Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-24-2019 12:27 PM
41 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,164 Year: 5,201/19,786 Month: 1,323/873 Week: 219/460 Day: 35/29 Hour: 7/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1819
20
21222324Next
Author Topic:   Evidence for the Biblical Record
Otto Tellick
Member (Idle past 440 days)
Posts: 288
From: PA, USA
Joined: 02-17-2008


Message 286 of 348 (553175)
04-01-2010 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by Peg
04-01-2010 2:53 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg writes:

The genesis account shows that people were writing well before the tower incident...they were writing in their original language, hebrew...

Do you have any citations for that? And independent evidence as well? I think you may not have understood my point: the oldest written Hebrew that we know of is not as old as the oldest written Phoenician (whose writing system was adapted for use by the Hebrews); likewise, the oldest known Sumerian cuneiform and the oldest known Egyption hieroglyphs are older than the oldest known Hebrew.

Archaeological and historical linguistic research has established that Hebrew derives from the same source as (but is slightly more recent than) Phoenician, and there are clearly differences between Phoenician and Hebrew. The research also shows that the Egyptian of the oldest hieroglyphs, and the Sumerian of the oldest cuneiform, were each distinct languages, quite different from one another (and from Phoenician and Hebrew), with different sound systems, different lexicons, different inflectional patterns on words, and different sentence structure.

Now, if those those other writing systems existed before the "Babel event" supposedly took place, this clearly means that people were already speaking different languages before God got around to "confounding" them. The chronology you presented earlier for Babel (based on implausible dates for Peleg), combined with the known archaeological ages for cuneiform and hieroglyphics, leaves us with no other conclusion.

Maybe, like the flood, this supposed "global" effect was actually just local... (i.e. the people involved in the "rebellion" might in fact have been speaking a single language, but lots of other people, in far-flung places, were not involved, and were already speaking other languages). But it really makes no sense under any interpretation -- until you decide to interpret it as a parable or fable or myth or allegory or... anything but history.


autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Peg, posted 04-01-2010 2:53 AM Peg has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 11:42 PM Otto Tellick has responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3183
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 287 of 348 (553364)
04-02-2010 9:19 PM


Let's try for some new evidence:
Surely, there is some extra-biblical evidence of a mass of holy men raising from the dead, yes?

Matthew 27:52-53 writes:

52And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

53And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Surely someone else wrote about this event.......


"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


Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by Theodoric, posted 04-04-2010 10:35 AM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
Peg
Member (Idle past 3039 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 288 of 348 (553569)
04-03-2010 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by Otto Tellick
04-01-2010 7:01 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
OttoTellick writes:

Do you have any citations for that? And independent evidence as well? I think you may not have understood my point: the oldest written Hebrew that we know of is not as old as the oldest written Phoenician (whose writing system was adapted for use by the Hebrews); likewise, the oldest known Sumerian cuneiform and the oldest known Egyption hieroglyphs are older than the oldest known Hebrew.

"That we know of"....yes, that may be the case, however it could also be circumstantial. If Hebrew really is the oldest, then its possible that the very oldest writings simply are too old to exist...or havent been found yet. Moses got information about Adam from, what he called, 'The book of Adams history'

OttoTellick writes:

Archaeological and historical linguistic research has established that Hebrew derives from the same source as (but is slightly more recent than) Phoenician, and there are clearly differences between Phoenician and Hebrew.

Pheneocian is a subgroup of the canaanite language. Canaan was Noahs grandson from Ham. This makes both pheneocian and canaanite younger then hebrew.

I know you dont want biblical evidence, however Moses was able to get the names of the generations of mankind after Adam from somewhere. He called his reference 'the book of Adams history' This is not available anymore but it was obviously still around 4,000 years ago.

OttoTellick writes:


The research also shows that the Egyptian of the oldest hieroglyphs, and the Sumerian of the oldest cuneiform, were each distinct languages, quite different from one another (and from Phoenician and Hebrew), with different sound systems, different lexicons, different inflectional patterns on words, and different sentence structure.

dating methods can be flawed and not give accurate dates. Who's to say their dating of these languages is accurate? Can they prove accuracy? I dont think so.

otto Tellick writes:

But it really makes no sense under any interpretation -- until you decide to interpret it as a parable or fable or myth or allegory or... anything but history.

That is not my opinion. The bible is a record of human history not found anywhere else, it provides answers to questions not found anywhere else. It is in harmony with historical facts and time and again archeology digs up places and people whom critics have denied existed. This is why many people do accept the bibles history as fact.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by Otto Tellick, posted 04-01-2010 7:01 PM Otto Tellick has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by bluescat48, posted 04-04-2010 1:59 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 291 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-04-2010 3:42 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 293 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-05-2010 1:04 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 294 by anglagard, posted 04-05-2010 2:41 AM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 296 by Otto Tellick, posted 04-05-2010 11:32 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 298 by rockondon, posted 04-06-2010 12:34 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 304 by greyseal, posted 09-04-2010 4:42 PM Peg has not yet responded

    
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2299 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 289 of 348 (553589)
04-04-2010 1:59 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by Peg
04-03-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Phoenician is a Semetic not Hametic Language
Oxford University press writes:

Phoenician
■ noun
a member of an ancient Semitic people inhabiting Phoenicia in the eastern Mediterranean.
the Semitic language of the Phoenicians.
■ adjective relating to Phoenicia or its language.

Oxford University Press, 2004


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 288 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 11:42 PM Peg has not yet responded

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 6044
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 290 of 348 (553627)
04-04-2010 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by hooah212002
04-02-2010 9:19 PM


There is none
You will get the same responses I get to this question. Usually silence, but some will try bringing up 2nd and 3rd century sources. Evangelicals and Fundies evidently have trouble understanding the terms contemporary and extra-biblical.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by hooah212002, posted 04-02-2010 9:19 PM hooah212002 has acknowledged this reply

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16093
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 9.0


Message 291 of 348 (553659)
04-04-2010 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by Peg
04-03-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
That is not my opinion. The bible is a record of human history not found anywhere else, it provides answers to questions not found anywhere else. It is in harmony with historical facts ...

I'm going to mention Noah's Flood again, and then I'm going to giggle.

Like my ass is it in harmony with historical fact. It is known, for certain, to be wrong.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 11:42 PM Peg has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by hERICtic, posted 04-04-2010 7:13 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
hERICtic
Member (Idle past 2626 days)
Posts: 371
Joined: 08-18-2009


Message 292 of 348 (553705)
04-04-2010 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Dr Adequate
04-04-2010 3:42 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg writes:

That is not my opinion. The bible is a record of human history not found anywhere else, it provides answers to questions not found anywhere else. It is in harmony with historical facts ...

Creation account? Global flood? Exodus? Timelines of certain people not lining up with the Biblical account (Philistines as one example), Herod slaughtering the innocents? Roman census? Dead walking out of their graves? Romans releasing a murderer to appease a crowd? Do false prophecies count (ignoring the typical mental gymnastics apologists need in order to make the problems disappear regarding prophecy, ie fall of Tyre)?

These are just a few I can think of.

Edited by hERICtic, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-04-2010 3:42 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

    
ZenMonkey
Member (Idle past 2620 days)
Posts: 428
From: Portland, OR USA
Joined: 09-25-2009


Message 293 of 348 (553776)
04-05-2010 1:04 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by Peg
04-03-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg writes:

"That we know of"....yes, that may be the case, however it could also be circumstantial. If Hebrew really is the oldest, then its possible that the very oldest writings simply are too old to exist...or havent been found yet.

Sorry, but that doesn't fly. Can you present some sort of evidence that makes your assertion regarding the antiquity of Hebrew more likely than the conclusions drawn by professionals studying actual texts, archeological finds, etc.? If not, then to simply claim that "they could be wrong" carries no weight. What evidence do you have that the commonly accepted dates and relationships of Egyptian, Phoenician and Hebrew are wrong? Other than simply that you don't like these facts?


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

What's the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a new puppy? The puppy eventually grows up and quits whining.
-Steven Dutch


This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 11:42 PM Peg has not yet responded

  
anglagard
Member
Posts: 2185
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 294 of 348 (553789)
04-05-2010 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by Peg
04-03-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg writes:

That is not my opinion. The bible is a record of human history not found anywhere else, it provides answers to questions not found anywhere else.

Would such all-encompassing answers include the invention of the Mayan and Aztec calendars, the methods used in creating corn and potatoes from the original wild forms, and the full extent of the entire history of China?

It appears the Bible may be more a local history, than a global history, and recent scholarship indicates a somewhat less than infallible source of even local history at that.

Cheering the home team is nothing more than provincialism, it is not in any way related to a self-examined life.


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. Its us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 11:42 PM Peg has not yet responded

    
PgXero78
Member (Idle past 3212 days)
Posts: 2
From: Denton, Tx
Joined: 04-05-2010


Message 295 of 348 (553790)
04-05-2010 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by ZenMonkey
03-14-2010 12:28 AM


me likes it
I like it



This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ZenMonkey, posted 03-14-2010 12:28 AM ZenMonkey has not yet responded

    
Otto Tellick
Member (Idle past 440 days)
Posts: 288
From: PA, USA
Joined: 02-17-2008


(3)
Message 296 of 348 (554022)
04-05-2010 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by Peg
04-03-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
peg writes:

dating methods can be flawed and not give accurate dates.

Well, let's compare that to the Bible: it can be flawed and does not give accurate dates. Which source is able to quantify the range of its potential inaccuracy more carefully? In science, this range of inaccuracy is called the "margin of error", or the "confidence interval", and is usually measured in single-digit percentages. Please read RAZD's posts about the correlations among dating methods, in the "Dates and Dating" forum.

Oh, and in case you want to claim that the Bible cannot be flawed, there is this one fundamental problem with that notion: every Bible in use today is a translation, and translations are imperfect. They always are. And whose fault is that? If we go with the Bible as "history", it's God's fault -- it was His idea to confound humans by scrambling their language. So the "divine wisdom" of the Babel event was to ensure that the Word of God would become immediately incomprehensible to most of the people alive in the world in that age, and to make sure that it would remain imperfectly perceived for the rest of time! Nice job.

The Babel story, when you follow up to understand its consequences, represents a colossal blunder on God's part. Somebody (i.e. God, or rather, the person who cast this mythological fable into the OT scripture) really was not thinking this thing through very well at all.

One last little diversion: in trying to find information about the relative ancestry of Semitic languages, I found this curious tidbit at National Geographic:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070205-snake-spells.html

Be sure to read both pages. Bottom line, as it applies to this thread: the form of Hebrew found in OT scriptures is different from a clearly attested form of a clearly related (parent) language, from which both Phoenician and Classical Hebrew are derived. Prior to any putative time frame for the Babel event, languages were already differentiated, and language change over time was already documented across independent historical and archaeological records, so the supposed effect of the Babel event was already in evidence well before the event could have occurred (not to mention that there really is no clear, independent physical evidence for the event).

The Babel story as presented in the OT does not stand up as history, period -- quite apart from the fact that it makes no sense.


autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 11:42 PM Peg has not yet responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 297 of 348 (554075)
04-06-2010 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by Peg
03-23-2010 4:16 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg writes:

yet its interesting that the Chinese character for ship is made up of eight people in a vessel.

Ship is comprised of the following components

boat + eight + mouth = Ship

bit of a coincidence, isnt it? Especially if they 'apparently' had no contact with the people in mesopotamia before the language confusion.

And just how is this word pronounced?


"Can we say the chair on the cat, for example? Or the basket in the person? No, we can't..." - Harriet J. Ottenheimer
This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Peg, posted 03-23-2010 4:16 AM Peg has not yet responded

  
rockondon
Member (Idle past 3035 days)
Posts: 40
Joined: 03-29-2010


Message 298 of 348 (554099)
04-06-2010 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by Peg
04-03-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg,
dating methods can be flawed and not give accurate dates. Who's to say their dating of these languages is accurate?
No science is ever absolutely perfect. Anything that is right 99% of the time isn't perfect but it can still be highly accurate and very reliable. Absolute proof is for math, not science.

But denial of science isn't helping you here. When different cultures have unbroken histories that run back before the tower of Babel story, who needs a dating method? When you can see their distinct languages, you can see the Babel story is wrong. When you look at how many distinct languages developed during recorded history and that had nothing to do with God, you see that the Babel story makes no sense. The entire story is ridiculous - if read literally.

However, if one were to read the tower of Babel story metaphorically, they would see the lessons that are contained within and it makes sense.

Edit, just wanted to address this,

The bible is a record of human history not found anywhere else, it provides answers to questions not found anywhere else. It is in harmony with historical facts and time and again archeology digs up places and people whom critics have denied existed.
You're right that the bible provides answers to questions - but the problem is that it keeps giving wrong answers. And after these wrong answers are given, believers typically stop asking questions. And so begins the vicious cycle of religious ignorance.

And if someone was to write a book of lies, they would still get all the names of people and places right. Why wouldn't they? So when the bible is correct about the names of cities and rulers, that doesn't mean that snakes can talk and people can walk on water or live in a whale for 3 days. If I said that the USA exists, Obama is its president, and I can fly - just because I was right the first 2 times doesn't mean I can fly.

Edited by rockondon, : Addressed another point


This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 11:42 PM Peg has not yet responded

    
wkward
Junior Member (Idle past 3212 days)
Posts: 1
Joined: 04-08-2010


(1)
Message 299 of 348 (554414)
04-08-2010 5:41 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by Peg
03-23-2010 4:16 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Hi, I have enjoy silently lurking this forum =) (for a while) but I do have a few question in regards to the following comment.


Peg:
yet its interesting that the Chinese character for ship is made up of eight people in a vessel.
Ship is comprised of the following components

boat + eight + mouth = Ship

bit of a coincidence, isnt it? Especially if they 'apparently' had no contact with the people in mesopotamia before the language confusion.

This is an incorrect way to interpret this word.

The word "船(chun)" should be separate by left and right, not into 3 parts.

Left side is "舟(zhōu)", which is the word use for boat (usually for small size) and ,in this case, the right side is known to be "形聲(xng shēng)" (a method use by many Chinese character to pronouns a word).

The reason this is stated is because in "說文解字(Shuowen Jiezi)" the word 沿(yn),鉛(qiān),船(chun) (notice the similarity on the right side of the Chinese character) are categorized by separating the word left and right and not by separating into three parts.

Another question is there are many word to describe ship, why only choose one and explore on it?
舟,舡,舲,船,舼,舩,艒,艖,艭,艦,舠,舺,舫,舶,艇,舸,艑,艓,艚.
Any of the above word can mean ship in Chinese literature.

I was looking around and found this http://www.yutopian.com/religion/words/, I am not sure if this is the source of your information?


i have been trying to find more chinese characters but i dont have the right software to download them
from your link i found another 'mouth'

Creation is comprised of the following components
dust + (breath of) life + (from God's) mouth + motion = Creation

Interestingly, this is the character for 'creation'. Its a very similar to the genesis account of Adams creation where he was made of dust and God blew into him the breath of life

Without going deeper in to the actual word one obvious question cross me when I was reading. By what standard did the author define the stroke as a "(breath of) life"? I am deeply trouble and would like some clarification.

I want to apologize for any error I have with English, as anyone could have guessed by now it is not my native language.

Regards,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Peg, posted 03-23-2010 4:16 AM Peg has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by Huntard, posted 04-08-2010 7:32 AM wkward has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 405 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 300 of 348 (554419)
04-08-2010 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by wkward
04-08-2010 5:41 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Hello wkward and welcome to EvC!

Thanks for that explanation! Should make it very clear that Peg's arguments are based on nothing (in this case, at least)

Now, some of the questions you asked:

wkward writes:

Another question is there are many word to describe ship, why only choose one and explore on it?


Because that was probably the only one they could twist enough to make it look like there was some merit to Noah's story. You'll tend to see that alot with apologetics.

By what standard did the author define the stroke as a "(breath of) life"? I am deeply trouble and would like some clarification.

There's probably none, beyond the same fact of what I said above. They just twist it to suit what they want it to say, and rely on the ignorance of the people they tell it to (I mean, how many people can read Chinese? Aside from actual Chinese people that is). Again, that's what apologetics do. They twist everything to suit their goal, which is to convince ignorant people of the accuracy of their pet belief system (in this case aparticular interpretation of Christianity).

I want to apologize for any error I have with English, as anyone could have guessed by now it is not my native language.

I understood it perfectly, doesn't seem to be any problems with it so far.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by wkward, posted 04-08-2010 5:41 AM wkward has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1819
20
21222324Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019