• afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    The consensus among historical scholars

    Argument from authority, logical fallacy. Also you don’t apply it consistently. The consensus among humanity (95%) is that the supernatural does exist. The consensus among Bible scholars is the resurrection is a real historical event and that Luke wrote the 3rd gospel.

    it was already probably clear to everyone that something bad was going to happen to the Temple, there were lots of similar guys running around.

    80 football fields in area and one of the most prominent locations of the Empire. By a lot you mean the 2 we know about I assume.

    Arguing that the man probably existed is not arguing that he advocated for the things he was saying in the Bible,

    We follow the evidence and build claims off of it. What you are doing here is taking a claim, and weakening it so you can sneak it in. It is no different than what the diests do. They continue to hide their God in smaller and smaller amounts of time and space and scope on the very edge of what we know. It also isn’t different than what astrology does. Used to be astrology predicted the paths of empires now it is predicts that parts of your personality. All pseudoscience and fake history follows the route of ever decreasing effects.

    Remember that historical argumentation and proof looks fundamentally different than argumentation and proof in physics or math. You can’t do “Josephus minus The Testimonium Flavianum plus Pliny’s letters equals Christ.”

    When we don’t have enough evidence we make no claims. We don’t weaken our standards of evidence.

    • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Argument from authority, logical fallacy.

      Actually not worth reading anything past this, literally just jerking off on your keyboard while sounding like an idiot.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Yeah kind of agree. Argument from authority isn’t even a fallacy, really; we do this shit every single time we go to a doctor’s office or hospital. Ad Verecundiam really has more to do with blindly trusted singular experts (without looking at consensus) or false experts.

        We also utilize expert consensus in something called science and peer-reviewed journals.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          Argument from authority is a fallacy. You are confusing what we do vs what we know.

          We follow experts on things we do not have time to research ourselves as a practical means to live life. We don’t blindly accept something is true because an expert said it. I work with chemists all the time who knows more than me about their field. I follow them that doesn’t mean that literally every single thing they say I trust as wholly true.

          We also utilize expert consensus in something called science and peer-reviewed journals.

          Already explained this to you.

          Now, the majority of experts on the Bible believe the resurrection is a true historical event. Do you believe this yes or no? If yes then why are you in an atheist area if no why don’t you blindly have faith in authority?

    • andros_rex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The consensus among Bible scholars is the resurrection is a real historical event and that Luke wrote the 3rd gospel.

      Lolwut, that never came up in my graduate religious historiography class.

      Dude, I’m not going to get into endless arguments with you. You don’t have the reading comprehension. I’m pretty sure you’re not even 18 yet. It takes you about two comments to start accusing anyone who calls you a Christian.

      I used to laugh at folks who suggested that atheists could be as fundamentalist and dogmatic as Christian’s are, but you’ve given me cause for pause.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yes clearly if you never saw something in class it isn’t true.

        You don’t have the reading comprehension.

        Personal attack no evidence.

        • andros_rex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Okay, prove to me that the mainstream academic historical view is that Jesus was resurrected and that Luke wrote the third gospel.

          And if you’d like to prove your reading comprehension skills, see how many comments you can make it before accusing me of being a Christian lol.