Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable

On Jan 9, 11:49 am, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:39:54 -0800, Evopeach wrote:
On Jan 8, 10:28 pm, Mark VandeWettering <wetter...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2008-01-09, Evopeach <keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jan 8, 1:59 pm, "Tiny Bulcher" <alycid...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thus cwaeth chris thompson :

On Jan 7, 10:08 pm, Evopeach <keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 7, 1:55 pm, Cory Albrecht <coryalbre...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Augray wrote, on 2008/01/07 13:46:

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 08:58:28 -0800 (PST), Evopeach
<keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
<0e604fb0-

f901-4c35-8922-4eb86198b...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>





:
The resurrection of Christ is one of the most historically
studied events in history and no one no one has a scintilla of
evidence to overturn the reports written by the eye witnesses
all within 60 years of the events.

Then why do the eye-witness accounts contradict each other?

You know,if creationits had the brains God gave my cat, they'd
be able to answer this with modern psychology and behavioural
studies. And that is that humans are utterly unreliable as
witnesses.

I am sure thats the case with all you friends and peers since
their all turdhead evos who propagate lies like space does
radiowaves.

Well let's just trash that American Juris Prudence system which
relies heavily on sworn witnesses, witnesses for leads in
investigations, etc.

My brother-in-law was an NYPD detective for 20 years.  From what
he tells me, he never relied on eyewitnesses if he could help it.
In addition, he routinely solved cases where there were no
witnesses- forensic evidence being that much more powerful.

Reruns of "Dragnet" are not a good source of information on police
procedure.

As part of my training to be a lay magistrate, we were shown a film
made in the 1980's by the Metropolitan Police. They staged an
incident (an argument, followed by an assault), which was recorded
on CCTV. They then interviewed the witnesses of the incident (not
telling them the assault had been staged), in most cases immediately
afterward, and recorded their statements. It was amazing how wrong
they could be; and interestingly, the witnesses who made confident,
detailed statements were just as wrong as people who were hesitant
and unsure. A month later they re-interviewed some witnesses,
telling them it was for a possible trial. Again, the statements were
recorded. This time, none of them - not one - recalled the incident
correctly.

Uncorroborated eyewitness evidence needs to be taken with a dose of
NaCl. Especially if the eyewitnesses' names and addresses are
unknown, they haven't made any sworn statements, and they all have a
vested interest in presenting a particular account, as in the Case
of the Empty Tomb.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And the vested interst was to get arrested, imprisoned, lose all they
owned and probably executed.

Uh, the argument is not that they were lying.  The argument is that
they are unreliable.  That is demonstratably true.

        Mark- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And the demonstration is?  citations, documents, scholars

Weren't you the one claiming to be quite the theological scholar just a
few posts ago?  I asked who your mentors were, but perhaps you haven't
had time to reply.

Ehrman, Bart D.,  _Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the
Bible and Why_,  HarperOne, 2007.

This is mainstream history written for a popular audience.  If you're
still curious after reading this, he has a large body of more
academically-oriented work, and the citations in both are an excellent
portal into the rest of the field.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Mainstream with agnostics, atheists, evos, and skeptics certanly not
Christian historian scholars.

"I think Bart is writing about his personal journey, about legitimate
things that bother him," says Darrell Bock, research professor of New
Testament studies at the Dallas Theological Seminary. Like many
Christian scholars who have studied the ancient scrolls, Bock says his
faith was strengthened by the same process that destroyed Ehrman's.

Never said theological scholar but a layperson student self taught and
under teaching from some of the best scholars and teachers.

Just review the Dallas Theological Seminary website and add Dr. Bruce
Waltke and you'll get the drift of my theology and mentors.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: KRS - Possible news to come
    ... It appear that you aren't aware that there are evidence and that I am only ... > accept them, not given your history. ... written by abusers and naysayers who contrary to scholars, ... historians and theologian have seen my documentation, ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant Facts was: Re: The Reasonable
    ... studied events in history and no one no one has a scintilla of ... evidence to overturn the reports written by the eye witnesses ... witnesses- forensic evidence being that much more powerful. ... This is mainstream history written for a popular audience. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Vatican documents known by scholars.
    ... > scholars today are better then in old days is an assumtion which aren't ... > History many parts haven't been studied the last 50 years. ... Inger. ... You've been unable to provide evidence, ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Another transitional fossil found.
    ... no one of them had any reason to write down an independent ... But anyway, many Flood stories are ... None of this is evidence that the stories ... assuming that there were even three witnesses. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Another transitional fossil found.
    ... no one of them had any reason to write down an independent ... But anyway, many Flood stories are ... None of this is evidence that the stories ... assuming that there were even three witnesses. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading