Foxy,

<<I did not reject Matthias Media or their monthly news resource magazine "The Briefing" for Evangelical Christians. I merely questioned the objectivity of such a review on Thiering's Book given that the organisation is totally committed to the Christian Gospel message that Jesus is the saviour of humanity.>>

By the way, 'The Briefing' is a publication of the Sydney Diocese of the Anglical Church. It is committed to salvation for all people who believe in Jesus - NOT to 'the saviour of humanity' (your words).

However, it's legitimate for you to accept Thiering's book, Jesus the Man, as an objective analysis of the New Testament evidence.

Theiring knew what her worldview was doing in debunking the supernatural from Jesus life and refusal to accept the God-breathed inspiration of the Scriptures, based on objective evidence.

When you are committed to Thiering's worldview, you commit yourself to agnosticism or even atheism.

Dear Ozpen,

You are doing it again, displaying a shallow and faulty understanding of logical fallacies.

Let me see if I can again assist.

As Wikipedia explains;

“Genetic accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are not conclusive in determining its merits.”

Foxy did not utterly reject the review by your clap happy lot but rather expressly said she wouldn't take it as seriously as you. This is perfectly fine and does not breach the Genetic Fallacy parameters at all.

Check out Realiabilism.

Foxy gave a brief synopsis of Thiering's book mainly through directly quoting the introduction.

You then proceeded to commit at least two logical fallacies, the first was attempting to appeal to a higher authority rather than addressing the issues raised in Foxy's post, and the second was engaging in an ad hominem attack along with your reviewers. You claimed “All was not well with Barbara“ and your reviewers used terms like;

“Dr Thiering is suffering from two common diseases...”,

“Dr Thiering has this one bad. To claim, as she did, that much of Christianity is false and misguided (including belief in the resurrection and divinity of Christ) and yet still call herself a ‘Christian’, shows the disease in an advanced stage.”

“One can only pray that Dr Thiering will soon recover ... and hope that not too many people will become infected through contact with her work.”

It really is appalling and ropes in yet another logical fallacy, appeal to emotion.

“Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones ("argument from passion") is a logical fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient's emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence.”

Why on earth would anyone take a review couched in these terms seriously?

Anyway I am enjoying lifting your understanding of logical fallacies and it has been a good chance to brush up on them too so thank you for that at least.

OzSpen,

I'm quite happy with the notion that nobody or nothing 'made' the laws of physics, that they have always operated impersonally and regardless.

The problem with believing that a mythical god 'made' the laws of the universe is that one is forced to ask, " Then who or what made him/her/it ? " Then: "In turn, who made him/her/it ? " And so on, ad infinitum. Pretty pointless.

And of course, you are assuming that in a heaven, the laws of physics (or respiration, or metabolism and digestion) don't apply. So gravity doesn't apply ? Your god doesn't actually 'sit' anywhere, he/she/it just floats ? So the little cherubim and seraphim don't actually need wings ? Since there is no atmosphere in heaven, nobody can hear the angels singing ? Christ, what a dreary bloody place. And you're stuck there forever. So is heaven actually a form of hell ?

Which brings us to the thorny question of: who created hell ? Yes, Satan was once one of god's angels, until god lost his ghastly bet over Job. But for god's sake, if he's so all-powerful, why can't he make us all good ? Why invent evil at all ? Wouldn't it be a better world if none of us ever had evil thoughts ? That we all worked together equally ? Boring, maybe, but better ?

Personally, I have great respect for the mythical Eve, tempting Adam with the apple from the tree of Knowledge. [Or was that a serpent ?] Thank you, Eve.

Too ridiculous, sorry :)

Joe

SteeleRedux,

You will never win a argument with the likes of OzSpen.

His purpose is not to debate with you but to convert you.

OzSpen would have been well placed if he had lived during the Thirty Years War: Bible in one hand and a sword in the other.........Never a God but always the Devil.

sorry Joe the words and character of Jesus make yours seem very very pitiful.

OzSpen,

I am neither an agnostic nor an atheist -
nor a religious fundamentalist.

I enjoy reading - and
seeking different perspectives and points of view on a
variety of topics and issues and then joining into
discussions on the topics as they come up.

On the topic of religion -
I found it interesting what -
Rabbi Marianne Williamson wrote in her book -
"Illuminata" . I'm not Jewish, but what she had to say
struck a chord.

"I don't like what organized religion has done to the world.
I've come to realize that true religion is internal not
external. The spirit within cannot be blamed for the
blasphemies carried out in its name. What some have done
in the name of religion, projecting their neuroses even
perpetrating evil on the world, does not make religion as
a mystical phenomenon invalid".

"Secularized organised religions have become in many cases,
as calcified as other institutions that form the structures
of our modern world. Our religious institutions have far too
often become handmaidens of the status quo, while the
genuine experience is anything but that".

"Religious institutions as such are not
the only arbiters of religious experience.
They do not own the Truth, for Truth
cannot be owned. Nor should they think they hold some
franchise on our spiritual life."

"They are consultants and frameworks but they are not God Himself.
We should not confuse the path with the destination".

"I feel that organized religion will have to step up to bat,
or it will wither away. Organized religious institutions are in
for a huge transformation - for the simple reason that
people have become genuinely religious in spite of them".