Epistemology and Biblical Evidence

[DWill]

[
The number is not large only because I have refrained from nit picking. As I have mentioned nearly every page which refers to the Bible teams with misstatements and gross errors.

I happen to live near the Kennedy Space Center and so have an opportunity to hear both local and national newscasters provide information about the space program and the area. I am frequently amused at the mistakes they make. Of course I know they are mistakes because I am here but most of the audience doesn't know. Still, it does give one pause, if they are wrong about the stuff I know about, what about the stuff I don't know about. How do I know they have that right.

I don't think Wright's errors are because he is a materialist I think they are because he is either lazy or disinterested. Then again, we can probably eliminate lazy because he could have had his manuscript reviewed by someone who could catch errors like the 'Son of Man' so that leaves disinterested. I think he had his idea for the book and filled in the pieces he needed and when necessary, he made them fit.

In fact, the errors do negate Wright's thesis. Take the Son of Man example. Wright clearly parses this to fit his theory and therefore leaves what Jesus said on the table. Wright did not deal with it outright so what are you to conclude? Wright thought it was important enough to bring up and as long as Jesus did not say it Wright uses that as license to move forward with his story. But, in fact, I think the quote in the Bible and the Pharisees reaction stops Wright's theory in its tracks.

The situation is just as bad, or worse with the call of Abram. The Bible clearly provides a narrative of the transition from polytheism to monotheism and Wright doesn't even mention it.

As for Wright's attitude toward Christianity and the Bible, I think it is obvious from the first sentence. What does he choose as an example of polytheism? Primitive humans farting. I suppose it was meant to be funny but it also set a tone. Throughout the rest of the text little snide comments and sarcastic comments pop up. I didn't mark them but they are there.

Wright wrote the book he wanted to. It is directed at his target audience with enough footnotes to impress, but his premise consists of conspiracy theories, marginalizing the Bible and often admittedly wild speculation.

This really belongs in the TEoG discussion.

The last sentence is the only one I agree with. See you over in TEoG Spillover later on?

[stahrwe]

One of the things I have tried to do is to show a relationship between what the Bible says and objective external verification.

A common expression is, "he sweated blood," accomplishing some difficult task. The origin of that expression is from the Bible:

Luke 22
41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,
42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

This is one of those passages that tends to attract little attention. Skeptics dismiss Jesus so one more passage is of little import, and believers consider it a phenominon associated with the Passion.

As it turns out there is a medical term for 'sweating blood'. Hematidrosis (also called hematohidrosis) is a very rare condition in which a human being sweats blood. It may occur when a person is suffering extreme levels of stress. [wikipedia]


Blood, sweat and fear. "A classification of hematidrosis".
Holoubek JE, Holoubek AB.

Louisiana State University School of Medicine, Shreveport, USA.

Abstract
In order to verify the accuracy of the commonly used statement, "I sweat blood," a survey of the literature in the subject of hematidrosis was made. Seventy-six cases were studied and classified into categories according to the causative factor. These were, component of systemic disease, vicarious menstruation, excessive exertion, psychogenic, and unknown. The psychogenic were further subdivided into those that occurred only one time, those that recurred and the stigmatics. Acute fear and intense mental contemplation were found to be the most frequent inciting causes. Hematidrosis is an extremely rare clinical phenomenon with only few instances reported to have occurred within the twentieth century.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8982961


Int J Dermatol. 2008 Oct;47(10):1058-9.
Hematidrosis: a case report and review of the literature.
Carvalho AC, Machado-Pinto J, Nogueira GC, Almeida LM, Nunes MB.
Dermatology Department, Santa Casa de Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Abstract
The authors report the case of a 9 year-old female who had bleeding episodes around the mouth after strenuous exercise or prolonged exposure to heat. Characteristically, bleeding occurred right after sweat drops started appearing on the surface of the skin around the mouth. The bleeding episodes ceased spontaneously.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18986356

[Interbane]

It is genetically possible for pink unicorns to exist. That doesn't mean they exist. Showing that something is possible is not the same as showing that it 'happened', or that it 'existed'.

[stahrwe]

It is genetically possible for pink unicorns to exist. That doesn't mean they exist. Showing that something is possible is not the same as showing that it 'happened', or that it 'existed'.

In this case I cited two scientific papers which document sweating blood. I have found several more if you would like to have those references as well.

If you wish to cite scientific papers which show that it is genetically possible for pink unicorns to exist please do so in another thread. It appears to be an interest of yours but not of mine.

One more thing. Given the rareity of Hematidrosis it is reasonable to assume that Luke had never encountered it prior to his interviews with people regarding the Passion and so would have either had to have heard about something which actually happened, or invented the story of a previously unknown medical condition which turned out to exist.

[Azrael]

stahrwe wrote:

As it turns out there is a medical term for 'sweating blood'. Hematidrosis (also called hematohidrosis) is a very rare condition in which a human being sweats blood. It may occur when a person is suffering extreme levels of stress. [wikipedia]

In this case I have to agree with stahrwe. This condition does exist. It is possible that [Jesus?] if he lived could have experienced this condition during the crucifixion process. Considering what they tell [us?] his condition would have been to the point of this very thing. So this is a valid medical condition, did [Jesus?] suffer it? Who knows? We have only the [Gospels?] to tell us that and we know how reliable they are.......

[Interbane]

In this case I cited two scientific papers which document sweating blood. I have found several more if you would like to have those references as well.

You misunderstand me. I'm sure it's a documented phenomenon. Which means it's possible that such a thing could have happened in the way the bible says. The difference is, showing that something is possible is not the same thing as showing that it happened. That is non-sequitur. (It's possible that a tiger killed Amelia Earhardt, but that doesn't mean it happened. Additional evidence is required to support the truthfulness of the story.) You need corroborating evidence. You've already done everything in your power here, there's no need to resurrect this thread.