where else can you find us?

The League of Reason still has some social media accounts! You can find us on Facebook or on Twitter for some interesting links and things.

Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 26 of 27
 [ 533 posts ] 
Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.
Author Message
Jason101Posts: 49Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:56 am Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Now I post some of my sources.If you start to mess with the stuff I put on I will have nothing to do with you,so please make sure you keep my stuff on and do not play around with what I write or post.If you do I will see it as a declaration of intellectual abuse .
Mon May 20, 2013 10:53 am
Jason101Posts: 49Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:56 am Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Mon May 20, 2013 10:56 am
Jason101Posts: 49Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:56 am Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Mon May 20, 2013 10:58 am
Jason101Posts: 49Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:56 am Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Sam Harris, Christ’s Resurrection, and the Nature of Belief

by Kyle Butt, M.A.

Sam Harris has helped lead the new brigade of militant atheists in their charge against God. His bestseller, The End of Faith, attempts to persuade the reader that all religions, including Christianity, are not only useless, but often quite harmful. In truth, he does an outstanding job showing some of the problems with false religions like Islam, and he also effectively repudiates perversions of Christian doctrine that attempt to pass themselves off as authentic. What he fails to do, however, is accurately assess true, New Testament Christianity, a fault that lies at the heart of much modern, atheistic writing.

As a case in point, Harris asked the question: “What should we believe?” He answered:

We believe most of what we believe about the world because others have told us to.... In fact, the more educated we become, the more our beliefs come to us second hand. A person who believes only those propositions for which he can provide full sensory or theoretical justification will know almost nothing about the world (2004).

Harris then proceeded to discuss how to assess the validity of what we should or should not believe that other people tell us. He gave three sources of information and analyzed the validity of each. First, he proposed the scenario of an anchorman on the evening news claiming that a fire in Colorado had burned 100,000 acres. Second, he listed as a source of information numerous biologists who claim that DNA is the “molecular basis for sexual reproduction.” And the third source of information he listed was the Pope, who claims that Jesus is the Son of God, was born of a virgin, and was resurrected bodily after death.

After some discussion, Harris concluded that the first and second sources of information are reliable and should be trusted, but the third, the Pope, is not. What is interesting about Harris’ discussion is why he concluded that the story about the fire on the evening news is trustworthy. He elaborated:

Given our beliefs about the human mind, the success of our widespread collaboration with other human beings, and the degree to which we all rely on the news, it is scarcely conceivable that a respected television network and a highly paid anchorman are perpetrating a hoax, or that thousands of firefighters, newsmen, and terrified homeowners have mistaken Texas for Colorado. Implicit in such commonsense judgments lurks an understanding of the causal connections between various processes in the world, the likelihood of different outcomes, and the vested interests or lack thereof, of those whose testimony we are considering. What would a professional news anchor stand to gain from lying about a fire in Colorado? We need not go into the details here, if the anchor on the evening news says that there is a fire in Colorado and then shows us images of burning trees, we can be reasonably sure that there really is a fire in Colorado (2004).

It is not surprising that Harris follows this explanation with his statement about mistrusting the words of the Pope pertaining to the resurrection of Christ. In this regard, he is right: the Pope’s “word” on the resurrection is no more authoritative than the word of Sam Harris. But notice the straw man Harris has built. He rightly attacks the false belief of the Pope’s infallibility, but he does not address the real evidence that validates Jesus’ resurrection. Were we to put the evidence for the resurrection beside that of the news story, the resurrection would have unquestionably more “commonsense judgments” to commend it, making it much more “reasonably sure” than a modern news story.

Analyzing the resurrection of Christ in light of Harris’ filter of evidence, it is “scarcely conceivable” that several hundred eyewitnesses (1 Corinthians 15:6) of the resurrected Christ simply concocted the story to further their agenda. What would ordinary fishermen, farmers, or businessmen and women stand to gain from perpetuating such a hoax? The reward for their testimony was that many of them were stoned, killed with the sword, tortured, or imprisoned for nothing more than saying that they knew Jesus came back to life. Thousands of their peers listened with interest to their evidence, assessed the value of the witnesses and other information, such as the empty tomb of Christ, and were forced to conclude that the resurrection had, indeed, occurred (Acts 2:41). Many among the most educated classes, including the priests, who would have had numerous reasons to deny the validity of the evidence, were convinced of the truth of Christ’s resurrection (Acts 6:7). The many “infallible proofs” (Acts 1:3) offered for the resurrection are recorded in the most reliable documents ever to come down to modern man from any historical repository (see Butt, 2004). In fact, so powerful are the various evidences for the resurrection (see Butt, 2002), that, knowing what we know “about the casual connections between various processes” and humanity’s “success of our widespread collaboration with other human beings,” it is inconceivable that the resurrection of Christ is a hoax. The Pope is an easy target. The real evidence for the resurrection is not.

REFERENCES

Butt, Kyle (2002), “Jesus Christ—Dead or Alive?” Reason & Revelation, [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/121.

Butt, Kyle (2004), “Archaeology and the New Testament,” Reason & Revelation, [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2591.

Harris, Sam (2004), The End of Faith (New York: W.W. Norton).



Copyright © 2009 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

We are happy to grant permission for items in the "Deity of Christ" section to be reproduced in their entirety, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) the author’s name must remain attached to the materials; (4) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (5) alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, quotations, etc. must be reproduced exactly as they appear in the original); (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken.

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

Apologetics Press
230 Landmark Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
U.S.A.
Phone (334) 272-8558

http://www.apologeticspress.org
Mon May 20, 2013 11:00 am
forgotten observerUser avatarPosts: 99Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 1:21 am

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason101 wrote:Now I post some of my sources.If you start to mess with the stuff I put on I will have nothing to do with you,so please make sure you keep my stuff on and do not play around with what I write or post.If you do I will see it as a declaration of intellectual abuse .


Honestly jason spamming sources is hardly constructive, why not just put them at the end of whatever you are actually writing?
Also why are you so intent on providing sources when you haven't even made anything yet?
"Nobody is ever born into this world as a soldier. "
—Rau Le Creuset, Mobile Suit Gundam Seed
Mon May 20, 2013 11:03 am
*SD*User avatarPosts: 120Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:00 amLocation: Wales, UK Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason101 wrote:it is inconceivable that the resurrection of Christ is a hoax.


No, it isn't. I can conceive of it, therefore it is conceivable.
Mon May 20, 2013 11:06 am
WWW
Master_Ghost_KnightContributorUser avatarPosts: 2630Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:57 pmLocation: Netherlands Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason101 wrote:Now I post some of my sources.If you start to mess with the stuff I put on I will have nothing to do with you,so please make sure you keep my stuff on and do not play around with what I write or post.If you do I will see it as a declaration of intellectual abuse .

The only form of abuse being perpetrated here is you, on constantly spewing random bullshit while systematically failing to address any criticism and failing all your self imposed deadlines in order to make your case.
We don't care what you are doing with your free time, we don't care on either you are writing your paper or not, or if you have taken a pause, we don't care what inspires you, we don't care what you ate last night, we don't care about what you find interesting, we don't care about your plights or grievances.
Either present your case or f**k *f! I frankly think it is a mistake that you haven't been banned already.
"I have an irrefutable argument for the existence of...." NO, STOP! You are already wrong!
Last edited by Master_Ghost_Knight on Mon May 20, 2013 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
Mon May 20, 2013 11:06 am
forgotten observerUser avatarPosts: 99Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 1:21 am

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason101 wrote:Analyzing the resurrection of Christ in light of Harris’ filter of evidence, it is “scarcely conceivable” that several hundred eyewitnesses (1 Corinthians 15:6) of the resurrected Christ simply concocted the story to further their agenda. What would ordinary fishermen, farmers, or businessmen and women stand to gain from perpetuating such a hoax? The reward for their testimony was that many of them were stoned, killed with the sword, tortured, or imprisoned for nothing more than saying that they knew Jesus came back to life. Thousands of their peers listened with interest to their evidence, assessed the value of the witnesses and other information, such as the empty tomb of Christ, and were forced to conclude that the resurrection had, indeed, occurred (Acts 2:41). Many among the most educated classes, including the priests, who would have had numerous reasons to deny the validity of the evidence, were convinced of the truth of Christ’s resurrection (Acts 6:7). The many “infallible proofs” (Acts 1:3) offered for the resurrection are recorded in the most reliable documents ever to come down to modern man from any historical repository (see Butt, 2004). In fact, so powerful are the various evidences for the resurrection (see Butt, 2002), that, knowing what we know “about the casual connections between various processes” and humanity’s “success of our widespread collaboration with other human beings,” it is inconceivable that the resurrection of Christ is a hoax. The Pope is an easy target. The real evidence for the resurrection is not.


Notice the only source for these claims is the bible which was not written by credited historians or anything even close. This is practically circular reasoning
"Nobody is ever born into this world as a soldier. "
—Rau Le Creuset, Mobile Suit Gundam Seed
Mon May 20, 2013 11:08 am
australopithecusAdministratorUser avatarPosts: 4232Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason, sources usually are included in the paper. Not seperately on an Internet forum. Just a bit of academic advice for you.
Image
Mon May 20, 2013 11:12 am
australopithecusAdministratorUser avatarPosts: 4232Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Also, if you insist of spamming videos and walls of text then they will be condensed into a single post. I don't care if you don't like it, either learn to use the forum correctly or I will do the job for you.
Image
Mon May 20, 2013 11:16 am
Jason101Posts: 49Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:56 am Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Yep you are a joke ,academic censorship what a JOKE! I have only been on five minutes! What a total joke!
Mon May 20, 2013 11:29 am
australopithecusAdministratorUser avatarPosts: 4232Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Firstly, you don't know what censorship is. Secondly, no one has edited your posts so at this point you're just making stuff up.
Image
Mon May 20, 2013 11:31 am
forgotten observerUser avatarPosts: 99Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 1:21 am

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason101 wrote:Yep you are a joke ,academic censorship what a JOKE! I have only been on five minutes! What a total joke!


:facepalm: What censorship? He's tidying up your posts not deleting them.
"Nobody is ever born into this world as a soldier. "
—Rau Le Creuset, Mobile Suit Gundam Seed
Mon May 20, 2013 11:31 am
australopithecusAdministratorUser avatarPosts: 4232Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

forgotten observer wrote:
Jason101 wrote:Yep you are a joke ,academic censorship what a JOKE! I have only been on five minutes! What a total joke!


:facepalm: What censorship? He's tidying up your posts not deleting them.


I haven't even done that. No one has touched his posts, he's just looking for an excuse to complain.
Image
Mon May 20, 2013 11:33 am
VivreUser avatarPosts: 351Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:05 pmLocation: dungeon of despair Gender: Female

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason101
why do you miss a bit of respect besides regarding the forum rules that you've approved like everybody here?

Please use the 'edit-button' along your postings to condense your row of posts and please put the long quotations of external material into 'show-more' tags

[ShowMore]YOUR TEXT[/ShowMore]

~~~
(edit:) Oh well - he can't be bothered

Ein Dummkopf bleibt ein Dummkopf nur für sich in Feld und Haus;
Doch wenn du ihn zum Einfluß bringst, so wird ein Schurke draus.

(Franz Grillparzer)

A dullard stays a dullard to himself at farm and house;
But if you grant him influence, as scoundrel he'll arouse. (transl ~V)
Last edited by Vivre on Mon May 20, 2013 12:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Mon May 20, 2013 11:37 am
WWW
*SD*User avatarPosts: 120Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:00 amLocation: Wales, UK Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

australopithecus wrote:he's just looking for an excuse to complain.


Of course he is. This is what he does. Even though you haven't so much as touched his posts he's complaining that you have so he can get out of the hole he's dug him self.. He's even made a video about it already :)

Mon May 20, 2013 11:39 am
WWW
australopithecusAdministratorUser avatarPosts: 4232Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

FYI, these are the last few post edits that have happened on this forum. Just so Jason can't claim censorship.

Image
Image
Mon May 20, 2013 11:47 am
VivreUser avatarPosts: 351Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:05 pmLocation: dungeon of despair Gender: Female

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

*SD* wrote:
australopithecus wrote:he's just looking for an excuse to complain.

Of course he is. This is what he does. Even though you haven't so much as touched his posts he's complaining that you have so he can get out of the hole he's dug him self.. He's even made a video about it already :)

Wow - I took me a while to catch up with the postings, but that that vid already apeared while he was still on here is really telling - as if was planed beforehand.. Besides - again all his global disparagements are so disgusting. sorry to say

have a good day
Mon May 20, 2013 1:03 pm
WWW
australopithecusAdministratorUser avatarPosts: 4232Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:27 pmLocation: Kernow Gender: Time Lord

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

I did think it fishy how quickly the video surfaced, but if you look at the times it is possible he made it off the cuff. The first instance of anyone accusing him of spamming was at 11:03 and the video was published at 11:30, which gives him 27 minutes to record and upload the video. I have no doubt he was attention seeking, but I doubt his ability to orchestrate that level of planning and forethought.
Image
Mon May 20, 2013 1:37 pm
FrengerBloggerUser avatarPosts: 831Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 12:50 pmLocation: Derby, UK Gender: Male

Post Re: Jason101 aka Jason Burn's paper discussion thread.

Jason101 wrote:Now I post some of my sources.If you start to mess with the stuff I put on I will have nothing to do with you,so please make sure you keep my stuff on and do not play around with what I write or post.If you do I will see it as a declaration of intellectual abuse .


Sources to what? No one has seen anything, heard anything, witnessed anything, felt anything or even smelt anything close to something that requires sources from your side. You don't need to cite sources for silence, Jason.
Mon May 20, 2013 1:40 pm
WWW
PreviousNext
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 26 of 27
 [ 533 posts ] 
Return to Religion & Irreligion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests