Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Gary View Post
    Nick, you are being evasive: Why do you repeatedly insist that I and other skeptics accept the majority scholarly consensus regarding the Empty Tomb, but refuse to accept the overwhelming majority scholarly consensus regarding the non-reality of the biblical Exodus of several million Hebrews from Egypt?
    Actually no. You're pointing to a position and saying this is why I think the claims of the Exodus are false. By the same standard, we'd say Herodotus was wrong as well and lo and behold, further archaeology showed he was right and we were wrong.

    So I'll ask again, what have we found of the Scythians?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
      Actually no. You're pointing to a position and saying this is why I think the claims of the Exodus are false. By the same standard, we'd say Herodotus was wrong as well and lo and behold, further archaeology showed he was right and we were wrong.

      So I'll ask again, what have we found of the Scythians?
      And I will again ask you to answer my original question before I answer yours (go down your rabbit trail): Why do you repeatedly insist that I and other skeptics accept the majority scholarly consensus regarding the Empty Tomb, but refuse to accept the overwhelming majority scholarly consensus regarding the non-reality of the biblical Exodus of several million Hebrews from Egypt?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
        Which being interpreted means "no mike I have no idea of the percentage of people who reject exodus my 99% comparison was just my usual hueey"




        ROFL.....Gary You ought to do stand up Comedy...... So you have gone from appealing to the consensus of the overwhelming majority to begging your case on the consensus of one. No? then can we have the percentage that makeit a majority consensus that its "Dead"?

        Don't duck now. You appeal to the authority of ONE person to say its dead to prove its dead but MULTIPLE people say otherwise so if you have no other consensus that its DEAD then you are full or nonsense and hot air (ahem.....as usual).Of course the whole claim is just stupid. Finkelstein said the same thing about David Monarchy - no evidence - preposterous nonsense biblical tale and then? BLAM! in the last three years the dead has been brought back to life with multiple discoveries that show otherwise. Same thing said of the Hittites - Blam! no turns out the issue wasn't dead and they did exist. Its happened over and over and over again and each time its like your side NEVER learns. Absence of evidence as proof of absence has an abysmal track record

        Truth is you never claim something in history is dead because it takes just one discovery for it to be right back on the table and worse consensus means little when youa re still learning and researching. Dead issue all settled?

        let me put a stake in your argument

        http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/d...ere-is-kadesh/

        ongoing discussion and research affecting the issue

        Gary - You didn't get any better when you were away (no surprise there) Patterns of evidence is not without its issues but no one says no evidence is in there and even the source you quoted and relied on admits the dates might in fact align even if they don't agree with one way to realign the chronology.

        Just another fail post in a line of many
        Whenever looking at the work of a scholar, it is always important to see if they have a significant bias.

        I would be very skeptical of the archeological research of a very vocal, religion-hating atheist archeologist, one who makes the primary goal of his or her work to destroy the Bible and religion. On the other hand, I would suggest Christians be skeptical of Christian archeologists whose primary goal is to prove their religious beliefs and the Bible correct. I suggest both sides look for archeologists and other researchers/scientists who are primarily focused on examining the evidence and willing to let the "chips fall where they may" in forming a conclusion about the evidence.

        Here is one Jewish rabbi's comments about the "fairness" of archeologist Israel Finkelstein:

        "Itís striking to compare Mazarís (an Israeli archeologist who is very open that the primary goal of her research is to prove the Bible correct) approach to that of Israel Finkelstein, who comes from a new school of Israeli archaeologists who are arenít driven by political ideology and are willing to go wherever their research takes them. In a nutshell, Finkelstein and his colleagues have argued convincingly that itís impossible to say much of anything about ancient Israel until the 7th century BCE (around the time of the reign of King Josiah). This casts doubt on the historical veracity of the Biblical narrative from the period of the Patriarchs/Matriarchs through the reigns of David and Solomon. These claims have largely been accepted as normative by most mainstream archaeologists outside of Israel.

        If you are interested the current thinking of Israeli researchers who are unfazed by nationalist bias, I highly recommend Finkelsteinís 2002 book (with Neal Asher Silberman), ďThe Bible Unearthed.Ē Also check out this 2001 piece from Salon, which explores the deeper socio-political implications of Israeli archeology."

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gary View Post
          Whenever looking at the work of a scholar, it is always important to see if they have a significant bias.

          I would be very skeptical of the archeological research of a very vocal, religion-hating atheist archeologist, one who makes the primary goal of his or her work to destroy the Bible and religion. On the other hand, I would suggest Christians be skeptical of Christian archeologists whose primary goal is to prove their religious beliefs and the Bible correct. I suggest both sides look for archeologists and other researchers/scientists who are primarily focused on examining the evidence and willing to let the "chips fall where they may" in forming a conclusion about the evidence.

          Here is one Jewish rabbi's comments about the "fairness" of archeologist Israel Finkelstein:

          "Itís striking to compare Mazarís (an Israeli archeologist who is very open that the primary goal of her research is to prove the Bible correct) approach to that of Israel Finkelstein, who comes from a new school of Israeli archaeologists who are arenít driven by political ideology and are willing to go wherever their research takes them. In a nutshell, Finkelstein and his colleagues have argued convincingly that itís impossible to say much of anything about ancient Israel until the 7th century BCE (around the time of the reign of King Josiah). This casts doubt on the historical veracity of the Biblical narrative from the period of the Patriarchs/Matriarchs through the reigns of David and Solomon. These claims have largely been accepted as normative by most mainstream archaeologists outside of Israel.

          If you are interested the current thinking of Israeli researchers who are unfazed by nationalist bias, I highly recommend Finkelsteinís 2002 book (with Neal Asher Silberman), ďThe Bible Unearthed.Ē Also check out this 2001 piece from Salon, which explores the deeper socio-political implications of Israeli archeology."
          Source: http://rabbibrant.com/2010/02/23/the...ogy-unearthed/

          Comment


          • It has already been agreed that the number involved in the exodus was in all probability an exaggeration. It has also been argued that the earliest scriptural records do not stipulate numbers. And still he harps on about

            Jesus believed that a fable was historical fact.
            To the best of my knowledge, Jesus regarded Moses as an historical figure. I could be wrong, but I don't think that Jesus ever endorsed the details regarding the army of Egypt or the number of people involved in the exodus.

            You are a fundamentalist. There is no point in debating you, Mike. You have no respect for evidence, facts, research and scholarship.
            The only person discussing the issues of this thread who displays the characteristics mentioned is Gary. No-one else - and come to think of it, I have only encountered a handful of people on all of TWeb who displayed such blatant disregard for scholarship.
            1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω
            Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
            .
            "when the church no longer teaches its people why they believe what they believe, the world will often step in and fill in the gaps." Ryan Danker

            "The synoptic gospels claim that Jesus was crucified on the 15th day of Nisan and buried on the 14th day of Nisan:" Majority Consensus

            Comment


            • ROFL - citing a five year old text in an area as volatile as archaeology is not a recommended approach. Discoveries during the past three years have put paid to that assertion. In fact, archaeology and paleontology are so fast moving that it is prudent to re-check facts that were first published only six months ago.
              1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω
              Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
              .
              "when the church no longer teaches its people why they believe what they believe, the world will often step in and fill in the gaps." Ryan Danker

              "The synoptic gospels claim that Jesus was crucified on the 15th day of Nisan and buried on the 14th day of Nisan:" Majority Consensus

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                "Itís striking to compare Mazarís (an Israeli archeologist who is very open that the primary goal of her research is to prove the Bible correct) approach to that of Israel Finkelstein, who comes from a new school of Israeli archaeologists who are arenít driven by political ideology and are willing to go wherever their research takes them........I highly recommend Finkelsteinís 2002 book (with Neal Asher Silberman), ďThe Bible Unearthed.Ē Also check out this 2001 piece from Salon, which explores the deeper socio-political implications of Israeli archeology."
                Gary once again you are making an absolute fool of yourself because you don't read and research. Mazar has been all but entirely vindicated. Finkelstein laughed and mocked Mazar over davidic monarchy and over the last four years one discovery after another has backed Mazar and put egg on Finkelstien's face likr this one

                http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...entury-BC.html


                and almost ever y 6 months more is coming in that show much more to the era than Finkelstein allowed for

                http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/49...3F9LadCH99e.97


                At the least the davidic kingdom is under serious consideration due to the recent finds and the ridiculous characterization that Finkelstein tried to paint on it is a bust.

                as usual your reasoning is circular and beggingly self serving. If an atheist does research then its unbiased but if a a theist does research then its biased. As for book recommendations after claiming multiple times that you did not need to read books that disagree with you no one cares what you recommend

                Comment


                • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                  ROFL - citing a five year old text in an area as volatile as archaeology is not a recommended approach. Discoveries during the past three years have put paid to that assertion. In fact, archaeology and paleontology are so fast moving that it is prudent to re-check facts that were first published only six months ago.
                  I rarely say this of anyone including skeptic or atheist but the guy is a comic and thuds along like a clown grabbing the first thing he can find on the internet without regard to dates while totally oblivious to recent finds.


                  However on the bright side

                  He just demonstrated by his own posts the most recent abject failure in the absence of evidence proves absence. In less than half a decade the major claims against the monarchy of david have crumbled. Now heres the thing. David monarchy is younger in age than the exodus, was centralized and non nomadic and we are JUST DISCOVERING THESE THINGS even though the areas are not remote. How many digs are getting financed in the Sinai (not Mount Sinai Gary ) to dig up the desert? Its one thing to say hey we have looked and combed the desert and found nothing but when we have barely looked (and very few archaeologist can get funding to do a dig with no particular tell/city to explore) its an even weaker argument.
                  Last edited by Mikeenders; 10-10-2015, 12:30 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                    It has already been agreed that the number involved in the exodus was in all probability an exaggeration. It has also been argued that the earliest scriptural records do not stipulate numbers. And still he harps on about

                    To the best of my knowledge, Jesus regarded Moses as an historical figure. I could be wrong, but I don't think that Jesus ever endorsed the details regarding the army of Egypt or the number of people involved in the exodus.

                    The only person discussing the issues of this thread who displays the characteristics mentioned is Gary. No-one else - and come to think of it, I have only encountered a handful of people on all of TWeb who displayed such blatant disregard for scholarship.
                    "the earliest scriptural records do not stipulate numbers."

                    Source?

                    Please present just ONE Bible translation, in any language, ever printed, in the history of mankind, which translates the Hebrew text you mention above as "six hundred and fifty families/clans" of Hebrews left Egypt in an Exodus, instead of "six hundred and fifty THOUSAND" Hebrew fighting men and their families...

                    Are you really asking us to believe that every translator of the Bible has been wrong in translating this Hebrew word as "thousand" and just recently have you and other evangelical Christian Hebrew experts realized that everyone in the entire history of the Jewish religion and the Christian Church, for the last several thousand years, has been wrong???
                    Last edited by Gary; 10-10-2015, 01:50 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
                      I rarely say this of anyone including skeptic or atheist but the guy is a comic and thuds along like a clown grabbing the first thing he can find on the internet without regard to dates while totally oblivious to recent finds.


                      However on the bright side

                      He just demonstrated by his own posts the most recent abject failure in the absence of evidence proves absence. In less than half a decade the major claims against the monarchy of david have crumbled. Now heres the thing. David monarchy is younger in age than the exodus, was centralized and non nomadic and we are JUST DISCOVERING THESE THINGS even though the areas are not remote. How many digs are getting financed in the Sinai (not Mount Sinai Gary ) to dig up the desert? Its one thing to say hey we have looked and combed the desert and found nothing but when we have barely looked (and very few archaeologist can get funding to do a dig with no particular tell/city to explore) its an even weaker argument.
                      Please provide the archeological evidence for the Biblical King David, slayer of lions and giants, ruler of a great and powerful kingdom, and, of his son, Solomon, ruler of a great Israelite empire stretching the length of the Levant.

                      Finding one stele with the name "House of David" only proves there was a royal house of a David, not the David of the Bible. For all we know, the David referred to by the stele was the first chieftan of a small band of Canaanites, who would later call themselves "Judahites". This first king was then immortalized by tales of killing lions with his bare hands and giants with a sling shot, giving rise to the biblical story.

                      There is no archeological evidence of the Dual Monarchy of the Bible. None. Zip. Surrounding nations mention Israelite kings such as Ahab, Omri, and Josiah, but nothing about the great David or Solomon.

                      It is a folk tale, nothing more.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
                        I rarely say this of anyone including skeptic or atheist but the guy is a comic and thuds along like a clown grabbing the first thing he can find on the internet without regard to dates while totally oblivious to recent finds.


                        However on the bright side

                        He just demonstrated by his own posts the most recent abject failure in the absence of evidence proves absence. In less than half a decade the major claims against the monarchy of david have crumbled. Now heres the thing. David monarchy is younger in age than the exodus, was centralized and non nomadic and we are JUST DISCOVERING THESE THINGS even though the areas are not remote. How many digs are getting financed in the Sinai (not Mount Sinai Gary ) to dig up the desert? Its one thing to say hey we have looked and combed the desert and found nothing but when we have barely looked (and very few archaeologist can get funding to do a dig with no particular tell/city to explore) its an even weaker argument.
                        I don't pretend to be an expert on this subject, Mike, so don't waste your time arguing with me. Take up your complaint with the overwhelming majority of archeologists and Near East scholars who say your position is utter nonsense.

                        The Exodus has been disproved as a credible historical event. It isn't just my position or the position of skeptics. It is the position of every expert in the field; every expert except religious fundamentalist Jews and Christians, all whom have a religious agenda to defend and maintain at all cost.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          ROFL - citing a five year old text in an area as volatile as archaeology is not a recommended approach. Discoveries during the past three years have put paid to that assertion. In fact, archaeology and paleontology are so fast moving that it is prudent to re-check facts that were first published only six months ago.
                          Please present us with evangelical Christianity's latest evidence for the biblical Exodus.

                          Comment


                            • The idea that the "thousands" could - in the context - be legitimately translated to mean "tribes", "families", or "clans" is nonsense.
                            • The idea that Pharaoh would lead 600 chariots in pursuit of 600 000 fighting men is nonsense.
                            • The 600 000 number is inflated, assuredly - re-translating the sum derived from a census of the people as meaning other than the number of individuals is nonsense.


                            As to the source for the earliest known manuscripts - that information is included in the video (Stein's post #3766).
                            Last edited by tabibito; 10-10-2015, 02:26 AM.
                            1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω
                            Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                            .
                            "when the church no longer teaches its people why they believe what they believe, the world will often step in and fill in the gaps." Ryan Danker

                            "The synoptic gospels claim that Jesus was crucified on the 15th day of Nisan and buried on the 14th day of Nisan:" Majority Consensus

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                              There is no archeological evidence of the Dual Monarchy of the Bible. None. Zip. Surrounding nations mention Israelite kings such as Ahab, Omri, and Josiah, but nothing about the great David or Solomon.
                              The thing i really appreciate about you Gary is when you get found out in idiocy you just double up for more . Only to a fool would a mention of David "be nothing about David"

                              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele.

                              Your beloved Finkelstein was wrong as all the recent discoveries show. Your research was so pathetically poor you quoted a 2010 article oblivious to the facts of what had been discovered since. This is precisely the kind of thing that has made you a running joke on this forum.

                              P.S. Yes the Tel Dan stele does confirm a double monarchy separating Israel from Judah. Your incompetence knows no end

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                                I don't pretend to be an expert on this subject, Mike, so don't waste your time arguing with me. Take up your complaint with the overwhelming majority of archeologists and Near East scholars who say your position is utter nonsense.
                                Whats the percentage? You neglected to give us and we both know why. You don't have a clue. Besides you can't drag me into our foolish consensus equals undeniable proof debate is over claim. I've rejected that months ago as a failure in logic since history has shown consensus wrong on many occasions. Facts beat votes and the Monarchy of David consensus now vanquished destroys your point

                                It is the position of every expert in the field; every expert except religious fundamentalist Jews and Christians, all whom have a religious agenda to defend and maintain at all cost.
                                Lies and obvious lies. Your lack of intellectual honesty is embarassing. You are not even competent enough to know how to find every expert much less have polled them and you have quoted the sum total of ONE that the matter is forever settled. Meanwhile this year will see two more books being published, theres the BAR piece I referenced (and you would only show you total ignorance again if you claim BAR is jut an evangelical fundamental organization) and research continues

                                In the interim lack of evidence as proof of absence is a known logical fallacy and with the recent reminder of your beloved Finkelstiens demise appealing to it with the monarchy of David your claims of proven can be logically dismissed.
                                Last edited by Mikeenders; 10-10-2015, 04:20 AM.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X