To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 23492
23491  |  23493
Subject: 
Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:19:45 GMT
Viewed: 
386 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:

  
   For the story of Jesus, in effect, we have the Gospel of Dave! but we lack the Gospels of Todd, Tim, and Jake. Without those independent sources for confirmation, then it is impossible for me to conclude that the Gospels are accurate, because so much of what is contained in them directly contradicts modern understanding of reality. And, because I can’t accept the validity of the Gospels, I’m left with no independent evidence about Jesus at all, so I have no basis for assessing people’s behavior in comparison to him!

   Ummmmmm, where are you going with this? You ironically note that quoting yourself as a source is dubious by itself, but with Todd, Tim, and Jake providing corroborating evidence, you are at least more credible. But in the next breath you mention the gospels (you even gave yourself a clue you should have caught by using a plural) as if they are a single source.

Since they cannot be verified as independent sources and can instead be shown to borrow heavily from one another (in a manner quite similar to the process of editorial revisions of a single work), they cannot, to my satisfaction, be regarded as anything other than a single source (at least in terms of “proving” a historical account of Jesus).

And where the heck would I get a clue to give to myself in the first place?!?

   The Gospel of Matthew has less crediblity, but what about John, Mark and Luke (gosh, the same number as in your example)? I can understand citing the differences in those various gospels, but I’m confused by your example that basically proves the exact opposite of your conclusion. And yes, The Gospels of Dave!, Tim, Todd, and Jake are all fom the wHolly single source of Lugnet

Well, that’s not quite how I meant it. Granted, to the world outside of LUGNET, the various contributors to LUGNET are all subsumed into LUGNET as a source. But within the universe of LUGNET, (and in my example, at least) Dave, Todd, Tim, and Jake are sufficiently separate entities to qualify as different sources.

Additionally, although Todd’s, Jake’s, and Tim’s sudden conversion to MEGABLOKS-fandom would indeed be miraculous, it strikes me that the whole rising-from-the-dead thing is even miraculouser and would, accordingly, require even more definitively independent corroboration.

Dave!



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
 
(...) I didn't say that I thought they were right, or wrong, just that I was amazed at your example. (...) Freudian equivalent of a banana peel? (...) So, within the universe of the Bible, Luke, Matthew, John, and Mark are sufficiently separate (...) (21 years ago, 12-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: codifying marriage on biblical principles
 
(...) Ummmmmm, where are you going with this? You ironically note that quoting yourself as a source is dubious by itself, but with Todd, Tim, and Jake providing corroborating evidence, you are at least more credible. But in the next breath you (...) (21 years ago, 12-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

93 Messages in This Thread:





















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR