Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Validity of differing eyewitness accounts in religious texts
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 256 of 305 (204243)
05-02-2005 5:14 AM
Reply to: Message 251 by Faith
05-01-2005 5:22 PM


Re: one last reply, for old time's sake.
Absolutely not. As I have said before, where you are now is roughly where I was for most of my life. You could not have read it before as I do now or you would have had a personal relationship with the Living God as I do, and that you could not have given up to pursue such a killing thing as you are doing now. You are trafficking in conjecture and cynicism, not the truth.
you realize that this is nothing more than a personal attack on my faith, right? if i had thought you had a point here, i might have actually been really hurt by it, too.
my relationship was personal. and IS STILL personal. you know nothing of the things between me and my god. do not think for a second that you do. and if finding the truth is threatening to your faith, this is not my problem. i have already tried to explain how this actively part of my faith, and you have done nothing but use it as a weapon against me.
i am not the one here guilty of doing "killing things" and "trafficking conjecture." please keep it on topic, and out of my personal life.
This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 05-02-2005 05:15 AM

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by Faith, posted 05-01-2005 5:22 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 258 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 5:20 AM arachnophilia has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 257 of 305 (204244)
05-02-2005 5:17 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by mark24
05-02-2005 4:49 AM


Prove it
How can you know Moses saw the Red Sea part, when you can't even establish his existence?
The problem is with those who refuse to acknowledge his existence which has been attested to by millions over 3500 years. You can't tell real history from fiction, a genuine witness report from a hoax. You have ridiculous standards for "evidence," absolutely absurd, a recipe for continuing in deepest darkness, but you pride yourselves on this tool of "rationality" which you so abuse.
Here's a challenge for you:
Prove that Attila the Hun existed.
Prove that Genghis Khan existed.
Prove that Cleopatra existed.
You do believe they existed don't you? Well, then, prove it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by mark24, posted 05-02-2005 4:49 AM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by mark24, posted 05-02-2005 6:04 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 258 of 305 (204245)
05-02-2005 5:20 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by arachnophilia
05-02-2005 5:14 AM


Re: one last reply, for old time's sake.
please keep it on topic, and out of my personal life.
Fine, then don't tell me I am where you once were, which is an imposition on MY personal life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2005 5:14 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by arachnophilia, posted 05-02-2005 5:34 AM Faith has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 259 of 305 (204247)
05-02-2005 5:34 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Faith
05-02-2005 5:20 AM


Re: one last reply, for old time's sake.
Fine, then don't tell me I am where you once were, which is an imposition on MY personal life
i didn't mean it to be. it was a simple statement that once we would have had a lot in common, but i changed. i meant no insult, sorry.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 5:20 AM Faith has not replied

mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 260 of 305 (204249)
05-02-2005 6:04 AM
Reply to: Message 257 by Faith
05-02-2005 5:17 AM


Re: Prove it
Faith,
The problem is with those who refuse to acknowledge his existence which has been attested to by millions over 3500 years.
How the fuck would they know anything about it? And you accuse me of abusing rationality!
You can't tell real history from fiction, a genuine witness report from a hoax.
Your entire argument is buggered, then, if that is the case.
If we cannot tell if a historical text is true or false, then it cannot help us to deduce the truth or falsity of any given proposal. Moreover, if we cannot tell if a historical text is true or false, then pretty obviously we don't know if the alleged testimony is actual testimony, rather than a hoax. Therefore, the "testimony" cannot therefore be considered evidence because, as you have admitted, we cannot tell it from a hoax, & it cannot help us deduce the truth or falsity of anything.
To put it another way. Evidence is data that supports a hypothesis, since something that cannot be shown to be true or false (by your own admission) cannot possibly support any hypothesis, your alleged "testimony" cannot be considered evidence.
Does a bullethole in the foot hurt?
Prove that Attila the Hun existed.
Prove that Genghis Khan existed.
Prove that Cleopatra existed.
You do believe they existed don't you? Well, then, prove it.
The existence of all of the above are noted in records independent of each other. In other words, were I to have one record, I could hold reasonably hold it as being "iffy". If I have more than one, then I start having to take notice. If unrelated people are recording the same person, then there can be only one reason for it. There is, of course, a level of tentativity involved. The more independent evidence, the lower the tentativity.
This is the point, Moses et al exist nowhere outside of a religious book. The book he appears in is internally inconsistent & makes fantastic claims. I need more.
Even were you to establish the existence of Moses, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That he existed still gives me no reason to believe him. But first things first.
Mark
This message has been edited by mark24, 05-02-2005 06:49 AM

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 5:17 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 1:53 PM mark24 has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 261 of 305 (204275)
05-02-2005 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by Faith
05-02-2005 3:16 AM


Re: The Bible in Galactic
Faith writes:
Sorry but I know I'm right about a lot of it, and it's very wearying to take the endless commands to jump through hoops giving proof only to hear it wasn't good enough by some weird standard.
I'm not asking you to jump through hoops. I'm only asking you to address the topic of the thread. The opening post poses this question about eyewitness accounts:
What is the criteria that we should (or do) use to make an assumption of validity?
I attempted to paraphrase your criteria and you objected to it. Perhaps if you just listed your criteria yourself it would help. I mean a real list, like this:
  1. (first criteria for judging the validity of eyewitness accounts)
  2. (second criteria for judging the validity of eyewitness accounts)
  3. etc...
You say "I know I'm right", and that's nice, but if you can't explain the means by which you came to know you're right how do you expect others to follow your path?
If it helps, one of the primary criterion for historians in establishing such things is to have as many independent confirming pathways of evidence as possible. The more this requirement is satisfied, the more certainty some person or event of history is felt to be reliably established.
Using your numbers argument from your Moses example, your criteria is that millions of people have believed in the existence of Moses. But your numbers argument is circular, since when other people cite the same rationale then you become one of the millions of people they cite. They cite you, you cite them, you all cite each other, and all you've really got is a group who believes something because everyone else in the group believes it. Someone somewhere has to actually know something based upon objective evidence, not just think so because everybody else thinks so. The numbers argument isn't valid.
It might be interesting to debate some of you on MY turf. I wonder how YOU would survive.
We could find out. Just tell me where, as long as the rules don't proscribe non-Christian viewpoints.
But PecosGeorge made me aware of the spiritual down side of continuing here as well.
You might think PecosGeorge is trying to help you, but notice he isn't participating in this discussion. And after reading his words were you inspired or discouraged? Think about it.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 3:16 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 2:38 PM Percy has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 262 of 305 (204279)
05-02-2005 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by Faith
05-02-2005 3:16 AM


Re: The Bible in Galactic
Faith writes:
PS, my offtopic response to Arachnophilia was to his offtopic remark to me in the process of leaving.
Admin advisories are not up for discussion. I don't recall reading in the Forum Guidelines that "He did it first" makes subsequent violations okay. Read Asgara's recent posts on the topic (Message 233 and Message 233), moderators will not be taking on the impossible task of figuring out who started what. Members are responsible for their own guidelines violations.
Furthermore, I only noted the off-topic nature of your post and not its other qualities. I took this subtle approach because of your prickly nature, hoping you'd realize on your own what was really wrong, but you decided to dispute it anyway. I've read Arachnophilia's reply to you, and he apparently found it as, er, problematic as it initially appeared to me. Please stick to the topic and control your appetite for bringing the judgment of God down upon people.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 3:16 AM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 263 of 305 (204339)
05-02-2005 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by mark24
05-02-2005 6:04 AM


Re: Prove it
If we cannot tell if a historical text is true or false, then it cannot help us to deduce the truth or falsity of any given proposal.
One CAN tell, but YOU apparently can't if you make the perfectly asinine statement that nobody can tell whether Moses existed or not, the kind of asinine statement that the majority around here seem addicted to.
Oh blah blah blah to your sophomoric lecture on evidence.
Prove that Attila the Hun existed.
Prove that Genghis Khan existed.
Prove that Cleopatra existed.
You do believe they existed don't you? Well, then, prove it.
====
The existence of all of the above are noted in records independent of each other.
Oh really? Give me an example. You can't come up with ONE record of their existence. Come on, show me. Prove it. They are nothing but mythological figures invented to provide a romance for the peoples involved. Did Attila write anything? Did Ghenghis Khan? Produce their writings! For Moses we have five books of writings. Did Cleopatra write anything? Did somebody who knew them personally write about them? Why should I believe anything anybody wrote anyway? Why should I believe anything anybody says about anyone? These guys were all bigger than life. They simply couldn't have existed. Come on, produce the evidence!
In other words, were I to have one record, I could hold reasonably hold it as being "iffy". If I have more than one, then I start having to take notice.
FIND JUST ONE record of the existence ANY of those human beings listed that couldn't be shown to be a mere fiction. Come on, prove it. Take your own medicine.
If unrelated people are recording the same person, then there can be only one reason for it.
Unrelated people? Let me guess that any original records you could conceivably find (and you can't even find one) would be by people who were related, people who claim to have been ravaged by the first two for instance, or people who get a kick out of having a Cleopatra in their tribe, though she's just a fiction they invented. Find me reports from anyone who isn't part of a tribe with a vested interest in maintaining these myths. Come on, prove it.
There is, of course, a level of tentativity involved. The more independent evidence, the lower the tentativity.
Find us the independent evidence of the three above, Mark. Prove that anybody who wrote about them didn't have ulterior motives. Ignore all the people who merely believed in their existence after their death. After all you discount the bazillions who believe in Moses' existence since his death. Just find an original account of their existence written by someone who doesn't have a vested interest in their existence. Moses has five books to his name, both by him and about him. You'll be lucky to find a scrap of anything from the actual life of the above. PROVE IT!
This is the point, Moses et al exist nowhere outside of a religious book. The book he appears in is internally inconsistent & makes fantastic claims. I need more.
More than 66 INDEPENDENT books written over 1500 years, over half of which refer back to Moses, more than millions who have believed it as fact, more than all the Jews who have believed it, among whom thousands have been named after Moses (How many have been named after Attila the Hun?), more than I don't know how many commentaries on the Pentateuch that treat him as a historical figure. Moses is VERY well attested to, FAR better than Attila the Hun et.al.
This "religious book" is predominantly a HISTORY.
Even were you to establish the existence of Moses, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That he existed still gives me no reason to believe him. But first things first.
ALL we are talking about is his existence. Stick to the topic!
You cannot even prove the existence of George Washington beyond the kind of evidence we have for Moses! It's all WITNESS evidence, which means NOTHING to anybody here.
This message has been edited by Faith, 05-02-2005 01:54 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by mark24, posted 05-02-2005 6:04 AM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by MangyTiger, posted 05-02-2005 7:51 PM Faith has replied
 Message 276 by mark24, posted 05-03-2005 4:41 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 264 of 305 (204352)
05-02-2005 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by Percy
05-02-2005 9:52 AM


Re: The Bible in Galactic
I'm not asking you to jump through hoops. I'm only asking you to address the topic of the thread. The opening post poses this question about eyewitness accounts:
What is the criteria that we should (or do) use to make an assumption of validity?
Here's the problem: There ARE no other religious texts than the Bible that even HAVE eyewitness accounts of anything intrinsic to the religion itself - except possibly the Book of Mormon. So there are no "DIFFERING" eyewitness accounts to compare in the first place. Unless, again, you want to get into the Book of Mormon and so far no Mormons have shown up here for the purpose.
There is nothing to compare so perhaps the question should really be about the validity of eyewitness accounts AS SUCH, as opposed to other kinds of religious teachings, which is a challenge to the Bible exclusively, which is pretty much how I've been taking it.
I attempted to paraphrase your criteria and you objected to it. Perhaps if you just listed your criteria yourself it would help. I mean a real list, like this:
(first criteria for judging the validity of eyewitness accounts)
(second criteria for judging the validity of eyewitness accounts)
etc...
OK, here's a start:
Lots of witnesses.
Lots of witnesses to the witnesses.
A written report by those who were there.
The tone of the writing. Realistic detail in the writing.
The credibility and respectability of those who have found it valid.
Numbers of those who have found it valid.
You say "I know I'm right", and that's nice, but if you can't explain the means by which you came to know you're right how do you expect others to follow your path?
Just ONCE it would be SO nice if somebody just had a CLUE about what's really going on here. I was referring to my entire sojourn here and I have produced all kinds of evidence for many points I've made over the last few months, WAY better evidence than most of my opponents. On this thread too. But NOBODY has ever acknowledged a one of them. Except Crashfrog said he got something out of my first thread. That was nice. The ingenuity with which putative flaws are found in my EXCELLENT reasoning OUGHT to be enough to drive a person for the sake of sanity off this nutfarm altogether.
If it helps, one of the primary criterion for historians in establishing such things is to have as many independent confirming pathways of evidence as possible. The more this requirement is satisfied, the more certainty some person or event of history is felt to be reliably established.
Oh I agree, but the busy little Bible debunkers eliminate the huge numbers of independent witnesses of Moses and of Jesus Christ on the bogus notion that they are not independent. When you are dealing with this kind of madness there is NO rational criterion anyone can establish.
Felt to be reliably established by whom anyway? MILLIONS have felt the reality of the Bible reports to have been reliably established by the EVIDENCE GIVEN, the NUMBERS OF WITNESSES, the CHARACTER OF THE WITNESSES, the CREDIBILITY OF THE REPORTS, but this debunker mentality is capable of dismissing with a wave of the hand the certainty of so many people. This is MADNESS.
Using your numbers argument from your Moses example, your criteria is that millions of people have believed in the existence of Moses. But your numbers argument is circular, since when other people cite the same rationale then you become one of the millions of people they cite. They cite you, you cite them, you all cite each other, and all you've really got is a group who believes something because everyone else in the group believes it. Someone somewhere has to actually know something based upon objective evidence, not just think so because everybody else thinks so. The numbers argument isn't valid.
*****************************************************
By this criterion you would eliminate the validity of any witness report whatever, as what you are doing is eliminating EVERYBODY WHO BELIEVES IT. Soon as somebody who was previously skeptical comes to believe it that person is eliminated from consideration. In other words the ONLY report you will accept is the report by those who DON'T believe it. It's YOUR reasoning that is circular. And this is the kind of reasoning I keep running into around here. Total nuttiness by the self-appointed arbiters of *R*E*A*S*O*N*
*****************************************************
In the case of believing the Bible, if a person doesn't come to a settled personal belief on being personally convinced by the evidence, then their belief is of no value to them. Good preachers are very concerned about those in their congregations who grew up in Christian families very possibly just taking it all for granted and having no defense against the first wind of debunkery that hits them. They MUST come to an independent personal understanding of their own or their belief is worthless. So I do not count those, only those who LIVE IT from personal conviction of its truth.
However, for most subjects, most people believe ANYTHING on the basis of other people's believing it. That is the case with evolution too. You won't find one in a hundred thousand who believe in evolution who knows zip about it, they just believe it because it is the accepted dogma of the day.
It might be interesting to debate some of you on MY turf. I wonder how YOU would survive.
quote:
We could find out. Just tell me where, as long as the rules don't proscribe non-Christian viewpoints.
At the moment I don't have a turf. I'll see if I can put one together.
But PecosGeorge made me aware of the spiritual down side of continuing here as well.
quote:
You might think PecosGeorge is trying to help you, but notice he isn't participating in this discussion. And after reading his words were you inspired or discouraged? Think about it.
I understand where he is coming from completely. I've been fighting the same views myself ever since I came onto this site. Am I merely indulging an addiction to no good end? Could be.
EDITED TO EMPHASIZE PARAGRAPH & ADD A SENTENCE OR TWO TO IT.
This message has been edited by Faith, 05-02-2005 04:19 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by Percy, posted 05-02-2005 9:52 AM Percy has not replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6353 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 265 of 305 (204414)
05-02-2005 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by Faith
05-02-2005 1:53 PM


Re: Prove it
The existence of Cleopatra is confirmed by coins minted during her lifetime, both in Egypt and various parts of the Roman Empire.

The Tigers roared in Dublin - and I was there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 1:53 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 8:12 PM MangyTiger has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 266 of 305 (204418)
05-02-2005 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by MangyTiger
05-02-2005 7:51 PM


Re: Prove it
The existence of Cleopatra is confirmed by coins minted during her lifetime, both in Egypt and various parts of the Roman Empire.
Prove the coins were minted in that particular time by those particular entities. Probably minted hundreds of years later. No proof in any case that they depict someone who ever lived. You have no way of proving this, therefore she never existed. All a myth invented by the aristocracy to give the people a national identity and keep them in line.
This message has been edited by Faith, 05-02-2005 08:14 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by MangyTiger, posted 05-02-2005 7:51 PM MangyTiger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by MangyTiger, posted 05-02-2005 9:13 PM Faith has replied
 Message 268 by Clark, posted 05-02-2005 9:36 PM Faith has replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6353 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 267 of 305 (204441)
05-02-2005 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by Faith
05-02-2005 8:12 PM


Re: Prove it
Wow.
Words fail me.
Actually I suppose I shouldn't be surprised - you're the person who came up with the "birds resting on the heads of tall dinosaurs during the flood" stuff aren't you ?
Although I still suspect you might be a troll I'll play for while...
Prove the coins were minted in that particular time by those particular entities.
Do you have any particular reason to doubt the expertise of the experts in numismatics/history who say they were ? Can you find anyone with expertise in the field who says they weren't ?
Probably minted hundreds of years later.
Your basis for this claim is what exactly ? I note you say Probably not Possibly - I don't think you have a single thing to back that up with.
All a myth invented by the aristocracy to give the people a national identity and keep them in line.
You do realise that Cleopatra was the end of the Ptolemaic dynastic line don't you ? After her death there were no more Pharaohs - Egypt became a province of Rome. Not exactly the ideal character to symbolise a national identity.

The Tigers roared in Dublin - and I was there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 8:12 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 9:40 PM MangyTiger has not replied

Clark
Inactive Member


Message 268 of 305 (204445)
05-02-2005 9:36 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by Faith
05-02-2005 8:12 PM


Re: Prove it
Here's my understanding of historical reconstruction, forigve me that it is a bit half-assed.
Independent Attestation: Do we have multiple lines of evidence from independent sources? For Cleopatra, do we have writings from her contemporaries whom she had contact, friend and foe, the Romans, the Greeks, Egyptians, Ethiopians, Jews, Persians etc. Do we have contemporous inscriptions and monuments and artwork that describe her? Any archeological evidence, artifacts such as coins are always helpful. The more of all this the better. The more independent the better. The closer to her alleged time, the better.
Contextual Credibility: Does her existence make sense, logically and historically? Does she fit in the historical mileau? Does what happened that preceded and followed Cleopatra make sense with Cleopatra fitting in-between? Are there any problems with the "story" of Cleopatra? Does her story fit the time she supposedly existed? Does it make sense to have a female pharaoh of Egypt messing around with the Caesars and politicians of Rome? Does she fit into the historical framework we already know?
Dissimilarity: the trickiest criterion. Does any of our evidence have a reason to deny her existence, yet gives it anyway? MangyTiger just came up with a good example. Cleopatra came as the last in the line of Ptolemaic pharaohs, afterwards, Egypt was a province of Rome. Do any Egyptian historians of that time attest to her existence? The criterion of dissimilarity is generally especially enlightening.
Now, add the totality of this information up. What does the evidence tell you? One thing it will never give you is Absolute certainty; it won't give you "proof". It will only give you degrees of certainty. On that note, I would say the existence of Cleopatra is about as certain as the stuff we breathe is made up of parts nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 8:12 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by Faith, posted 05-02-2005 9:41 PM Clark has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 269 of 305 (204448)
05-02-2005 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by MangyTiger
05-02-2005 9:13 PM


Re: Prove it
Please do not respond in kind to Faith. If Faith agrees to participate in only a single thread at a time, I am not going to hold her to the forum guidelines. This exception applies only to Faith. Anyone else who violates the guidelines will be vulnerable to a temporary suspension of posting privileges. --Admin
Wow.
Words fail me.
Imagine that. You're deaf to parody. You don't even recognize the thinking of the majority of the idiots on this site whom I am parodying, very likely including yourself.
Prove the coins were minted in that particular time by those particular entities.
====
Do you have any particular reason to doubt the expertise of the experts in numismatics/history who say they were ? Can you find anyone with expertise in the field who says they weren't ?
Why would that matter? We all KNOW that nothing in history is true, especially if it's about unusual people or occurrences and certainly Cleopatra would be out of the ordinary if she had existed. You can't tell ANYTHING from what any expert says, or what is written about anything. It's ALL just the invention of people who want to dominate others. HAven't you learned that yet?
That's the reasoning about Moses, you know, I'm simply playing by the rules of the scholarly game here. Nothing anybody has ever written about Moses is of any value whatever, you know, for showing that he existed. Volumes of material by and about him are all trash. Same with Cleopatra then. It follows. It's the accepted method. No mere coin can prove her existence if tons of writing about Moses as a historical figure can't prove his.
Probably minted hundreds of years later.
========
Your basis for this claim is what exactly ? I note you say Probably not Possibly - I don't think you have a single thing to back that up with.
Just because I don't think Cleopatra existed, of course. I'm sure she didn't, therefore the coins had nothing to do with a supposed time in which she supposedly did. It was no doubt all made up later to create a myth to keep the rabble in line.
After all, this thinking would be in tune with the supposed "Bible scholars" who decided that Daniel couldn't have been written when it says it was written because he prophesied some things that actually came true. Therefore he had to have lived after the time of their fulfillment, just because they don't believe in prophecy. I mean, this is standard reasoning among today's sorry excuse for Bible "scholars." I'm simply following the rules. Therefore I don't believe in Cleopatra. You cannot prove she existed because nobody can prove anybody existed.
All a myth invented by the aristocracy to give the people a national identity and keep them in line.
quote:
You do realise that Cleopatra was the end of the Ptolemaic dynastic line don't you ? After her death there were no more Pharaohs - Egypt became a province of Rome. Not exactly the ideal character to symbolise a national identity.
So say you, but there's no evidence she existed at all, in that time or ever, so what difference does it make? Ah well, you know, people need bread and circuses no matter what times they live in, and in a time when they were losing their national identity what BETTER time to create a symbol for them. Maybe keep them from rebelling against Caesar or something. Isn't that what the Jews did with Moses and in fact their whole religion? Just make it all up to keep people in line? Clever inventors those Jews. Quite a character that Moses.
This message has been edited by Admin, 05-02-2005 10:22 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by MangyTiger, posted 05-02-2005 9:13 PM MangyTiger has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by Admin, posted 05-02-2005 10:16 PM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 270 of 305 (204449)
05-02-2005 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 268 by Clark
05-02-2005 9:36 PM


Re: Prove it
Now apply your reasoning to Moses, Abraham, King David and Jesus Christ.
For Jesus Christ you have a TON of evidence. All His followers from many nations under the Roman Empire of the time.
You want to deny this is evidence? By Percy's Law then. If somebody believes it, we disqualify that person's testimony.
And He attests to the other three.
Also, take up the question of Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan please. POint to writings about them.
This message has been edited by Faith, 05-02-2005 09:47 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Clark, posted 05-02-2005 9:36 PM Clark has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by Clark, posted 05-03-2005 12:25 AM Faith has replied
 Message 273 by arachnophilia, posted 05-03-2005 12:33 AM Faith 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