Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for the Biblical Record
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 166 of 348 (550978)
03-20-2010 3:57 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by hooah212002
03-20-2010 12:40 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
hooah212002 writes:
No, Peg. You pulled an answer from Wiki Answers, then claimed you got it from the Encyclopedia. THAT is dishonest. Do you have an encyclopedia to verify this fact? How can we be sure you aren't quote mining (which you've been prone to do in the past)?
I pulled it from wiki did I? Then i claimed that it was from an encyclopedia??
if you are refering to the George Smith quote, it comes from his book 'the chaldean account of creation' and many people use it because its a fairly important discovery with regard to the tower of bable... its evidence outside of a biblical source as was requested by ZenMonkey.
If you are refering to the other quotes that actually have the encyclopedia cited with page and paragraphs, then they are from the encylopedia and if you dont believe me you can simply use the citation i gave to confirm it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by hooah212002, posted 03-20-2010 12:40 AM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by hooah212002, posted 03-20-2010 5:52 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 167 of 348 (550979)
03-20-2010 4:07 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by anglagard
03-20-2010 12:48 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
anglagard writes:
For just one single example, Euskara, the ancient language still spoken by some Basques, no prior root language has even remotely been agreed upon by any purported 'modern linguists.'
and this does not present a problem for the biblical account of the confusion of languages because according to Genesis, completely new languages were given to the people. We should see completely unrelated languages in the world and the fact that we do adds weight to the bibles account of how they got here.
anglagard writes:
I can come up with other examples but even just one refutes your assertion.
how in the world did you conclude that my assertion that all languages can be traced to a parent language are false? According to the genesis account, there should be several parent languages....which there are.
aside from the fact that not all linguists agree with the basque language hypotheses (likely because they just dont have enough information yet) what makes impossible that it itself is not a parent language?
anglagard writes:
Remember you have been shown your statement is false, but that may be due to ignorance of fact. However, if you later willfully repeat the same statement after being shown it is false, you will be guilty of violating God's Commandment against bearing false witness.
Hahahaha thats funny.
Can you prove that the hypothoses about the basque language is true? I dont think so. So its a bit of a stretch to claim victory with the example you've given.
but if it makes you feel better, ok, you win.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by anglagard, posted 03-20-2010 12:48 AM anglagard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by anglagard, posted 03-21-2010 1:38 AM Peg has replied
 Message 180 by ZenMonkey, posted 03-21-2010 2:29 AM Peg has not replied

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


Message 168 of 348 (550981)
03-20-2010 4:22 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by Peg
03-19-2010 11:43 PM


Tel Dan? Have you been here?
I have been to Tel Dan. And have actually been to more than couple archaeological site in Israel. (must be a little disturbing to Hyro that a person supportive of Israel is also knowledgeable about weapons.
There is a lot of controversy over the meaning of the stela.
Tel Dan stele - Wikipedia

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Peg, posted 03-19-2010 11:43 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Peg, posted 03-20-2010 4:37 AM Theodoric has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4930 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 169 of 348 (550986)
03-20-2010 4:37 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Theodoric
03-20-2010 4:22 AM


Re: Tel Dan? Have you been here?
i have no idea what you're trying to get at???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Theodoric, posted 03-20-2010 4:22 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Theodoric, posted 03-20-2010 4:46 AM Peg has replied

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


Message 170 of 348 (550989)
03-20-2010 4:46 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by Peg
03-20-2010 4:37 AM


Re: Tel Dan? Have you been here?
However, critics have suggested other readings of ביתדוד, usually based on the fact that the written form "DWD" can be rendered both as David and as Dod (Hebrew for "beloved") or related forms.[citation needed] In ancient Hebrew a dot was sometimes used to divide separate words. For example, the phrase "House of David" could be written as ביתדוד. The Aramean writer of the Tel Dan Stele, who is writing to commemorate a victory over the Hebrews, did not employ the Hebrew word divider for ביתדוד.[citation needed]
I know Anson Rainey but I disagree with the following
" Anson Rainey, defending the reading "House of David" stated that "a word divider between two components in such a construction is often omitted, especially if the combination is a well-established proper name."

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Peg, posted 03-20-2010 4:37 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Peg, posted 03-21-2010 4:47 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 171 of 348 (550993)
03-20-2010 5:52 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by Peg
03-20-2010 3:57 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg writes:
The story of Babel most certainly is based on fact which is confirmed by history, archaeology and folklore.
North of the Marduk temple in Babylon once stood a huge tower, and in this area archaeologist George Smith discovered a tablet with an account about the confusion of languages. The table reads in part: The building of this illustrious tower offended the gods. In a night they threw down what they had built. They scattered them abroad, and made strange their speech. Their progress they impeded. This wasnt a bible tablet, it was a babylonian one.
(notice the lack of citation?)
Wiki Answers writes:
North of Marduk temple in Babylon once stood a huge tower, and in this area archaeologist George Smith discovered a tablet with a similar account. In part the tablet reads: "The building of this illustrious tower offended the gods. In a night they threw down what they had built. They scattered them abroad, and made strange their speech. Their progress they impeded." Various lands yield additional evidence through their folklore, testifying to the miraculous change of tongues: "Versions have been recorded from near the Zambezi and also from Ashanti; among some of the Tibeto-Burman peoples of Assam the story of a tower and confusion of speech is found. Similar tales are found in Mexico." (The Encyclop—dia Britannica, Vol. 2, p. 839)
yes, Peg. Plagiarism. You tried to change just enough so as not to get caught. The rest is directly ripped from that same page.

"Some people think God is an outsized, light-skinned male with a long white beard, sitting on a throne somewhere up there in the sky, busily tallying the fall of every sparrow. Othersfor example Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einsteinconsidered God to be essentially the sum total of the physical laws which describe the universe. I do not know of any compelling evidence for anthropomorphic patriarchs controlling human destiny from some hidden celestial vantage point, but it would be madness to deny the existence of physical laws."-Carl Sagan
"Show me where Christ said "Love thy fellow man, except for the gay ones." Gay people, too, are made in my God's image. I would never worship a homophobic God." -Desmond Tutu

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Peg, posted 03-20-2010 3:57 AM Peg has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 172 of 348 (550995)
03-20-2010 6:28 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by Buzsaw
03-19-2010 9:30 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Buzsaw writes:
Huntard, it's like any history book or text book. For the most part, there's nothing to interpret. You read the words and they mean what they say.
Ok. So this bit:
quote:
And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
Means that there will actually be a beast with seven heads and ten horns. Glad we cleared that up.
If the writer says Mt Sinai is in Arabia, the land of Midian, etc, what's there to interpret?
Notning. Neither is there anything tho interpret when he says there will be a beast with seven heads and ten horns. It's clear that there will be a beast with seven heads and ten horns.
If he says Israel will be restored and invaded as a land of unwalled villages and ungated, what's there to interpret?
Clearly nothing.
n ancient days they needed the walls. In these latter days, city walls and gates are irrevelant, so you read, think and go figure.
Of course. Which is why you and Peg completely agree on what the bible says.... Oh...Wait...
Creationists regard your interpretation of what is observed on earth and in the cosmos as faulty but when it comes to wording, in most cases you read it and apply it at face value.
And how do we tell when we are to read literally (as in the beast with ten heads and seven horns part), or when we are to "interpret" (as in the unwalled city part)?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Buzsaw, posted 03-19-2010 9:30 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 173 of 348 (550996)
03-20-2010 8:12 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Buzsaw
03-17-2010 10:29 PM


The Book Of Revelation Is Not Fulfiled Prophecy
You seem to be claiming the Book of Revelation as a successful prophecy on the grounds that you are capable of daydreaming that one day something will happen which will vaguely resemble whatever it is the Book of Revelation is about.
Well, it's not an actual successful prophecy unless it comes true, OK? The fact that you can imagine something vaguely metaphorically kinda-like-but-not-really-like the events in Revelation happening at some point in the future is only a tribute to how vivid your imagination is and how much of the Book of Revelation you can manage to ignore, distort, misread, "interpret", or otherwise be wrong about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Buzsaw, posted 03-17-2010 10:29 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Buzsaw, posted 03-20-2010 8:31 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 174 of 348 (550997)
03-20-2010 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by Peg
03-20-2010 12:33 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
They didnt 'steal' anything. The isrealites were not the only nation involved when the languages were confused so its only natural that many different nations have the same story.
Israel was not a nation at the time of the alleged tower. It predates Abraham who was a Babylonian, born in Ur, which at the time was a Babylonian city. All of the "Nations" you talk about are derived from Babylon, who controlled all of Mesopotamia at the time.

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 162 by Peg, posted 03-20-2010 12:33 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Peg, posted 03-21-2010 5:01 PM bluescat48 has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 175 of 348 (551082)
03-20-2010 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by PaulK
03-19-2010 3:21 AM


Re: Buz Denies The Evidence
PaulK writes:
Buzsaw writes:
I have cited prophecies of a tiny nation of identifiable people who the prophets declared to be dispersed to the Gentile nations. That has happened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean like the "prophecy" in Luke ? A "prophecy" only found in a second-hand (at best) account written after the fact ?
After what fact, Paul? After the end of the times of the Gentiles?, alluded to in the prophecy? After the destruction of the temple subsequent to when Jesus spoke the pophecy?
6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in which there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
...After false messiahs coming in Jesus's name?
7 And they asked him, saying, Teacher, when therefore shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when these things are about to come to pass?
8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not led astray: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am he; and, The time is at hand: go ye not after them.
......After great signs from heaven?
11 and there shall be great earthquakes, and in divers places famines and pestilences; and there shall be terrors and great signs from heaven.
.......After Jesus gives them wisdom and words to say and they are persecuted for their testimony of Jesus?
15 for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to withstand or to gainsay.
17 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake.
.....After celestial signs, seas roaring and powers of heaven shaken and the 2nd advent of Jesus?
25 And there shall be signs in sun and moon and stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, in perplexity for the roaring of the sea and the billows;
26 men fainting for fear, and for expectation of the things which are coming on the world: for the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28 But when these things begin to come to pass, look up, and lift up your heads; because your redemption draweth nigh.
........After the generation that passes subsequent to all of the above?
32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all things be accomplished.
The above all were inclusive in the same prophecy which you doggedly apply to pre-NT ancient times. What then do you do with these post-Jesus prophecies?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by PaulK, posted 03-19-2010 3:21 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by PaulK, posted 03-21-2010 3:21 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 176 of 348 (551085)
03-20-2010 8:31 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by Dr Adequate
03-20-2010 8:12 AM


Re: Revelation Prophecy
Dr Adequate writes:
You seem to be claiming the Book of Revelation as a successful prophecy on the grounds that you are capable of daydreaming that one day something will happen which will vaguely resemble whatever it is the Book of Revelation is about.
Well, it's not an actual successful prophecy unless it comes true, OK? The fact that you can imagine something vaguely metaphorically kinda-like-but-not-really-like the events in Revelation happening at some point in the future is only a tribute to how vivid your imagination is and how much of the Book of Revelation you can manage to ignore, distort, misread, "interpret", or otherwise be wrong about.
Hi Doc. Metaphorize til the cows come home. That's your perrogative. I tend to see the significance of marks and numbers relating to how I pay my bills and do my online taxes these days. I tend to look at a tiny nation restored form a nearly 2000 year dispersement of relatively few descendents as significant as I observe the Mid Eastern news and look at the modern maps. I tend to take the Revelation implications of weather change in the latter days including excessive drout and an aggragate global warming literally as I observe the increasing frequency of weather related natural disaster. I tend to regard Jesus's prophecy of stars falling to earth as relative to satelites and other man made craft which are lights in the sky looking like stars capable of falling to earth; these all to mention a few.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-20-2010 8:12 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Huntard, posted 03-20-2010 9:14 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 177 of 348 (551089)
03-20-2010 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by Buzsaw
03-20-2010 8:31 PM


Re: Revelation Prophecy
Buzsaw writes:
I tend to regard Jesus's prophecy of stars falling to earth as relative to satelites and other man made craft which are lights in the sky looking like stars capable of falling to earth; these all to mention a few.
But they aren't stars, Buz. So, either Jesus was wrong about them being stars, or, stars will actually fall from the sky. Which one do you pick? Was Jesus wrong, or will stars actually fall from the sky to earth?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Buzsaw, posted 03-20-2010 8:31 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Buzsaw, posted 03-21-2010 1:23 AM Huntard has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 178 of 348 (551103)
03-21-2010 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 177 by Huntard
03-20-2010 9:14 PM


Re: Revelation Prophecy
Huntard writes:
But they aren't stars, Buz. So, either Jesus was wrong about them being stars, or, stars will actually fall from the sky. Which one do you pick? Was Jesus wrong, or will stars actually fall from the sky to earth?
There's a third option, Huntard, which I go by which is that Jesus knew what they would be but since the readers up until our times knew no terminology relative to air travel and particularly space flight etc, the only terminology relative to space would be stars.
This terminology was also applied to the wise men light/star of Bethlehem, since certainly a star of the cosmos would not be leading the wise men to the babe, Jesus.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Huntard, posted 03-20-2010 9:14 PM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by ZenMonkey, posted 03-21-2010 2:38 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 837 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 179 of 348 (551106)
03-21-2010 1:38 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by Peg
03-20-2010 4:07 AM


Palm That Pea
In message 158 in this thread you stated:
quote:
Modern linguists have also created a chart of human language and they've found there there are parent languges from which all other languages are derived. This is in harmony with the bible account.
emphasis mine
In message 164 in this thread I stated:
quote:
For just one single example, Euskara, the ancient language still spoken by some Basques, no prior root language has even remotely been agreed upon by any purported 'modern linguists.'
Please allow me to clarify:
You said "Modern linguists have also created a chart of human language and they've found there there are parent languges from which all other languages are derived."
I said "For just one single example, Euskara, the ancient language still spoken by some Basques, no prior root language has even remotely been agreed upon by any purported 'modern linguists."
It is pretty obvious that you imply that essentially all modern linguists are in general agreement that the Basque language has an identifiable root.
It is pretty obvious that I stated modern linguists do not in any way agree on the Basque language having any identifiable root.
Should you have sought to imply something resembling the truth, you would have modified the term 'modern linguists' with the word some, or a few, or a minority of. Instead you clearly leave the impression that a majority of the modern community of linguists agree on an identifiable root language to Euskara.
That is a false assertion, as I clearly showed.
However instead of dealing with the matter at hand you try to palm the pea, shift the goalposts.
quote:
and this does not present a problem for the biblical account of the confusion of languages because according to Genesis, completely new languages were given to the people. We should see completely unrelated languages in the world and the fact that we do adds weight to the bibles account of how they got here.
Your speculations concerning any god magically poofing languages into existence at any time is not the issue. The issue here is the assertion that modern linguists at this very moment somehow agree that every language has an identifiable root.
I hold that you are falsely representing the consensus of their findings.
Now you can either deal with or not as is your wont.
how in the world did you conclude that my assertion that all languages can be traced to a parent language are false? According to the genesis account, there should be several parent languages....which there are.
Because you asserted that at present, right now, that "Modern linguists have also created a chart of human language and they've found there there are parent languges from which all other languages are derived."
That statement is false as shown with the single counterexample I provided.
aside from the fact that not all linguists agree with the basque language hypotheses (likely because they just dont have enough information yet) what makes impossible that it itself is not a parent language?
Once again future findings are not the issue. The issue is that you stated that "Modern linguists have also created a chart of human language and they've found there there are parent languges from which all other languages are derived."
And now you make your case even less defensible by you yourself stating "what makes impossible that it itself is not a parent language?" which totally refutes any validity behind the statement that it has an identifiable root agreed upon by a majority of linguists.
You can't even get your story straight.
As to my ending, it was over harsh considering the previous or that you meant to imply falsehood and move the goalposts/palm the pea, as opposed to knowingly and directly state an indisputable falsehood as fact. Still bad form.
{ABE} either that or you are having a lot of trouble in either creating or following a coherent argument - I am beginning to tilt toward this second explanation, in which case I was definitely overly judgmental. {/ABE}
Edited by anglagard, : point out self-contradiction.
Edited by anglagard, : clarity
Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.
Edited by anglagard, : replace defiantly with definitely, Freud's slip is showing

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Peg, posted 03-20-2010 4:07 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Peg, posted 03-21-2010 5:09 PM anglagard has replied

  
ZenMonkey
Member (Idle past 4511 days)
Posts: 428
From: Portland, OR USA
Joined: 09-25-2009


(1)
Message 180 of 348 (551112)
03-21-2010 2:29 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by Peg
03-20-2010 4:07 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg writes:
how in the world did you conclude that my assertion that all languages can be traced to a parent language are false? According to the genesis account, there should be several parent languages....which there are.
I see two problems with your reasoning so far, Peg.
The first is that your assertion is essentially worthless as an argument. Of course languages have ancestry, some of which is relatively easy to trace, and some of which isn't. All you're really saying is that ANY organization of language families and superfamilies will agree with the Genesis account. If there are 100 language families, well then that's how many God split the Ur language into. And if there's only one ultimate language source, well then that must be the first language that everyone spoke before God split them all up. By being able to explain anything, your story actually explains nothing. (But that's the fun of having an omnipotent deity in all your stories - anything at all can happen, just cuz God felt like doing it that way, and there's no way of proving otherwise.)
Now on to your second, more significant problem. Look at what I actually asked for in Message 150.
quote:
How about showing how worldwide language dispersal patterns are clear indications that the story of the Tower of Babel is based on fact?
You're not proving anything simply by asserting that there are a lot of languages around. What I asked for was evidence showing that the geographic distribution of languages and language families is consistent with a mass dispersal from a central point in the Middle East in historical times. That shouldn't be so hard, should it?
Related languages tend to be neighbors, and languages travel as people travel, becoming more and more different from both their ancestors and their siblings as time goes by. French and Spanish are pretty similar, having both split off from Latin relatively recently and both being spoken in the same part of the world. Latin is also related to Sanskrit, both being from the Indo-European family, but there the relationship is more distant and not as immediately obvious. Nevertheless, it can be demonstrated convincingly that once a single group of people spoke a root language that ultimately split into, among many others, Sanskrit and Latin as the speakers moved off into different directions. By studying the relationships in languages, one can map out the movements of people from one place to another, and can even date how long ago related languages split off from each other. So if the Tower of Babel is true, and it happened only a few thousand years ago, then you should be able to map out the dispersal of all human languages from where that tower once stood.
Go to it.

I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die.
-John Lydon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Peg, posted 03-20-2010 4:07 AM 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