Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is belief in God or the Bible necessary to believe in a massive flood.
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 61 of 110 (509405)
05-21-2009 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by PaulK
05-19-2009 7:36 AM


PaulK writes:
We can be pretty sure that the Exodus never happened as described.
We can be reasonably sure that at the least the achievements of David and Solomon have been exaggerated to a significant degree, and their existence is not certain.
Instead of simply looking at the Bible, the historical and archaeological evidence has to be considered.
What makes you say that the exodus never happened as described?
there is evidence in Jewish traditional customs such as the Passover celebration which is still celebrated today.
An Egyptian historian, Ahmed Behgat, has published a book charging that "during the Exodus ancient Israelites smuggled gold out of Egypt and used it to make the golden calf." His research into ancient Egyptian archives has led him to conclude that Israel should pay Egypt $40billion.
There is also an ancient egyption poem about a Pharaoh Ni-maat-Re that says in part "Fight on behalf of his name ... There is no tomb for a rebel against his majesty, and his corpse is cast into the water." As all ditties do, this one would have been based on an actual event.
Seeing there is some evidence for the historical exodus...it makes it very possibly based on fact and not a myth.
Now to say that David and Solomon may not have been real people you must have some pretty solid evidence for such a claim. What is it??
You're right that the archeological evidence has to be considered. Time and time again archeology digs up things that the bible spoke about long before...there is so much archeological evidence that many scholars believe the bible to be a History book full stop.
many museums house wall reliefs, inscriptions and statues that verify the Bible accounts. Various Kings of Judah and Israel such as Hezekiah, Manasseh, Omri, Ahab, Pekah, Menahem and Hoshea appear on cuneiform records of Assyrian rulers.
Archologists have found the ancient city of UR the city where Abraham lived. Andre Parrot and his French team of archaeologists found over 20,000 clay tablets at the royal city of Mari. Some of these cuneiform tablets mention cities by the name of Peleg, Serug, Nahor, Terah and Haran....all these names occur in the Genesis account as names of Abraham’s relatives.
So archeology backs up the early part of the bible in many ways.
PaulK writes:
Because number and age of manuscripts is NOT the most important factor. Christian apologists like to emphasise it because it's one where the Bible scores well. And in doing so they reveal their bias.
and yet the age of fossils IS the most important factor in determining science matters and evolutionists dont mind using it as a strong basis for their evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by PaulK, posted 05-19-2009 7:36 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by PaulK, posted 05-21-2009 2:45 PM Peg has replied
 Message 63 by Theodoric, posted 05-21-2009 5:53 PM Peg has replied
 Message 66 by Coragyps, posted 05-21-2009 9:24 PM Peg has not replied
 Message 67 by Tanndarr, posted 05-21-2009 9:33 PM Peg has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 62 of 110 (509430)
05-21-2009 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Peg
05-21-2009 8:31 AM


quote:
What makes you say that the exodus never happened as described?
Despite the fact that it was supposedly a huge event - to the point of implausibility - it is invisible to history and archaeology. It simply doesn't fit.
quote:
there is evidence in Jewish traditional customs such as the Passover celebration which is still celebrated today.
That isn't significant evidence. Celebrations change, and so do the stories behind them.
quote:
An Egyptian historian, Ahmed Behgat, has published a book charging that "during the Exodus ancient Israelites smuggled gold out of Egypt and used it to make the golden calf." His research into ancient Egyptian archives has led him to conclude that Israel should pay Egypt $40 billion.
There was a similar story about a proposed lawsuit posted here a few years ago. The guy pushing the story claimed that there was evidence form Egyptian records - but it wasn't true. The only source was the Torah. If there was real evidence it wouldn't be obscure.
quote:
There is also an ancient egyption poem about a Pharaoh Ni-maat-Re that says in part "Fight on behalf of his name . . . There is no tomb for a rebel against his majesty, and his corpse is cast into the water." As all ditties do, this one would have been based on an actual event.
Ni-Maat-Re is better known as Amenemhat III. I don't know how you get the idea that rebels against his rule would be denied a tomb and their bodies dumped in the river is any support from the Exodus. Especially as under every chronology and dating I know of (even David Rohl's) Amenemhat III lived well BEFORE the supposed date of the Exodus.
quote:
Seeing there is some evidence for the historical exodus...it makes it very possibly based on fact and not a myth.
Given that you have helped demonstrate the LACK of evidence I'd say that you've helped prove my point.
quote:
Now to say that David and Solomon may not have been real people you must have some pretty solid evidence for such a claim. What is it??
On the contrary - what I need is a LACK of good evidence for their existence. And we've got that !
Your references to archaeology all deal with later events or things that have little bearing on the accuracy of the Bible.
quote:
PaulK writes:
Because number and age of manuscripts is NOT the most important factor. Christian apologists like to emphasise it because it's one where the Bible scores well. And in doing so they reveal their bias.
and yet the age of fossils IS the most important factor in determining science matters and evolutionists dont mind using it as a strong basis for their evidence.
You're not making any sense here. Your point (which as written is complete nonsense) doesn't even try to deal with the facts I pointed out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 8:31 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 10:40 PM PaulK has replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 63 of 110 (509433)
05-21-2009 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Peg
05-21-2009 8:31 AM


quote:
An Egyptian historian, Ahmed Behgat, has published a book charging that "during the Exodus ancient Israelites smuggled gold out of Egypt and used it to make the golden calf." His research into ancient Egyptian archives has led him to conclude that Israel should pay Egypt $40 billion.
Any chance on a source for this? There is nothing, absolutely nothing on the net about this guy. I tried every trick I know and could not find anything at all about this guy or this claim. All google comes up with is your post. So sure would love to find out more about this supposed book.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 8:31 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by PaulK, posted 05-21-2009 6:23 PM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 65 by Coragyps, posted 05-21-2009 9:17 PM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 71 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 10:57 PM Theodoric has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 64 of 110 (509435)
05-21-2009 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Theodoric
05-21-2009 5:53 PM


Maybe it IS a confused memory of the supposed lawsuit. There was no book, and I don't remember the name - but it does match in other areas (perhaps "Ahmed Behgat" was one of the unnamed backers of the proposed lawsuit). In the discussion here there were even claims about "new evidence" - but there was never anything to substantiate it.
See the discussions starting here:
http://EvC Forum: Endogenous Retroviral Insertions Demonstrate Evolution Beyond a Reasonable Doubt -->EvC Forum: Endogenous Retroviral Insertions Demonstrate Evolution Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
and here:
http://EvC Forum: The Exodus: 'A Dead Issue.' -->EvC Forum: The Exodus: 'A Dead Issue.'
(The latter thread has more relevant material to current discussion).
(Note that much of what Jester461 said was untrue - and in fact I can find no sign that the lawsuit was ever filed anywhere, or that the "evidence" other than the Torah account was ever anything more than a figment of jester461's imagination.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Theodoric, posted 05-21-2009 5:53 PM Theodoric has not replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 65 of 110 (509445)
05-21-2009 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Theodoric
05-21-2009 5:53 PM


There is nothing, absolutely nothing on the net about this guy.
Maybe it started as Ahmed begat Akbar......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Theodoric, posted 05-21-2009 5:53 PM Theodoric has not replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 66 of 110 (509446)
05-21-2009 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Peg
05-21-2009 8:31 AM


Now to say that David and Solomon may not have been real people you must have some pretty solid evidence for such a claim. What is it??
You have it exactly backwards, Peg. You need some pretty solid evidence that those two may have been real people. You have a few documents that talk about them - the same sort of documentation that we have for Hector, Paris, or Odysseus. And I'll bet you don't assume that they were real folks that did all the things Homer claimed for them, do you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 8:31 AM Peg has not replied

Tanndarr
Member (Idle past 5182 days)
Posts: 68
Joined: 02-14-2008


Message 67 of 110 (509447)
05-21-2009 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Peg
05-21-2009 8:31 AM


There is also an ancient egyption poem about a Pharaoh Ni-maat-Re that says in part "Fight on behalf of his name . . . There is no tomb for a rebel against his majesty, and his corpse is cast into the water." As all ditties do, this one would have been based on an actual event.
Seeing there is some evidence for the historical exodus...it makes it very possibly based on fact and not a myth.
Peg, you have stripped all context and sense from this passage to twist it to your purposes.
The text is instructions from one of Amenemhat III's treasurers to his children and is not recounting history but telling them to serve their king well. Here's a larger part in context:
"The beginning of the instruction which he made for his children. I tell something important and cause that ye hear (it); I cause that ye know a counsel of eternity and manner of living aright and for passing a lifetime of peace: Worship King (Amenemhat III), living forever, within your bodies and associate with his majesty in your hearts. He is perception which is in (men's) hearts, and his eyes search out every body. He is the sun god Re, by whose beams one sees; he is one who illumines the Two Lands more than the sun disc...He gives food to those who are in his service and he supplies them who tread his path. The King is a ka, and his mouth is increase. He is to be is his creation, for he is (the god) Khnum of all bodies, the begetter who creates the people...He is (the goddess) Sekhmet against him who transgresses his command, and he whom he hates will bear woes. Fight on behalf of his name, and be scrupulous in the oath to him, that ye may be free from the taint of disloyalty. He whom the king has loved will be a revered one, (but) there is no tomb for a rebel against his majesty and his corpse is cast into the water. If ye do this your persons shall be unblemished-ye will find it (so) forever."
Quoted from The Culture of Ancient Egypt by John Albert Wilson attributed to someone named Erman.
The Culture of Ancient Egypt page 143
Would you care to tell us where you got it from and who twisted it to say something that it clearly does not, or will you go down with the ship insisting that someone living in the 19th century BCE is writing about the latest news event of the exodus?
(Nimaatre is Amenemhat III's prenomen or throne name btw, since prenomens are not unique, historians prefer to use the nomen or personal name (Amenemhat with the ordinal III) to avoid confusion.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 8:31 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 11:22 PM Tanndarr has not replied

Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 68 of 110 (509451)
05-21-2009 10:12 PM


To return to the topic...
Is belief in God or the Bible necessary to believe in a massive flood?
Yes. Of course!
Belief in the bible is the only thing keeping the global flood story alive.
There certainly is no evidence in geology, archaeology, hydrology or a bunch of other -ologies to support such a notion.
Its a religious belief start to finish. End of story.
-------------
Part II (lest I be accused of making claims without supporting evidence)
If the global flood story reflected real events, at the generally agreed upon date of 4,350 years ago, there would be a lot of things that would be evident. To mention just two from my own research:
--If the entire globe was flooded with such a catastrophic flood, that evidence would by definition be everywhere. That means it would be in your back yard. And your front yard. Archaeologists have been poking holes in the ground for over 150 years, and you would think that they would be familiar with a stratigraphic discontinuity/deposition layer at 4,350 BP. That's not the case. I've been poking some of those holes for nearly 40 years and I have yet to see such a discontinuity/depositional layer at the appointed time. But I, and my colleagues, have seen continuity of human cultures, fauna and flora, and soil layers across the appointed time period.
--If the entire globe's population was wiped out about 4,350 years ago we would have a discontinuity in DNA between earlier and later populations, with later populations all descended from Noah (or with mtDNA, from Noah's female kin). We don't see that. In the western US we have mtDNA (haplotype A01) from 14,300 years ago (Paisley Caves in southern Oregon) which is identical to mtDNA from archaeological specimens both before and after 4,350 years ago on the California coast, as well as to mtDNA from living individuals on the California coast--some of which evidence is from my own research. We also have a different mtDNA haplotype (D4h3) dated to 10,300 years ago (On Your Knees Cave in southern Alaska) which is identical to that of living individuals stretched between southern California and the tip of South America. In all of these cases, and hundreds of others, the evidence directly contradicts the belief that the globe's population was wiped out about 4,350 years ago and replaced by DNA from Noah and his kin.
So yes, a literal belief in the bible is necessary in order to believe in a global flood at the appointed time of 4,350 years ago--as the scientific evidence definitively contradicts that belief.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Coyote, posted 05-22-2009 12:09 PM Coyote has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 69 of 110 (509458)
05-21-2009 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by PaulK
05-21-2009 2:45 PM


PaulK writes:
Despite the fact that it was supposedly a huge event - to the point of implausibility - it is invisible to history and archaeology. It simply doesn't fit.
I agree that the archeological evidence is scarce but its certainly not surprising in view of the fact Egyptians did not record defamatory matters and were in the habit of changing their histories to suit later rulers. When ThutmoseIII came to power, he tried to obliterate the memory Queen Hatshepsut. He had her inscriptions erased, chiseled her name from monuments, built a wall around her obelisks and her name was not recorded in later annals.
Also if we consider that the history was written under the direction of the priests, whose chief interest, obviously, was maintaining their position and upholding the glory of their gods. They surely would not want to record the defeat of their own gods by the God of a nation of slaves.
Josephus also mentions Manatho, an Egyptian historian whom he quotes to confirm that the Jews did come out of egypt
quote:
Wicki on Manehto writings: Volume 2 covers Dynasties XII - XIX, which includes the end of the Middle Kingdom and the Second Intermediate Period (XV-XVIIthe Hyksos invasion), and then their expulsion and the establishment of the New Kingdom (XVIII onward). The Second Intermediate Period was of particular interest to Josephus, where he equated the Hyksos or "shepherd-kings" as the ancient Israelites who eventually made their way out of Egypt (Apion 1.82-92). He even includes a brief etymological discussion of the term "Hyksos".
PaulK writes:
There was a similar story about a proposed lawsuit posted here a few years ago. The guy pushing the story claimed that there was evidence form Egyptian records - but it wasn't true. The only source was the Torah. If there was real evidence it wouldn't be obscure.
Yes this was a short straw... it could have been a hoax of sorts...or he may have based the evidence on the torah...i havent read the book so i dont really know.
PaulK writes:
On the contrary - what I need is a LACK of good evidence for their existence. And we've got that !
Your references to archaeology all deal with later events or things that have little bearing on the accuracy of the Bible.
Lack of evidence for the existence of David and Solomon???
such as?
PaulK writes:
You're not making any sense here. Your point (which as written is complete nonsense) doesn't even try to deal with the facts I pointed out.
perhaps i could word it differently...Why is it appropriate for science to use dating as a basis of evidence but we cant use dating as a bases for evidence of the age of manuscripts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by PaulK, posted 05-21-2009 2:45 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by bluescat48, posted 05-21-2009 10:50 PM Peg has replied
 Message 74 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 1:53 AM Peg has replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 70 of 110 (509459)
05-21-2009 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Peg
05-21-2009 10:40 PM


Peg writes:
perhaps i could word it differently...Why is it appropriate for science to use dating as a basis of evidence but we cant use dating as a bases for evidence of the age of manuscripts?
The dating would be fine if one had the original manuscripts. Show me the the original manuscript of the book of Genesis.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 10:40 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 11:26 PM bluescat48 has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 71 of 110 (509460)
05-21-2009 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Theodoric
05-21-2009 5:53 PM


this was reported on some years ago by the World Press Review...but they only have archives dating back to 2003
PaulK has posted that his evidence was based on the Torah and not on egyption sources though, so its not a good reference, my apologies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Theodoric, posted 05-21-2009 5:53 PM Theodoric has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 72 of 110 (509461)
05-21-2009 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Tanndarr
05-21-2009 9:33 PM


Tanndarr writes:
Would you care to tell us where you got it from and who twisted it to say something that it clearly does not, or will you go down with the ship insisting that someone living in the 19th century BCE is writing about the latest news event of the exodus?
actually that was just me...i've read it wrong and will happily go down with the ship
thats what i get for late night posting

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Tanndarr, posted 05-21-2009 9:33 PM Tanndarr has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 73 of 110 (509462)
05-21-2009 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by bluescat48
05-21-2009 10:50 PM


bluescat48 writes:
The dating would be fine if one had the original manuscripts. Show me the the original manuscript of the book of Genesis.
As with all books, there is always only 1 original manuscript. There would not be one original manuscript on our libarary shelves and yet we happily use the reprints of the manuscript
are we to doubt the authenticity and content of all books?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by bluescat48, posted 05-21-2009 10:50 PM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by bluescat48, posted 05-22-2009 7:17 AM Peg has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 74 of 110 (509475)
05-22-2009 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Peg
05-21-2009 10:40 PM


quote:
I agree that the archeological evidence is scarce but its certainly not surprising in view of the fact Egyptians did not record defamatory matters and were in the habit of changing their histories to suit later rulers. When Thutmose III came to power, he tried to obliterate the memory Queen Hatshepsut. He had her inscriptions erased, chiseled her name from monuments, built a wall around her obelisks and her name was not recorded in later annals.
I would class that as historical rather than archaeological evidence. I was thinking more of evidence of the massive depopulation of Egypt when a large proportion of the (pre-plague) population walked out. Or the Hebrew camp at Kadesh-Barnea. And of course of a large influx of people conquering and destroying in Canaan in conjunction with the above two events.
quote:
Josephus also mentions Manatho, an Egyptian historian whom he quotes to confirm that the Jews did come out of egypt
Josephus, writing as a Jew, identified the Hyksos with the Israelites (it is his idea, not Manetho's). All that can be said for this is that the Hyksos were apparently Semitic (but Egyptianised) people who lived in the delta region and left Egypt in the direction of Canaan. None of the rest fits. Even at the basic level, the Hyksos ruled the delta area as a separate kingdom and were driven out by military force.
A simple identification of the Hyksos with the Israelites accepts that Exodus is wrong in many ways (and therefore proves my point).
quote:
Yes this was a short straw... it could have been a hoax of sorts...or he may have based the evidence on the torah...i havent read the book so i dont really know.
Lack of evidence for the existence of David and Solomon???
such as?
No seals belonging to them. No letters corresponding with neighbouring kingdoms. No inscriptions attributed to their reigns, little evidence that Jerusalem was especially important at the time David supposedly reigned over all Israel...
quote:
perhaps i could word it differently...Why is it appropriate for science to use dating as a basis of evidence but we cant use dating as a bases for evidence of the age of manuscripts?
I never said that you couldn't use "dating as a bases [sic] for evidence for the age of manuscripts". It would be nonsense to say such a thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 10:40 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 7:25 AM PaulK has replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 75 of 110 (509492)
05-22-2009 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Peg
05-21-2009 11:26 PM


The point is dating a manuscript doesn't necessarily show that it is the original. ie: Finding a copy of Genesis that it dated at 450BCE would most likely not be an original whereas one dated ~900 BCE could be.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Peg, posted 05-21-2009 11:26 PM Peg 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