead people.

I am not speaking for dead people, IBD. I am describing their writings.

Are you claiming that you lived back then? Do you have a time machine with which we can verify the understanding of natural cycles of the ancient Galileans?

Never made any such claim, IBD.

Otherwise, neither you nor @Into the Night get to speak for dead people.

I am not speaking for dead people. I am using their writings.

Nope. Especially the "us" part, in which you surreptitiously included yourself in that ... as @Into the Night continues to insist that you don't do that and that you never did. Too funny.

I never said that either, IBD.

Stupid comment. I hope you realize that stupid comments comprise the bulk of what you make. I wonder if @Into the Night will have anything to say about the purely "superficial" way farmers use technology.

Obviously have no concept of farming.

Speak for yourself. I'll stipulate that you don't understand any science whatsoever. We can leave it at that.

Magick Word. Science is not involved here. Strawman fallacy.

Everybody does. Electrons flow through circuits and create electromagnetic waves that flow. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't understand that.

There are a lot of people that don't understand that, including you, apparently. Now you are ignoring the work of Faraday, Gauss, and Maxwell.

You might be JPP's only example.


Again, speak for yourself. I'm not aware of anyone who is patting anyone on the back. All I see is you bitching and crying that the documentation for the story of Jesus doesn't meet the criteria for being historical. At least you have @Into the Night to cry with you.

There is no Magick Criteria.

Primitive Galileans were, in fact, primitive.

Circular definition.

How were you convinced that they weren't?

Circular question.

Their time period should be a dead give-away.

Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism).

There is nothing about the New Testament that isn't hagiographic. I'm guessing that you have never read it.

So? Are you trying to make a point here?

Thank you. The same hagiography as the legend of Rosa Parks.

Strawman fallacy.