Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Ugarit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Meh Gerbil View Post
    Premise: Abe Lincoln didn't exist.

    Stories were written about Abe Lincoln in the 1800's.
    Stories were written about Abe Lincoln in the 1920's.
    Stories were written about Abe Lincoln in the 2000's.

    If I make the assumption that the stories in the 1800's are not based on any real events and then assume the stories in the 1920's and 2000's are derivatives of the initial story I may have participated in an interesting historical research exercise but I'm still pre-supposing what I hoped to prove.
    This is a very very poor analogy to anything in history and how historians consider the evidence over time, and historians and scientists do not prove anything. The do not consider events and the lives of people in black and white true or false because accounts do not agree over time . Historians consider all the evidence found over time and work from a consensus perspective to develop the history of humanity. A new letter may be found today that changes what is considered an accurate history.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #92
      An interesting note on the origins of the name 'Isreal.'

      Source: https://people.brandonu.ca/nollk/canaanite-religion/


      The name “Israel” makes an excellent example of the difficulties associated with Canaanite identity. This word suggests an unselfconsciously Canaanite worldview, since “Israel” means “El strives” (or perhaps “El is just”; cf. Margalith 1990), designating the bearer of the name as one who affirms the Canaanite god El, as in Genesis 33:20. If the Bible’s claim that the Israelites were non-Canaanite migrants to Palestine preserves any genuine memory, then obviously the name provides no evidence for this, nor does archaeology provide unambiguous ethnic data (Noll 2001a, p. 163; compare Zevit 2001, pp. 113–21, and Brett 2003). Moreover, trace data in the Bible (e.g., Yithra the Israelite in 2 Samuel 17:25 MT; see Noll 1999, p. 41 note 32) and ancient inscriptions (such as the Moabite stone’s reference to Gadites as a non-Israelite people; see Noll 2001a, p. 169 note 17) suggest that only some of the people now known as the ancient Israelites called themselves Israelites. The biblical texts were edited at a late date to create the false impression of a unified pan-Israelite ethnos (Noll 1999, 2001b). Thus, it is best to view Canaan as a geographic term and to define Israel as a limited ethnic or political identity within Canaan (Zevit 2001, p. 116 note 50). An Israelite was a Canaanite who was attacked by Pharaoh Merneptah somewhere in or near the Jezreel valley (Noll 2001a, pp. 124–7), or a Canaanite who was a subject of the kingdom called Israel, or a Canaanite who identified with the cultural memory of that kingdom after it ceased to exist.

      © Copyright Original Source

      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment

      Related Threads

      Collapse

      Topics Statistics Last Post
      Started by lee_merrill, 10-30-2020, 09:01 PM
      28 responses
      120 views
      2 likes
      Last Post thormas
      by thormas
       
      Started by lee_merrill, 10-24-2020, 07:58 PM
      13 responses
      65 views
      0 likes
      Last Post Gondwanaland  
      Started by Whateverman, 07-26-2020, 11:01 AM
      330 responses
      6,602 views
      0 likes
      Last Post Electric Skeptic  
      Started by shunyadragon, 09-09-2016, 03:27 PM
      1,246 responses
      54,984 views
      0 likes
      Last Post thormas
      by thormas
       
      Working...
      X