Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So basically your argument is I'm wrong, well because of course, I have to be wrong. Let's be clear, I never expected my OP to be given a second's worth of fair shake from the skeptical audience here. You offer me nothing specifically to show why the Bible is completely myth as you suggest. I also fail to see the hero stories. In fact, almost every major "hero" in the Bible including Abraham, David and Moses is showed as sinful, weak and flawed. Just like reality. There is a consistency seen in God's nature through the OT which means I would have to believe that different writers over thousands of years somehow conspired together to deceive mankind by creating these fictional stories. Umm no.
Not at all. You are wrong because of the facts that I cite, not because of any bias I have against you.
You claim that the Bible is a true historical book, with a fundamentally different treatment of history than a thing before. I gave you raisins why i think otherwise and backed it with examples. It is you who is trying to argue by using assertions devoid of facts, not me.
I should point out that your citation of Herodotus as the father of modern history undermines your position. If the bible were a historical treatise along the lines of heridutus' new discipline of history, then we wouldn't recognse Herodotus as the father of history, wood we? We would have looked to the bible to set the standard for historical trament. We don't. Therefore the bible is not a linear historical do kent as you claim.
No a waste of keystrokes is taking time to basically say I'm an idiot with no counter argument.
Funny how you reply to the posts where you think someone has insulted you or been aggressive. And yet you ignore posts like mine that actually directly reference your arguments with cordiality and decorum. You clearly see what you want to see and little else.
As for your surprise that many cultures have a flood myth, that is hardly surprising either. Actual floods back then would have seemed to be "global" because the idea people then had about how big the world actually was.... was likely minimalistic at best.
And given the place water itself plays in our human narrative, it is hardly surprising either that fantastical tales would be told about it too.
None of this is impressive, and none of your claims so far have been backed up with anything aside from repetition.
I'm not going to be dragged into a Flood debate.
.
The flood is only one myth and if you aren't going to be "dragged into" any discussions/debates about the myths and/or the reasons they are myths rather than factual accountings, why should anybody respond to you at all?
You want I should argue with the opinions of the 'scholar' you introduced? He isn't here but you're the one that 'brought' him here so it's up to you.
Funny how you reply to the posts where you think someone has insulted you or been aggressive. And yet you ignore posts like mine that actually directly reference your arguments with cordiality and decorum. You clearly see what you want to see and little else.
As for your surprise that many cultures have a flood myth, that is hardly surprising either. Actual floods back then would have seemed to be "global" because the idea people then had about how big the world actually was.... was likely minimalistic at best.
And given the place water itself plays in our human narrative, it is hardly surprising either that fantastical tales would be told about it too.
None of this is impressive, and none of your claims so far have been backed up with anything aside from repetition.
Don't take it personally, he has ignored all my posts as well .
Chariots were still being used in the Roman era though. It's hard to say adding that fact to Judges gives it historical validity.
The Romans used them for sport and ceremonial occasions, not for war. I believe that few people other than the Britons still used them and in Asia until the 13th century I believe.
Judges and kings is set in an earlier time when chariots were still the 'cavalry' of an army. I think it is possible that some armies might have had armoured chariots, but it was still early days for iron and the more usual metal was bronze.
My faith in Christ and the Bible doesn't hinge on not being able to figure out how Noah fit all the animals in the ark in a single story. Christ believed in the story, that's good enough for me. I don't lose sleep over it. But people like you love to constantly retread the Flood story, ignore 90% of the rest of the Bible because it is the one puzzle that can't be answered on our side without having more facts about what really happened.
What I do know is that pretty much every culture around the world has some type of Flood story with remarkable similarities to the Biblical account. That alone tells me that something major impacted the world enough for cultures around the world to retain and tell the events in their own way.
The bottom line is it is human arrogance to say that we know definitively that the Flood never happened. That position suggests that we have achieved complete understanding of science and human knowledge is not limited. There could be a scientific discovery in the future that completely shatters everything in your wiki article, but if I am to accept your position, that would be impossible. Which kinda goes against the nature of science being always self correcting.
But Jeff, I already dealt with the flood stories - which Egypt and China don't seem to have anyway. at the end of the last ice -age was a global flood but not a total one. That could explain the flood stories, and in fact would make the Biblical point of the flood a myth, even if it was based on a real flood (in fact it is more probably a borrowing from the Mesopotamian flood -story).
I already posted this. What a pity you missed it.
Your appeal to future knowledge is really invalid. Even if it could make a total flood and an Eden scenario possible, it would not be rational or reasonable, but the Good Old Blind Faith to prefer it as a theory. Let alone regarding is as hard, life- changing reliable Fact, when just about all the evidence I can think of is against it. The Flood stories were the only last problem, but the Black Sea flood event has denied bible -literalists even that.
The flood is only one myth and if you aren't going to be "dragged into" any discussions/debates about the myths and/or the reasons they are myths rather than factual accountings, why should anybody respond to you at all?
You want I should argue with the opinions of the 'scholar' you introduced? He isn't here but you're the one that 'brought' him here so it's up to you.
I rather you address the specific points in my OP like the story of Joseph which no one has done here. I haven't seen a single convincing argument to show me that the Bible is myth. Not one. Just the typical rantings from the Bible haters.
I rather you address the specific points in my OP like the story of Joseph which no one has done here. I haven't seen a single convincing argument to show me that the Bible is myth. Not one. Just the typical rantings from the Bible haters.
I rather you address the specific points in my OP like the story of Joseph which no one has done here. I haven't seen a single convincing argument to show me that the Bible is myth. Not one. Just the typical rantings from the Bible haters.
Because you don't read anything people post that doesn't confirm your beliefs. You really can't prove or disprove the story of Joseph because it involves one individual man. However, it's likely a memory of the cultural past of Israel is all. Telling the tale of the rise of semitic peoples in Egypt from the 19th Century until their banishment in the 16th. With other things you can disprove them because the Archaeology just is not there to support the tales. Even the maximalists don't believe that anything prior to Kings has a lot of validity to it.
My faith in Christ and the Bible doesn't hinge on not being able to figure out how Noah fit all the animals in the ark in a single story. Christ believed in the story, that's good enough for me. I don't lose sleep over it. But people like you love to constantly retread the Flood story, ignore 90% of the rest of the Bible because it is the one puzzle that can't be answered on our side without having more facts about what really happened.
What I do know is that pretty much every culture around the world has some type of Flood story with remarkable similarities to the Biblical account. That alone tells me that something major impacted the world enough for cultures around the world to retain and tell the events in their own way.
The bottom line is it is human arrogance to say that we know definitively that the Flood never happened. That position suggests that we have achieved complete understanding of science and human knowledge is not limited. There could be a scientific discovery in the future that completely shatters everything in your wiki article, but if I am to accept your position, that would be impossible. Which kinda goes against the nature of science being always self correcting.
No but we do know what kind of sediments floods lay down, we know that one cannot have such a mixture of fresh and saline waters adjacent the way flood proponents claim.
it is not arrogance to go with the evidence rather that the literal interpretation of one religion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
