Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for God
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 181 of 213 (483009)
09-19-2008 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 179 by Granny Magda
09-19-2008 2:36 PM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
Are you even following my line of reasoning? I will give you the same challenge as I have given Brian. Please prove in a conclusive manner who the author of any book in the entire world is. In fact, please prove to me in a conclusive manner that any event in the past actually happened. You are not able to. All history is based on writings and witnesses. All of these could have been forged. But, there is no benefit in assuming that every writing in the world may actually be a hoax. This line of reasoning will get you nowhere. Therefore, testimony and writings are accepted as evidence from a historians perspective. I have therefore asserted that most religions have a valid argument for the origin of there holy books. However, even if you follow every religion to the core of their holy books, they all must result in the testimony of one man. This is not the case in Judaism. If you follow the tradition all the way back you arrive at the testimony of 600,000 people. This is valid evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by Granny Magda, posted 09-19-2008 2:36 PM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Granny Magda, posted 09-19-2008 3:06 PM Open MInd has not replied
 Message 186 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 3:42 PM Open MInd has replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 182 of 213 (483010)
09-19-2008 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Brian
09-19-2008 2:39 PM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
Can you step up to the challenge? Please give me some conclusive evidence that will prove who the author of any book in the entire world actually is. Also, please give me some examples of your problems with the Torah. Just stating that such problems exist is meaningless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 2:39 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 3:11 PM Open MInd has replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 183 of 213 (483012)
09-19-2008 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by Open MInd
09-19-2008 2:49 PM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
One paragraph again huh? Wow, you're really putting in some effort there. How about taking your time and putting together a detailed response, maybe one that includes some citations to back up some of your claims. This isn't a chat room you know. There's no hurry.
Are you even following my line of reasoning?
Dude, I'm starting to suspect that even you're not following your line of reasoning...
Your repeated insistence that anyone who disagrees with you is too stupid to understand your argument is pathetic. People are disagreeing with you because;
a) Other people have other opinions.
and
b) Your argument is composed of tired, mix-and-match fallacies, all of which we've heard a thousand times before.
I will give you the same challenge as I have given Brian. Please prove in a conclusive manner who the author of any book in the entire world is. In fact, please prove to me in a conclusive manner that any event in the past actually happened. You are not able to. All history is based on writings and witnesses. All of these could have been forged.
This is the very point that half the people on this thread have already made to you.
But, there is no benefit in assuming that every writing in the world may actually be a hoax. This line of reasoning will get you nowhere.
Nor is there any benefit in assuming them true. You need to examine ancient texts with a sceptical, yet open mind, qualities you appear to lack.
Therefore, testimony and writings are accepted as evidence from a historians perspective.
The point you are repeatedly missing is that the holy book cannot be accepted as evidence of its own veracity in the absence of alternate corroborating sources.
Therefore, testimony and writings are accepted as evidence from a historians perspective. I have therefore asserted that most religions have a valid argument for the origin of there holy books. However, even if you follow every religion to the core of their holy books, they all must result in the testimony of one man.
I have asked you to back up this ludicrous drivel already. If you are unwilling or unable to do so, kindly stop bringing it up.
This is not the case in Judaism. If you follow the tradition all the way back you arrive at the testimony of 600,000 people. This is valid evidence.
No, it is merely a shameless and crude display of special pleading.
Mutate and Survive

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 2:49 PM Open MInd has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 184 of 213 (483013)
09-19-2008 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by Open MInd
09-19-2008 2:55 PM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
Can you step up to the challenge? Please give me some conclusive evidence that will prove who the author of any book in the entire world actually is.
So why are you climing that you know who wrote any book in the Bible?
Also, I have never stated that the author of a book can be conclusively proven. My whole point is that we cannot know for certain, yet you claim that you do.
Also, please give me some examples of your problems with the Torah.
Okay.
A wee simple one to begin:
'Tradition' states that Moses wrote the Torah, however he could NOT have written this:
Genesis 14:14
When Abram heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the 318 trained men born in his household and went in pursuit as far as Dan.
How could Moses have possibly mentioned Dan when it wasn't called Dan during Moses' time?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 2:55 PM Open MInd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 3:38 PM Brian has replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 185 of 213 (483019)
09-19-2008 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by Brian
09-19-2008 3:11 PM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
I claim that the only way of knowing any history is through the written testimony and the oral testimony. There is no other conclusive evidence. However, I assume you believe in most of the other things that historians have to say. You do believe that World War I happened right. I am trying to show you that the same methods used to show that other historical events have happened, can be used to show that the giving of the Torah actually happened.
With regard to your first problem with the Torah, how do you know that it was not called Dan during the time of Moses? Just because it is mentioned later in the Book of Kings Chapter 12 Verse 29 does not show that it had a different name years earlier. Now let us assume that it did have a different name in the time of Moses, this would actually show a prophecy not a problem. However, any prophecy that has come true since the time of the Torah will only show to you that the Torah must have been written later, or must have been edited by later writers. We see here again that it is all a matter of perspective. Also, I think it should also be pointed out that the oral tradition written in the Talmud has something to be interpreted from the mentioning of this place. You are not the first one to analyze this verse. It has already been analyzed by the oral tradition, and written down over a thousand years ago.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 3:11 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 4:05 PM Open MInd has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 186 of 213 (483021)
09-19-2008 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by Open MInd
09-19-2008 2:49 PM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
If you follow the tradition all the way back you arrive at the testimony of 600,000 people.
And if we examine this number the only conclusion is that it shows the tradition to be inaccurate. Since the 600 000 is a fantasy number it casts doubt on the accuracy of this event.
In the Book of Numbers 3:42-43 we are told:
So Moses counted all the firstborn of the Israelites, as the LORD commanded him. The total number of firstborn males a month old or more, listed by name, was 22,273.
How can we take this seriously when, Gray ((1903) A critical and exegetical commentary on Numbers, Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark) informs us that:
The unreality of the numbers is independently proved by comparing them with one another. Thus: the number of male firstborn is 22 273, allowing the number of female firstborn to be equal, the total number of firstborn is 44 546, and, therefore, the total number of Israelites being between 2,000,000 and 2,500,000, the average number of children to a family is about 50! Again, if, as is probable, the firstborn of the mother is intended (cp3:12), then, since the number of firstborn and of mothers must have been identical, there were 44,456 mothers: but the number of women being approximately the same as of men, the women over 20 numbered something over 600,000, and therefore only about 1 in 14 or 15 women over twenty were mothers! (page:13)
There’s more internal evidence to suggest that the 2-3 million of the Exodus group is artificial.
Current estimates of the population of Canaan at the time of the Exodus are well below three million. Exod. 23:29 and Deut. 7:7, 17, 22 indicate that the Israelites were far fewer in number than the Canaanite population that they were to conquer ( Ashley, T. R. (1993). The book of Numbers. Grand Rapids, Mich., William B. Eerdmans. pp.60-61)
This is valid evidence.
Yes, valid evidence that the Torah is a work of fiction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 2:49 PM Open MInd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 3:54 PM Brian has replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 187 of 213 (483022)
09-19-2008 3:43 PM


Sub Topic of Historical Science
How about that issue be taken to:
Historical science
It is a good topic which should be dealt with but needs to be separated from this topic.

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 188 of 213 (483025)
09-19-2008 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by Brian
09-19-2008 3:42 PM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
The firstborn does go after the Father alone; verify this yourself. The Jewish people had many wives as you are well aware. According to tradition, the Jewish women gave birth to six children in one pregnancy in Egypt. Now go back and find something else.
Also, I don't know where you are verifying these so called "current estimates of the population of Canaan." Please explain.
Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 3:42 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 4:11 PM Open MInd has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 189 of 213 (483026)
09-19-2008 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by Open MInd
09-19-2008 1:59 PM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
I am explaining to you that every observant Jew around today is giving testimony that the Torah is authentic.
So you think that the testimony given by followers of a religion with regards to the authenticity of their book is evidence that the specific creator referenced is the creator of the universe?
No, apparently YHWH has legitimate grounds special treatment.
However, other religions are only testifying to a man that wrote their books years ago. If all religions are more or less testifying to about a book that was written by one person, it is easily believed that this person did actually write the book. However, the author could still have been lying.
Agreed; though I'm still unsure how the Torah gets an exemption.
The Jews, on the other hand, are testifying to a book that was accepted by 600,000 people who all believed that they had heard the voice of G-d.
The point, you seem to be missing, is that there is only one source that states that 600,000 people believed they heard the word of God and that book claims to be written by a single author.
So your logic:
Judaism is only testifying to a man (Moses) that wrote the Torah years ago. If the followers of Judaism are more or less testifying about a book that was written by one person, it is easily believed that this person did actually write the book. However, the author could still have been lying.
Now let us continue the critical train of thought. Regardless of what is easily believed initially: a book that contains details of the supposed author's death, could easily be believed to have not been written solely by the supposed author. That others might have added to the original writings or composed the whole thing entirely after the fact.
As I said to other people here, I am giving evidence not proof.
Yes, but evidence must lead towards a single conclusion. That your chosen holy book claims a large number of witnesses to a supernatural event, and is still believed by people today cannot realistically be called 'evidence'. Similar claims could be made by any other extant religions.
For example, the Qur'an says "The Hour has drawn near, and the moon has been cleft asunder". A huge number of people would have witnessed that! And Muslims still give testimony to their book. And they have evidence outside of the Qur'an demonstrating the existence of the book's supposed author.
How can we separate all the claims of and about various Holy Books? We cannot do so. Instead of trying, the OP asks if there is any evidence outside the texts we can look to. The existence of jews does not lend credence to the claim that 600,000 people heard the voice of God at Mt Sinai. Outside evidence might be able to say something about 600,000 jews at the mountain.
There might also be evidence that the Torah was written contemporary with the events it alleges occurs. Perhaps there is evidence that large numbers of people had access to these texts, (so we might argue that there would have been a public outcry and rejection of the doctrine if the claims were obviously fraudulent). I don't know, but the mere existence of jews doesn't really do it as far as evidence goes.
If we squint we might agree it is evidence that mildly supports the claim, but it wouldn't even get us to 'a preponderance of the evidence' standard let alone as far as the lofty highs of 'beyond reasonable doubt': after all, all claimants have similar claims. Your claims for the Torah are little different than the claims of any other book. The claims against the other books can be levelled at your own. It is an evidential stalemate. Can you break it?
If G-d does exist, the world is evidence of his existence
I am granting that a Creator exists for the purposes of this debate. Is there any extra-biblical evidence that supports that Yahweh created it whilst gazing over the form of the salty waters? Is there something to make it stand particularly apart from the claim that Marduk created the world whilst standing on the defeated body of Tiamat/the salty waters?
Also, checkup some of your history of Hinduism before using it as an example.
Hinduism started a long time ago. We're looking at beyond 1100BCE for Vedic religion, and you could stretch it to even as far back as 2000BCE. It became closer to the familiar Hinduism over time.
How far do we go to get Judaism? We can see beginnings around 1000BCE, though some argue it wasn't strictly monotheistic until possibly as late as 300BCE.
The point in time where Judaism started significantly standing apart from rival religions seems to me to have happened later than in Hinduism.
What part of my rather incomplete historical knowledge of Hinduism and Judaism do you disagree with?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 1:59 PM Open MInd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Open MInd, posted 09-21-2008 2:44 AM Modulous has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 190 of 213 (483027)
09-19-2008 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Open MInd
09-19-2008 3:38 PM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
I claim that the only way of knowing any history is through the written testimony and the oral testimony. There is no other conclusive evidence.
Then by YOUR criteria EVERY historical event is true!
You need external evidence to support an historical claim, you cannot just accept any old nonsense because it is a written testimony.
And there is no such thing as conclusive proof in the discipline of ancient history.
However, I assume you believe in most of the other things that historians have to say.
Not at all. I always question everything I read, I even criticise my ex-lecturers if I find something that I don't think fits the evidence.
But history is only degrees of plausibility, it is never proven, just as a scientific theory is never proven. Historical theories are just the best explanation for the evidence available, and they have to be able to falsify a historians claim.
You do believe that World War I happened right.
The quality of evidence for WWI is of a significantly higher quality than the old torah.
I am trying to show you that the same methods used to show that other historical events have happened, can be used to show that the giving of the Torah actually happened.
But NO other events are accepted in the manner that you claim. No historian would ever accept that an event is true without supporting evidence, especially when the claims made are so fantastic and smack of mythology and folklore.
You don't seriously think that historians think that there was a worldwide flood based solely on the stories in the Tanakh do you?
With regard to your first problem with the Torah, how do you know that it was not called Dan during the time of Moses?
Because it was called Laish.
Just because it is mentioned later in the Book of Kings Chapter 12 Verse 29 does not show that it had a different name years earlier.
The Book of Judges claims it was called somehtng else.
18:29
They named it Dan after their forefather Dan, who was born to Israel”though the city used to be called Laish.
So we know it was called Laish before it was called Dan, thus Moses did not write about dan and your book has been edited.
Now let us assume that it did have a different name in the time of Moses,
Well we need to assume that it was since 'Samuel' says it was.
this would actually show a prophecy not a problem.
The verse is not even prophetic.
However, any prophecy that has come true since the time of the Torah will only show to you that the Torah must have been written later, or must have been edited by later writers.
This is just part of the problem though when your earliest source is removed by over a thousand years from some of the events it describes. If any 'prophecised' event occured after we had a written text to examine it would make the case stronger. But, as it is, the earliest texts are the DSS, over a thousand years after Moses died, if he existed that is.
We see here again that it is all a matter of perspective. Also, I think it should also be pointed out that the oral tradition written in the Talmud has something to be interpreted from the mentioning of this place. You are not the first one to analyze this verse. It has already been analyzed by the oral tradition, and written down over a thousand years ago.
Yes, it was concluded a very long time ago that this is just one of many anachronisms contained in the Torah.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 3:38 PM Open MInd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 4:25 PM Brian has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 191 of 213 (483028)
09-19-2008 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Open MInd
09-19-2008 3:54 PM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
The firstborn does go after the Father alone; verify this yourself.
Sorry, it is YOUR job to support YOUR cliams.
The Jewish people had many wives as you are well aware.
This has no bearing on the argument, plus I am not aware that Jewish people had many wives. Can you provide proof that they did?
According to tradition, the Jewish women gave birth to six children in one pregnancy in Egypt.
Reference please.
Now go back and find something else.
You don't get off that easy. I'm not a fundy braindead Christian you know.
So let's see you support something for a little change.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 3:54 PM Open MInd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 4:52 PM Brian has replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 192 of 213 (483032)
09-19-2008 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Brian
09-19-2008 4:05 PM


Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic
Try the Book of Joshua Chapter 19 verse 47. In this verse another Dan seems to be discussed. If you are only taking the scripture on face value, you have no proof that there was only one Dan in Israel. I hope you see what I mean.
Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.
Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 4:05 PM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Adminnemooseus, posted 09-19-2008 5:14 PM Open MInd has not replied

  
Open MInd
Member (Idle past 1253 days)
Posts: 261
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 193 of 213 (483038)
09-19-2008 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by Brian
09-19-2008 4:11 PM


Re: Actually Actually Getting Back On-Topic
Wow, I will kill two questions with one answer, try Deuteronomy Chapter 21 verse 15. This verse discusses who will be the first born in a case where a man has two wives one of whom he s, and the d one happens to give birth to the first born. I will get back to you on the reference that you requested for the multiple children in a single pregnancy. However for now just check up the beginning of the book of Exodus, namely chapter 1 verses 9 through 22. These verses discuss the multiplying of the Jewish people, and how the pharaoh tries to stop it. These verses may also explain how the Jews were able to have many wives. Think about what is going on.
Edited by Open MInd, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 4:11 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by Brian, posted 09-19-2008 5:31 PM Open MInd has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 194 of 213 (483040)
09-19-2008 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by Open MInd
09-19-2008 4:25 PM


Bare link - Serious forum rule violation
Try the Book of Joshua Chapter 19 verse 47.
While it is not an internet link, you are still essentially supplying a bare link (likewise for message 193), which is a significant violation of forum rule 5:
quote:
Bare links with no supporting discussion should be avoided. Make the argument in your own words and use links as supporting references.
At bare minimum, you should quote the scripture you are citing. Some additional discussion would also probably be nice.
AND CAN'T ANYONE COME UP WITH A MESSAGE SUBTITLE BETTER THAN "Re: Actually Getting Back On-Topic"? YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY HAS SOME VALUE RELATIVE TO THE CONTENT OF THE MESSAGE.
No replies to this message. Doing such will get you a suspension. If you really think you need to post a response to a moderation message, send the/an admin an e-mail. But do such in a nice rational manner.
Adminnemooseus

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Report a problem etc. type topics:
Report Technical Problems Here: No. 1
Report Discussion Problems Here: No. 1
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, [thread=-19,-112], [thread=-17,-45], [thread=-19,-337], [thread=-14,-1073]
Admin writes:
It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon.
There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot.
Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Source

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 4:25 PM Open MInd has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 195 of 213 (483041)
09-19-2008 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Open MInd
09-19-2008 4:52 PM


Killing me softly
Wow, I will kill two questions with one answer, try Deuteronomy Chapter 21 verse 15.
This only 'kills' YOUR claim that:
The Jewish people had many wives
Deuteronomy 21:15
If a man has two wives
This undermines your claim on two accounts.
Firstly, 'two' wives is hardly 'many' is it?
Secondly, the passage says 'if', which negates your claim that 'The Jewish people had many wives'. This passage tells us that some didn't have two wives and none had more than two.
So try again.
I will get back to you on the reference that you requested for the multiple children in a single pregnancy.
That's good.
Meantime, another fundy posted this link, which is an article by Jacob Gebhart of The Hebrew Research Centre who is embarrassed about the number of people that Exodus suggests came out of Egypt.
You will notice that he claims that The average number of children born to the descendents of Yaacov is three to five.
This does seem to conflict with your claim.
Edited by Brian, : added sub heading

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 4:52 PM Open MInd has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by Open MInd, posted 09-19-2008 5:48 PM Brian has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024