Biased Biographical Propaganda

[SallyF]

In my view, the "Gospels" have no input whatsoever from "God".

In my view, the "Gospels" are the biased biographical propaganda of a failed Jewish Messiah.

I note:

This article is concerned with bias and subjectivity in ethnographic research. Since the research in ethnography cannot eliminate biographical determinants, the makeup of the researcher is critical to the quality of the work done. Looking at a number of factors that determine bias, the article suggests ways to move this “bias in biography� toward a new era in anthropology and education. https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wile ... 1.04x0762h

And:

What is most obvious is that every biographer has an agenda of his own. A biographer’s take on the life he spotlights is necessarily biased by his own opinions. While this can add colour to the biography, it can sometimes be a really a fine line between fact and fiction- a line that the biographer should ideally not breach. https://www.thecuriousreader.in/feature ... pher-bias/

Are the "Gospels" biased biographical propaganda ...?

[Tcg]

My paragraph was to head off any further discussion on those lines.

Of course it was. That's what bringing up a subject usually does right?

And of course it only applies to other poster's experiences.

I quite clearly said that I have had subjective, personal experiences with the Risen Christ but I do not tender this as evidence for others to accept.

Yours must be considered intensely significant.


Tcg

[CalvinsBulldog]

[Replying to post 11 by Tcg]

Of course it was. That's what bringing up a subject usually does right?

And of course it only applies to other poster's experiences.

If you want to believe I'm intensely interested in something I say that I'm uninterested in, then go right ahead.

I didn't bring up Sally's autobiography. She did.

Yours must be considered intensely significant.

Whatever.

[Tcg]

I didn't bring up Sally's autobiography. She did.

I didn't bring up your autobiography. You did.


Tcg

[CalvinsBulldog]

[Replying to post 13 by Tcg]

No, I didn't. Try again. Go back and read.

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 13 by Tcg]

No, I didn't. Try again. Go back and read.

Who was it then who claimed to have had a subjective, personal experiences with the Risen Christ?

Are you retracting your claim?


Tcg

[CalvinsBulldog]

[Replying to post 15 by Tcg]

Who was it then who claimed to have had a subjective, personal experiences with the Risen Christ?

This is really a form of trolling and represents a tiresome distraction from the original topic, and the person I was interacting with.

At this point you are in violation of forum rules 4. (stay on topic), and 7. (frivolous posts), and arguably 9. (unconstructive one liners). We're trying to have a debate here. Your involvement is actually impeding it and bogging the thread down. Please stop.

My next step is to notify the moderators. I'm not going to engage with you again.

[SallyF]

Are the "Gospels" biased biographical propaganda ...?

I've been away for a while and this seems like a good place to jump in so I will bite.

In a word, yes. The Gospels are 1) biased 2) biographical and 3) at least in some sense a type of propaganda.

And I say that as a Christian.

There.

Now what of it?

Religions are full of charlatans that make unsupported claims about the "Leader".

Christians often claim that their Leader actually IS God with a capital G ...

Based on nothing more than belief in biased biographical propaganda.

For me …

That is MORE than sufficient to consider Christianity a fraud.

My door is, of course, WIDE OPEN to evidence.

[Tart]

In my view, the "Gospels" have no input whatsoever from "God".

In my view, the "Gospels" are the biased biographical propaganda of a failed Jewish Messiah.

I note:

This article is concerned with bias and subjectivity in ethnographic research. Since the research in ethnography cannot eliminate biographical determinants, the makeup of the researcher is critical to the quality of the work done. Looking at a number of factors that determine bias, the article suggests ways to move this “bias in biography� toward a new era in anthropology and education. https://anthrosource.onlinelibrary.wile ... 1.04x0762h

And:

What is most obvious is that every biographer has an agenda of his own. A biographer’s take on the life he spotlights is necessarily biased by his own opinions. While this can add colour to the biography, it can sometimes be a really a fine line between fact and fiction- a line that the biographer should ideally not breach. https://www.thecuriousreader.in/feature ... pher-bias/

Are the "Gospels" biased biographical propaganda ...?

Good question. Id say ya, the Gospels can certainly have bias views. For example, a Jewish writer might see things a lot differently then a Gentile writer. They may have completely different prospective about God, about law, and other things.. And it is very possible that, say Mark, and Luke were Gentiles, while Matthew and John were Jews. They would lead to different perspective.

Propaganda, however, is a different question... Were they promoting Jesus as a Jewish Messiah? Yes all of them where giving prophecies, they gave reasoning, they build a case for Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God. Is it misleading, like the word "propaganda" can lead people to believe? I dont think they were misleading... Im utterly convinced that the early disciples had genuine beliefs that Jesus was the Messiah.. I mean even Bart Erhman, who doesnt believe in God, an atheist (perhaps agnostic) confesses that the Disciples had genuinely believed that Jesus was the Messiah and that they believed they witnessed His Resurrection... And if we read the words of the early disciples in their epistles, its pretty clear they have solid beliefs that Jesus was the Messiah, and they give their reasoning, they give their prophecies, the law, the witnesses.. They explain everything they believe and why they believe it.

[SallyF]

And if we read the words of the early disciples in their epistles, its pretty clear they have solid beliefs that Jesus was the Messiah, and they give their reasoning, they give their prophecies, the law, the witnesses.. They explain everything they believe and why they believe it.

Yes, propaganda is convincing.

But …

If the Jesus propaganda is ALL we have to go on …

We should be VERY careful about what the propagandists tell us about visiting angels and the Holy Ghost inseminating the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the magic supposedly done by the Divine Leader whose biased biographical propaganda they are spreading about.

There is NOTHING outside the propaganda to back up the idea of Magic Jesus.

The early reports of Christianity outside the propaganda do not support Magic Jesus.

Magic Jesus ONLY appears inside his own propaganda …

And the minds of believers.

NOWHERE ELSE ….

[Tart]

And if we read the words of the early disciples in their epistles, its pretty clear they have solid beliefs that Jesus was the Messiah, and they give their reasoning, they give their prophecies, the law, the witnesses.. They explain everything they believe and why they believe it.

Yes, propaganda is convincing.

But …

If the Jesus propaganda is ALL we have to go on …

We should be VERY careful about what the propagandists tell us about visiting angels and the Holy Ghost inseminating the Blessed Virgin Mary and all the magic supposedly done by the Divine Leader whose biased biographical propaganda they are spreading about.

There is NOTHING outside the propaganda to back up the idea of Magic Jesus.

The early reports of Christianity outside the propaganda do not support Magic Jesus.

Magic Jesus ONLY appears inside his own propaganda …

And the minds of believers.

NOWHERE ELSE ….

Well id have to agree with one of the worlds leading experts on "evidence" for this subject...

"Of the Divine character of the Bible, I think, no man who deals honestly with his own mind and heart can entertain a reasonable doubt, For myself, I must say, that having for many years made the evidences of Christianity the subject of close study, the result has been a firm and increasing conviction of the authenticity and plenary inspiration of the Bible. It is indeed the Word of God."~Simon Greenleef