Paul the Uncertain wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:28 am
There is a middle ground, and a view that I "advocate" outside of statistics (besides its home turf, statistics is also applied in niches in many fields - use Bayes liberally there, IMO).
George Polya's book abstracts most of what's useful in Bayes outside of statistics using very few numbers and relatively tight English words .
The book is readable, short, has only one known technical lapse (on a peripheral point), and the progress of knowledge since Polya died has been kind to it (mainly that he didn't distinguish between the truth of a hypothesis and its "usefulness," but then a lot of people still don't).
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
And the idea that the reason we post here is to get people to 'agree' with us is a wretched motivation to post here. We should participate in this forum to float ideas or ask questions and be as rigorous as possible with the outcomes for the sake of the truth or truthfulness. Nothing more, nothing less.
Indeed.
That was tongue-in-cheek - maryhelena disagreed by making the very same points I did.
Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 8:51 am
I don't believe it is reasonable to have any firm conclusions about the historicity of Jesus based on the uncertainty of the core documents from early Christianity.
Yup.
This enquiry is about Christian origins - specifically which early Christians existed.
It's not leading up to whether Jesus existed - that's so last century
Kapyong wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2017 2:28 pm
This enquiry is about Christian origins - specifically which early Christians existed
I'd like to know whether the moniker Christians or Chrestians had been applied to a religion or sect, such as an Egyptian 'mystery' religion, before it came to be applied to Jesus-believing Christians ...
The editor made the URL automatically. I've since hand typed the correct url tags into my post, and that link now works, but the correction doesn't propagate to those who've quoted it.
Thanks for catching it, and to Kapyong for diagnosing it,
Where is there evidence the Marcionite knew of Jesus's baptism by John?
The question I answered was about the Marcionites knowing about John the Baptist (not about Jesus' baptism by John).
According to Marcion's gospel, the answer is yes regarding John the Baptist only, but not part of their belief for the (new) quoted question (about Jesus' baptism by John).
Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
Whoa.
It's down the rabbit hole I go again. Except this time it is Paul's existence that is in doubt - something I had not really considered properly, just assumed rather like Jesus. I just dipped into some Robert M. Price, Rene Salm, and WC van Manen. It's possible that the Marcionites were the mid 2nd C. source of most of the NT ! How fascinating.
Leaving my list of historically solid early Christians rather bare :
Marcion. 90%
Very probably published a gospel (and possibly 'Paul') in Sinope in early-mid 2nd century. No primary evidence, but much secondary.
Tatian. 98%
Wrote in Syria mid 2nd century. Primary evidence in his Address, in which he names and describes himself. May have published the DiaTessaron.
Justin Martyr. 95%
Wrote about several 'memoirs' or gospels mid 2nd century, in Rome. Primary evidence of his own writing.
Irenaeus. 98%
Collected, named, and numbered four Gospels in Lyons in late 2nd century. Primary evidence from his own writing.
.
