MAD Poster: DCP Delivers Talk that is not "Relevant"

[_Mister Scratch]

I'd like to see how he goes about proving something that has no historical foundation

I've never spoken of "proving" the resurrection. But I do think I can show that its historical foundation is reasonably strong.

What, at heart, is the difference? Aren't the rhetorical goals essentially the same in either case?

Further, what do you mean when you claim that the "historical foundation is reasonably strong"? It makes it sound like you are arguing that there is historical precedent for the resurrection. Of course, having read your posts on MAD, I assume that your basic argument runs along the lines of, "Well, there were a lot of eyewitness accounts for the resurrection, so this provides us with a reasonably strong historical foundation." Is that about right?

[_The Nehor]

By that standard the Gospel Doctrine class I taught today was a desperate measure.

You teach the Gospel Doctrine class??

Yeah, I've been teaching Gospel Principles and Gospel Doctrine (moved back and forth between the two callings) for several years now.

[_Jersey Girl]

If Daniel came to my region, I'd drive an hour or more to see this presentation.

I would as well and I'm not LDS

I'd like to see how he goes about proving something that has no historical foundation, but is simply a matter of faith.

There are historical and cultural evidences that provide reason (not conclusive proof) that the Gospels are true in their accounts. Perhaps that's what Daniel presented?

[_Daniel Peterson]

I've never spoken of "proving" the resurrection. But I do think I can show that its historical foundation is reasonably strong.

What, at heart, is the difference? Aren't the rhetorical goals essentially the same in either case?

They're quite distinct, though related.

Further, what do you mean when you claim that the "historical foundation is reasonably strong"? It makes it sound like you are arguing that there is historical precedent for the resurrection.

???????

???????

Of course, having read your posts on MAD, I assume that your basic argument runs along the lines of, "Well, there were a lot of eyewitness accounts for the resurrection, so this provides us with a reasonably strong historical foundation." Is that about right?

Sort of. Within a few miles, anyway.

There are historical and cultural evidences that provide reason (not conclusive proof) that the Gospels are true in their accounts. Perhaps that's what Daniel presented?

On this specific issue, yes, that's what I did. Although my attention was focused directly on the Pauline epistles and on certain passages in Acts.

[_Jersey Girl]

On this specific issue, yes, that's what I did. Although my attention was focused directly on the Pauline epistles and on certain passages in Acts.

Hang on. I'm a little rusty on this. Ya mean descriptions of governments and stuff?

[_Daniel Peterson]

Hang on. I'm a little rusty on this. Ya mean descriptions of governments and stuff?

Well, I didn't really get into that on Friday, but, yes, there are reasons to trust the descriptions of the background of the story of Christ as they're given in the gospels.

But my focus on Friday night was actually very heavily on Paul and on some selected snippets from Acts, along with some attention to James, "the Lord's brother."

[_Jersey Girl]

I apologize for derailing this thread. I don't want to turn it into a topical discussion of any sort.

[_Jersey Girl]

Hang on. I'm a little rusty on this. Ya mean descriptions of governments and stuff?

Well, I didn't really get into that on Friday, but, yes, there are reasons to trust the descriptions of the background of the story of Christ as they're given in the gospels.

But my focus on Friday night was actually very heavily on Paul and on some selected snippets from Acts, along with some attention to James, "the Lord's brother."

Isn't it Ramsey who wrote heavily on Luke regarding descriptions of governments, locations, etc?

Sorry for the derailment.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Isn't it Ramsey who wrote heavily on Luke regarding descriptions of governments, locations, etc?

He's one who has, yes.

[_Brackite]

I wish that I could have heard the Speech.