Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
84 online now:
jar (1 member, 83 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,327 Year: 4,439/6,534 Month: 653/900 Week: 177/182 Day: 10/47 Hour: 0/2

Announcements: Security Update Released


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 4169 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 76 of 110 (509493)
05-22-2009 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by PaulK
05-22-2009 1:53 AM


PaulK writes:

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.

Manetho's account was written over 1000 years after Israel's exodus from Egypt, so perhaps it had become distorted in the details. If the Egyptians were brazen enough to change the history of their own monarchs then why would they maintain a truthful account about a foreign people who dwelt for a short time in their land and conquered their gods and their army?

What Manetho's writings prove is that there was indeed a wandering group of Semitic people, otherwise known as 'Shepherd Kings', who had long come to Egypt for trade and other purposes, who managed to gained control of Egypt and were eventually 'driven' out by the Egyptian army.... this story is very similar to the biblical account of the Semitic family of Jacob settling in Egypt and eventually leaving in one big exodus with the army hotly in pursuit of them.

PaulK writes:

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

Im not sure why you say that??
According to the archaeological inscriptions in the Karnak Temple in Egypt, Shishak (Shoshenq I) conquered Solomons temple and carried off the booty
Archaeology confirms the existence of the cedar forests of Lebanon, where Solomon obtained timbers for his building projects
There was an Isreali team led by Yigael Yadin who discovered the defensive gates built by Solomon...see the book Hazor: The Rediscovery of a Great Citadel of the Bible.

There is evidence for Davids existence too.
In the early 90's at the site of an ancient mound called Tel Dan, archeologists uncovered a basalt stone with the words carved into it "House of David" and "King of Israel". It was dated to the 9th Century BCE. This was the first ever find of David outside the bible and it wasnt written by jews...its actually a part of a victory monument erected by the Aramaeans who were enemies of Israel and proves that King David was certainly known in the Ancient world.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 1:53 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Coragyps, posted 05-22-2009 7:38 AM Peg has replied
 Message 78 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 7:43 AM Peg has replied

Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 77 of 110 (509496)
05-22-2009 7:38 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Peg
05-22-2009 7:25 AM


This was the first ever find of David outside the bible and it wasnt written by jews...

First ever and, so far, only. Doesn't that make you think about this "evidence" stuff just for a second, Peg?


"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 7:25 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 7:52 AM Coragyps has taken no action

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17167
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 78 of 110 (509497)
05-22-2009 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Peg
05-22-2009 7:25 AM


quote:

Manetho's account was written over 1000 years after Israel's exodus from Egypt, so perhaps it had become distorted in the details. If the Egyptians were brazen enough to change the history of their own monarchs then why would they maintain a truthful account about a foreign people who dwelt for a short time in their land and conquered their gods and their army?

In other words you want to assume that Manetho's account (as relayed by Josephus) is distorted in just the ways you find convenient.

There's one big, big problem with that. Your assumptions aren't evidence. If you want to use Manetho as evidence then you are stuck with what Manetho actually says. Not what you assume he was talking about.

Manetho's story is very different from the Exodus as I have already pointed out. If you want to show that it is wrong then you need evidence.

quote:

Im not sure why you say that??
According to the archaeological inscriptions in the Karnak Temple in Egypt, Shishak (Shoshenq I) conquered Solomons temple and carried off the booty

Except that there is no mention of Solomon at all. There could be a temple in Jerusalem without Solomon.

quote:

Archaeology confirms the existence of the cedar forests of Lebanon, where Solomon obtained timbers for his building projects

The existence of cedar forests in Lebanon does nothing to show that Solomon existed. Unless you are suggesting that Solomon somehow magically created those forests.

quote:

There was an Isreali team led by Yigael Yadin who discovered the defensive gates built by Solomon...see the book Hazor: The Rediscovery of a Great Citadel of the Bible.

The association with Solomon is disputed (and is based solely on the dating), with other archaeologists attributing these structures to the Omride dynasty of Israel.

quote:

There is evidence for Davids existence too.
In the early 90's at the site of an ancient mound called Tel Dan, archeologists uncovered a basalt stone with the words carved into it "House of David" and "King of Israel".

The interpretation of the Tel Dan stele is disputed. (It has
been discussed here - Brian had a lot to say about it).

So thanks for once again showing that I am correct. And for giving me a laugh by suggesting that cedar forests in Lebanon are evidence of Solomon.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 7:25 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 8:04 AM PaulK has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4169 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 79 of 110 (509499)
05-22-2009 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Coragyps
05-22-2009 7:38 AM


Coragyps writes:

First ever and, so far, only. Doesn't that make you think about this "evidence" stuff just for a second, Peg?

the fact is that King David is mentioned by another nation

the assertion was that there is NO mention of him anywhere except the bible. That assertion is incorrect.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Coragyps, posted 05-22-2009 7:38 AM Coragyps has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 8:05 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4169 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 80 of 110 (509501)
05-22-2009 8:04 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by PaulK
05-22-2009 7:43 AM


PaulK writes:

The existence of cedar forests in Lebanon does nothing to show that Solomon existed. Unless you are suggesting that Solomon somehow magically created those forests.

but it does prove that the writers of the bible were not writing fanciful tales of mythical places and mythical characters

the bible is a history of real people and real places

PaulK writes:

The association with Solomon is disputed ...The interpretation of the Tel Dan stele is disputed

everything is disputed...but you cant change the fact that there is evidence for both solomon and david...even if its being disputed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 7:43 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 8:09 AM Peg has taken no action
 Message 84 by Granny Magda, posted 05-22-2009 8:21 AM Peg has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17167
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 81 of 110 (509502)
05-22-2009 8:05 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Peg
05-22-2009 7:52 AM


quote:

the fact is that King David is mentioned by another nation

No, it is not a fact. It's an interpretation that may not be correct. (It may well be, but it's uncertain).

quote:

the assertion was that there is NO mention of him anywhere except the bible. That assertion is incorrect.

No, there was no such assertion. Please remember that the rules of the site tell you to avoid misrepresentation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 7:52 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 8:36 AM PaulK has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17167
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 82 of 110 (509503)
05-22-2009 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Peg
05-22-2009 8:04 AM


quote:

but it does prove that the writers of the bible were not writing fanciful tales of mythical places and mythical characters

Even if it did (and it only "proves" it in this instance) that isn't relevant to showing that Solomon existed.

quote:

everything is disputed...but you cant change the fact that there is evidence for both solomon and david...even if its being disputed.

YOU can't change the fact that the evidence is very weak - fully justifying my statement that their existence is uncertain.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 8:04 AM Peg has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by LucyTheApe, posted 05-22-2009 8:17 AM PaulK has replied

LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 110 (509505)
05-22-2009 8:17 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by PaulK
05-22-2009 8:09 AM


PaulK writes:

Even if it did (and it only "proves" it in this instance) that isn't relevant to showing that Solomon existed.

Are you saying, PaulK, that Solomon didn't exist?


There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything.

blɛz paskal


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 8:09 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 8:24 AM LucyTheApe has taken no action

Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 74 days)
Posts: 2384
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 84 of 110 (509506)
05-22-2009 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by Peg
05-22-2009 8:04 AM


Peg, you are being ridiculous.

PaulK writes:

The existence of cedar forests in Lebanon does nothing to show that Solomon existed. Unless you are suggesting that Solomon somehow magically created those forests.

Peg writes:

but it does prove that the writers of the bible were not writing fanciful tales of mythical places and mythical characters

It does nothing of the kind.

The novel The Wizard of Oz features Kansas. Kansas is a real place. Thus Oz is a real place and Dorothy, the Tin Man and the gang are all real as well. Right?

How about this; In Flashman at the Charge, the central character, Harry Flashman, takes part in the Battle of Balaclava. Balaclava is a real place, where there was a real battle. He takes part in the Charge of the Light Brigade, a real event. He encounters Cardigan and Raglan, both absolutely real people. Thus, Flashman is a history of real people and real places. Right?

Or... not right?

You are over-reaching on the thinnest evidence imaginable. Just because story contains a single real element, doesn't mean that the whole story is true.

Mutate and Survive

Edited by Granny Magda, : Fixed quote boxes.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 8:04 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by LucyTheApe, posted 05-22-2009 8:27 AM Granny Magda has replied
 Message 89 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 8:41 AM Granny Magda has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17167
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 85 of 110 (509508)
05-22-2009 8:24 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by LucyTheApe
05-22-2009 8:17 AM


quote:

Are you saying, PaulK, that Solomon didn't exist?

I guess that you're too lazy to read the posts or you wouldn't have to ask.

I'm saying that Solomon's existence is uncertain. Peg is doing a nice job of demonstrating that by failing to come up with any significant evidence of Solomon's existence outside the Bible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by LucyTheApe, posted 05-22-2009 8:17 AM LucyTheApe has taken no action

LucyTheApe
Inactive Member


Message 86 of 110 (509511)
05-22-2009 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by Granny Magda
05-22-2009 8:21 AM


Cedar forests
Granny, do you believe that there were cedar forests in Lebanon?


There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything.

blɛz paskal


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Granny Magda, posted 05-22-2009 8:21 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Granny Magda, posted 05-22-2009 8:31 AM LucyTheApe has replied

Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 74 days)
Posts: 2384
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 87 of 110 (509512)
05-22-2009 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by LucyTheApe
05-22-2009 8:27 AM


Re: Cedar forests
Yes. Why?

(Barely seems worth writing "Mutate or Survive" for such a brief message.) :(


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by LucyTheApe, posted 05-22-2009 8:27 AM LucyTheApe has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by LucyTheApe, posted 05-22-2009 8:55 AM Granny Magda has taken no action

Peg
Member (Idle past 4169 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 88 of 110 (509513)
05-22-2009 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by PaulK
05-22-2009 8:05 AM


Paul, you said there was a good LACK of evidence to support the existence of David and Solomon

i asked "such as?" you replied with...

PaulK writes:

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...

if you dont accept the archeology that has been found as a possibility, you should say "there have been various finds for these individuals, but i doubt they are accurately interpreted" or something to that effect rather then blatantly claiming there is no evidence.

Paulk writes:

Your references to archaeology all deal with later events or things that have little bearing on the accuracy of the Bible.

Little bearing on the accuracy of the bible???

King Sargon was thought to never have existed apart from the bible mention of him...then they found the mans Palace!

Pontius Pilate was completely unknown apart from the bible until his name was unearthed

300 cuneiform tablets were uncovered in Iraq relating to the reign of Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar, the inscriptions include a list of names including King Jehoiachin of the land of Judah, and 5 of his sons!

Critics have argued that Bible history was transmitted by unreliable oral tradition because the isrealites were illiterate, yet in 2005 archaeologists found an archaic alphabet, perhaps the oldest Hebrew alphabet ever discovered, dating to the 10th century BCE.

the site of ancient Nineveh, revealed a sculptured slab in the palace of King Sennacherib, which shows Assyrian soldiers leading Jewish captives into exile after the fall of Lachish in 732 BCE. backing up the bibles account at 2 Kings 18:13-15.

The annals of Sennacherib found at Nineveh, describe his military campaign during the reign of Judean King Hezekiah, and mention him by name.

Sheesh...you seem so certain that the bibles accuracy is not backed up by archeology and yet im seeing plenty of evidence for it.

Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

Edited by Peg, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 8:05 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2009 8:45 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 4169 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 89 of 110 (509515)
05-22-2009 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by Granny Magda
05-22-2009 8:21 AM


please keep in mind that we are talking about the bibles accuracy

The bible speaks of such cedar wood forests where Solomon gathered wood for the building works...are there such forests in the vicinity???

yes.

So is the bible accurate in its description of cedar wood forests?

yes.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Granny Magda, posted 05-22-2009 8:21 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Granny Magda, posted 05-22-2009 8:55 AM Peg has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17167
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 90 of 110 (509517)
05-22-2009 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Peg
05-22-2009 8:36 AM


quote:

Paul, you said there was a good LACK of evidence to support the existence of David and Solomon

To be more accurate, I said that there was a lack of GOOD evidence.

quote:

if you dont accept the archeology that has been found as a possibility, you should say "there have been various finds for these individuals, but i doubt they are accurately interpreted" or something to that effect rather then blatantly claiming there is no evidence.

Since I didn't claim that there was absolutely no evidence whatsoever you are simply engaging in more misrepresentation.

quote:

Little bearing on the accuracy of the bible???

Yes. All your examples dealing with events prior to those described in 1 Samuel (to use an semi-arbitrary cut-off point) had little bearing on the accuracy of the Bible. For instance the existence of Ur - a major city that lasted a long time - has little bearing on the truthfulness of the Bible stories about Abraham.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 8:36 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Peg, posted 05-22-2009 8:58 AM PaulK has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022