Thu Aug 2, 2012, 09:44 PM
DemocratsForProgress (327 posts)
Nance Greggs: WWJB – Who Would Jesus Boycott?
My dear, self-serving, delusional Trevin Wax:
More at: http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2012/08/02/wwjb-who-would-jesus-boycott/
5 replies, 777 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Response to DemocratsForProgress (Original post)
Fri Aug 3, 2012, 04:50 PM
Igel (17,637 posts)
Apparently also Jesus approved.
It's called an argumentum ex silencio or argument from silence. It's generally considered a fallacy.
Jesus didn't go around laying down the law. He'd done that already. He modified or expanded it. Divorce he reverted; adultery he expanded. The sabbath, he pointed out, was no constraint on doing good. He refocused attention on love to God and, after that, love to man. Lots of things were ignored. A few things were mentioned in passing, where the context was appropriate: things like tithing, where he affirmed that even herbs should be tithed, a big point of honor (it would seem) to some. Given the nature of what he said, the overall tendency, lots of things that weren't expanded or changed (or which could be expanded and changed by analogy) were left unmentioned.
That's the problem with an argument from silence based on texts you don't know well. The idea of silence presupposes what the "shape" of the context is around it.
Greggs just justified the Catholic priests' sexual abuse. Jesus didn't say there was an age of consent, did he?