Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   This belief thing
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7799
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 151 of 162 (784231)
05-14-2016 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by LamarkNewAge
05-14-2016 4:48 PM


Re: Modulous and my point. Attempted by me. Here goes.
We have a sick man on our hands, a man gravely ill, it will be a great misfortune if one of these days he slips through our hands, especially before the necessary arrangements are made.
Huh? I didn't say that. I'm not sure where this came from. Somebody hacked me if this was under my name. Honestly.
I preceded the quote with the words "Around Darwin's time people were saying". It's a very famous quote attributed to Nicholas I by John Russell about the Ottoman empire.
The Islamic texts have always said that the Jewish texts weren't the original unmolested texts.
Most educated Jews and Christians agree with them on many points regarding non-originality and unmolested condition of the texts.
What's your point?
I think we all can imagine lots of "chatter" over the past 1400 years. What was the "popular view" verses the official edicts from the Caliphs? I'm sure the Caliphs simply ignored the situation, and whatever comments they made about the Jewish scriptures and Gospels were very mild and not too earth-shaking.
What has this got to do with what I said?
Judah was always assumed to have existed in the 10th century in a way comparable to the Biblical description
And Muslims on the whole concur with this.
Whatever their religion, what difference does their dates have on this discussion?
Their forceful theories on geographical and racial/tribal issues surely made their way around the globe.
I'm pretty sure Pakistan, Indonesia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Palestine....already have a pretty practiced system of racial/tribal issues.
Did the Jewish Solomon actually exist?
Does it matter?
My post is lost though. And the OP is made we are even discussing this.
I assume this is a concession of some kind? I still don't understand why you raised these points, but if you are happy to drop them that's fine by me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by LamarkNewAge, posted 05-14-2016 4:48 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by LamarkNewAge, posted 05-17-2016 4:49 PM Modulous has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12993
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.1


(1)
Message 152 of 162 (784250)
05-15-2016 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by LamarkNewAge
05-14-2016 4:48 PM


Re: Modulous and my point. Attempted by me. Here goes.
LamarkNewAge writes:
My post is lost though.
If you're referring to your Message 134, the post is not lost. As I told you in the very next message, "As this is your second warning I will remove the content from your message and send a copy to you in a PM." You have the complete text of your message. Use its content to compose new messages. Just don't post messages that are mostly cut-n-pastes. We want to hear what *you* have to say, supported by short quotes and excerpts, and links.
If you lost the PM I can send you a copy.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by LamarkNewAge, posted 05-14-2016 4:48 PM LamarkNewAge has not replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 728 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 153 of 162 (784376)
05-17-2016 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Modulous
05-14-2016 7:11 PM


Re: Modulous and my point. Attempted by me. Here goes.
quote:
[LamarkNewAge]
The Islamic texts have always said that the Jewish texts weren't the original unmolested texts.
[Modulous]
Most educated Jews and Christians agree with them on many points regarding non-originality and unmolested condition of the texts.
What's your point?
My point is that they never had a great explanation of what the original texts said.
quote:
[LNA]
I think we all can imagine lots of "chatter" over the past 1400 years. What was the "popular view" verses the official edicts from the Caliphs? I'm sure the Caliphs simply ignored the situation, and whatever comments they made about the Jewish scriptures and Gospels were very mild and not too earth-shaking.
[Modulous]
What has this got to do with what I said?
We don't know what the average Muslim thought about the textual situation. The Caliphs and scholars would have had a simplified explanation.
quote:
[LNA]
Judah was always assumed to have existed in the 10th century in a way comparable to the Biblical description
[Modulous]
And Muslims on the whole concur with this.
Whatever their religion, what difference does their dates have on this discussion?
But Islam says the Hebrew Biblical texts weren't the original texts.
Now we have archaeology to show details that have forced certain questions.
Take the situation of Judah and the failure to find any mention till after the 2nd half of the 8th century BCE, despite endless Assyrian campaigns from c.850 on. Take the case of Assyrian king Adad Nirari III from 811 to 783. Here is an Assyrian text from 797 BCE. It covers an invasion to Palestine.
Notice how Judah isn't mentioned.
quote:
" As far as the shores of the great sea at the rising
of the sun, from the banks of the Euphrates, the
land of the Hittites, the land of the Amorites to its
farthest borders, the land of Tyre, the land of Sidon,
the land of Omri, the land of Edom, the land of the
Philistines {Palastn), as far as the shores of the great
sea at the setting of the sun (the Mediterranean), I
subjected (them all) to my yoke, tribute and gifts
I imposed upon them. Against the land of Syria I
marched ; Marih the king of the land of Syria I shut
up in Damascus his royal city. The terror of the
glory of Assur his lord overwhelmed him ; he took
my feet, he became a vassal : 2300 talents of silver,
20 talents of gold, 3000 talents of copper, 5000
talents of iron, many-coloured garments of linen, a
couch of ivory, a canopy of ivory, hilts in abundance,
his goods, his property to a countless amount I
received in Damascus his royal city, in the midst ot
his palace."
Edom is mentioned (despite the tiny size). Israel is mentioned as the "land of Omri". Where is Judah mentioned? Here is the best explanation A.H. Sayce could offer 100-150 years ago.
quote:
p.399
Samaria also was laid under
tribute, as well as Phoenicia, Edom, and the Phili-
stines. Among the latter the Jews were probably-
included.
Full text of "The "higher criticism" and the verdict of the monuments"
Now, the issue of Judah not existing was never dreamed of back then. But there is no mention of "Judah" or "Jews" (nor the all important Temple) till a few decades before 700 BCE. The 925 BCE invasion of Palestine by the founder of the Egyptian 22 Dynasty, failed to mention Jerusalem or any towns in Judah (there were some towns in Benjamin mentioned, but none from Judah unless I'm mistaken) though the Biblical text featured Jerusalem (with its tons of endlessly valuable gold) as the centerpiece of the invasion.
quote:
[LNA]
Their forceful theories on geographical and racial/tribal issues surely made their way around the globe.
[Modulous]
I'm pretty sure Pakistan, Indonesia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Palestine....already have a pretty practiced system of racial/tribal issues.
My point is that many diverse views would exist as to what the original texts say. The Nation of Islam is obsessed with white people (as American Jews appear to be) being imposters of the "chosen" black-skinned people (who came from Africa where the REAL Eden was), and that created an opening to question a lot of issues related to the original texts. The Islamic texts were seen as offering complatibility with their view.
quote:
[LNA]
Did the Jewish Solomon actually exist?
[Modulous]
Does it matter?
Well, Black Muslims in American think it does.
Palestinians seem to be interested in the issue.
Historians are interested.
Archaeologists are interested.
All the failures to find any mention of the Temple before 700 BCE have caught a lot of attention. Judah and Jerusalem and the Temple is an interesting issue. The lack of evidence has created some interesting views. Among the secular and the religious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Modulous, posted 05-14-2016 7:11 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by Modulous, posted 05-17-2016 6:12 PM LamarkNewAge has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7799
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 154 of 162 (784388)
05-17-2016 6:12 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by LamarkNewAge
05-17-2016 4:49 PM


Re: Modulous and my point. Attempted by me. Here goes.
My point is that they never had a great explanation of what the original texts said.
OK.
We don't know what the average Muslim thought about the textual situation.
OK.
But Islam says the Hebrew Biblical texts weren't the original texts.
Show me what you are talking about. What does Islam specifically say about which texts in which texts?
Take the situation of Judah and the failure to find any mention till after the 2nd half of the 8th century BCE, despite endless Assyrian campaigns from c.850 on. Take the case of Assyrian king Adad Nirari III from 811 to 783. Here is an Assyrian text from 797 BCE. It covers an invasion to Palestine.
Notice how Judah isn't mentioned.
OK, I notice it. Now take the Islamic texts and show this represents a problem.
My point is that many diverse views would exist as to what the original texts say.
What any text says, as my experience here at EvC proves to me.
The Nation of Islam is obsessed with white people (as American Jews appear to be) being imposters of the "chosen" black-skinned people (who came from Africa where the REAL Eden was), and that created an opening to question a lot of issues related to the original texts. The Islamic texts were seen as offering complatibility with their view.
So....?
Well, Black Muslims in American think it does.
Palestinians seem to be interested in the issue.
Historians are interested.
Archaeologists are interested.
And how does this answer my question?
quote:
Can you confirm that my guess about your point is correct? You are trying to say that there were two Solomon's in this perspective? One real one, and one fictional one and that Islam is increasingly claiming to believe in the real one - while arguing that the Biblical one is the fictional one?
You seem to be arguing that some Muslims believe there was the REAL Solomon from 5000BCE or whenever, and the Biblical Solomon who lived considerably later. That this is in contradiction with archaeology. Am I correct? I'm still not clear. It's strange, I'm often assailed here with conclusions with insufficient arguments, here I seem to have lots of arguments but I'm not clear what you are concluding.
I don't think there are any absolute dates in any of the Scriptures, though perhaps I am wrong. I expect there may be problems with relative dating. Any absolute dates are usually derived from Traditional Sources. The religious may accept them as true, but their religion generally doesn't stand or fall on Traditional Sources, even if they are usually relied upon.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by LamarkNewAge, posted 05-17-2016 4:49 PM LamarkNewAge has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9486
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 155 of 162 (784390)
05-17-2016 6:46 PM


Perhaps you two could take your pointless squabble elsewhere?
There's lots of space for inane biblical argument but it ain't here.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by LamarkNewAge, posted 05-18-2016 12:13 PM Tangle has replied

  
LamarkNewAge
Member (Idle past 728 days)
Posts: 2236
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 156 of 162 (784459)
05-18-2016 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Tangle
05-17-2016 6:46 PM


But.
We are trying to understand the range of beliefs out there and why they are held.
O.k. then.
I'm done.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Tangle, posted 05-17-2016 6:46 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by Tangle, posted 05-18-2016 12:26 PM LamarkNewAge has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9486
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 157 of 162 (784460)
05-18-2016 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by LamarkNewAge
05-18-2016 12:13 PM


Re: But.
LNA writes:
We are trying to understand the range of beliefs out there and why they are held.
No, you're fixated on biblical trivia. The OP is not about literacy criticism, it's asking why their are so many of these detailed belief system to argue the trivia about.
I'm done.
Do you have no on-topic comment then?

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by LamarkNewAge, posted 05-18-2016 12:13 PM LamarkNewAge has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 158 of 162 (784664)
05-21-2016 6:12 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by LamarkNewAge
05-14-2016 6:32 PM


Re: Finkelstein. I'll risk a wikipedia quote.
Missed this,not that it's worth much other than as an example of the way some people will cling to ideas despite the evidence.
quote:
Well, there are many different views on the numbers of refugees (in all directions). Here is what the Biblical text says about what you cite. It was a small number of people, and they might have been foreigners who assumed Israelite identity.
In other words, as I said, the Bible is not clear on the scale of the deportations. And really, if you are trying to insist that the Bible is inaccurate why keep citing it against the archaeological evidence ?
quote:
There were deportations before 722/721. And immigration inward too.
Of course the disagreement is in the scale of these events. I'm going with Finkelstein and Silberman. Funny how you bring up the book and then keep disagreeing with it.
quote:
A.H. Sayce was the leading apologist before Albright. Here was one of his most important defenses of the Old Testament history.
I.e. He lived before the archaeological discoveries rewrote the history of the region. Also, before the discovery of the Tel Dan stele (the Mesha stele may also mention Judah, but the reconstruction is questionable)
And all he can tell us is that Judah didn't get mentioned much. That doesn't change the fact that there were people living there. The place was just a minor backwater.
The whole argument is worthless - because you can't argue that people don't exist just by arguing over whether they formed a kingdom or not. But if Judah was predominantly settled by people of the same culture as Israel and if the people swelling their ranks in the 8th Century were largely Israelite refugees what does it matter if there were no kings in earlier times ? (Not the Finkelstein and Silberman even argue for that, holding that the Biblical kings of Judah did exist)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by LamarkNewAge, posted 05-14-2016 6:32 PM LamarkNewAge has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9486
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 159 of 162 (790684)
09-03-2016 11:47 AM


Trolls
Just had to add a new belief to the thread.
I've just spent a week in Norway. Norway, like Scandinavia generally is not a religious/believing country.
quote:
Religion in Norway is mostly Evangelical Lutheran, with 72.9% of the population officially belonging to the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Norway in 2015.[1] The Catholic Church is the next largest Christian church at 2.4%.[2] The officially unaffiliated make up 13.0% of the population.[3] Islam is followed by 2.4% of the population, making it the largest non-Christian religion.[3]
The Evangelical Lutheran Church has a privileged place in society, though less so since a constitutional change in 2012.[4]
Early Norwegians, like all of the people of Scandinavia, were adherents of Norse paganism; the Smi having a shamanistic religion.[5] Norway was gradually Christianized by Christian missionaries between 1000 and 1150. Before the Protestant Reformation in 1536, Norwegians were part of the Catholic Church.
Norway has seen a great decline in religiosity and most Norwegians are irreligious. According to the Eurobarometer Poll of 2010:[6]
22% of Norwegian citizens responded that "they believe there is a God".
44% answered that "they believe there is some sort of spirit or life force".
29% answered that "they do not believe there is any sort of spirit, God, or life force".
5% answered that they "do not know".
Estimated atheism rates in Norway range from 31 to 72%.[7]
(Gotta love the 31-72% range of atheism)
Anyhow - regardless of the above - they have a very strange relationship with trolls.
Trolls live under bridges and in caves and only come out at night. They're ugly buggers.
And I think that an awful lot of the population believe in them. It's a weird thing. A bit like a lot of Irish really do believe in leprechauns.
There's nowt so queer as folk. Myths take a long time to die and even when they're sort of dead, they lurk in our consciousness.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by Hawkins, posted 09-14-2016 2:40 PM Tangle has replied

  
Hawkins
Member (Idle past 1364 days)
Posts: 150
From: Hong Kong
Joined: 08-25-2005


Message 160 of 162 (791337)
09-14-2016 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by Tangle
09-03-2016 11:47 AM


Re: Trolls
Since when humans are willing to die to witness to existence of trolls.
Does it sound even logical to say that because you speculate that too many false gods exist that a true God cannot exist?
Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Tangle, posted 09-03-2016 11:47 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by Tangle, posted 09-14-2016 2:53 PM Hawkins has not replied
 Message 162 by ringo, posted 09-14-2016 3:21 PM Hawkins has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9486
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 161 of 162 (791343)
09-14-2016 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by Hawkins
09-14-2016 2:40 PM


Re: Trolls
Hawkins writes:
Since when humans are willing to die to witness to existence of trolls.
Since when was the test of a real god been whether humans are prepared to die for them? If that's the test, there's a truck load if 'real' gods.
Does it sound even logical to say that because you speculate that too many false gods exist that a true God cannot exist?
And who is saying that? Just you perhaps? God is a black swan. But at least white swans exist.
However, the fact that humans are known to make up almost unmeasurable amounts of silly superstitions and belief systems, combined with the total lack of evidence for any of them leads to a conclusion that the likelyhood is that gods do not exist.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Hawkins, posted 09-14-2016 2:40 PM Hawkins has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 162 of 162 (791351)
09-14-2016 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by Hawkins
09-14-2016 2:40 PM


Re: Trolls
Hawkins writes:
Since when humans are willing to die to witness to existence of trolls.
Humans die for a lot of stupid "causes" - climbing Mt. Everest comes to mind. Willingness to die, or at least to risk one's life, is a poor measure of the value of the "cause".
Hawkins writes:
Does it sound even logical to say that because you speculate that too many false gods exist that a true God cannot exist?
It's logical to say that if YOU think 100 gods are false, then it's quite possible that the 101st (yours) is also false.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Hawkins, posted 09-14-2016 2:40 PM Hawkins has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024