Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
69 online now:
candle2, PaulK, Tangle (3 members, 66 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,122 Year: 4,234/6,534 Month: 448/900 Week: 154/150 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why would God write a book of lies and why would you worship such a being?
jar
Member
Posts: 33890
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 61 of 86 (670820)
08-19-2012 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by foreveryoung
08-19-2012 9:50 PM


Re: On Israel
Nonsense, utter nonsense.

That there were two states, Israel and Judah are facts supported by actual evidence outside the Bible. Further the Exodus had NOTHING to do with the creation of a nation state called Israel but rather of a people identified as Hebrews.

Have you ever even read the Bible stories or studied anything about the history of the area?

Edited by jar, : change people identified as Israelites to hebrews


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by foreveryoung, posted 08-19-2012 9:50 PM foreveryoung has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by arachnophilia, posted 09-12-2012 10:06 PM jar has seen this message

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 62 of 86 (670834)
08-20-2012 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by jar
08-19-2012 9:13 AM


Provide Support
jar,

On the religious side, one still needs to provide support for their position. If one says that the Bible says "blah blah", then one needs to provide the scripture that supports that statement.

If someone says that facts are supported by actual evidence outside the Bible, then that evidence needs to be provided.

Please provide support for your comments.

Thanks
AdminPD

Please do not reply to this post.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by jar, posted 08-19-2012 9:13 AM jar has taken no action

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2690 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


(2)
Message 63 of 86 (670838)
08-20-2012 7:59 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by foreveryoung
08-19-2012 9:50 PM


Re: On Israel
quote:
If the exodus was pure fiction, then there was no state of Israel for God to condemn. You just defeated your ownself.
As Arach pointed out in Message 54, per the Bible, Israel was formed from Jacob and his twelve sons. (Genesis 35:9-13)

Even if the stories in Genesis are fiction or partial fiction, there are books in the Bible that refer to books outside the Bible that supposedly may have been more historical in nature.

Non-canonical books referenced in the Bible
The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel (lost/missing) and Chronicles of the Kings of Judah ("2 Chronicles" in the Christian Old Testament or "Divrei Hayamim II" in the Hebrew Tanakh) are mentioned in the Books of Kings (1 Kings 14:19, 14:29). They are said to tell of events during the reigns of Kings Jeroboam of Israel and Rehoboam of Judah, respectively. The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel is again mentioned in 1 Kings 16:20 regarding King Zimri, and many other times throughout 1 and 2 Kings.

Books of Kings
In brief outline the sources of the books appear to have been these: I Kings i. and ii. are extracted bodily from an early court history of David's private life, which is largely used in II Sam. ix.-xx. The editor (Rd) has added notes at ii. 2-4 and 10-12. For the reign of Solomon the source is professedly"the book of the acts of Solomon" (xi. 41); but other sources were employed, ...

Books of Chronicles
(1) An earlier historical work cited as: "The Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel" (II Chron. xvi. 11, xxv. 26, xxviii. 26); "The Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah" (ib. xxvii. 7, xxxv. 26); "The Acts of the Kings of Israel" (ib. xxxiii. 18); and perhaps also as "The Midrash of the Book of Kings" (ib. xxiv. 27).

IMO, the Exodus story is a creative way to relate how the tribes came to be where they were. If the story hadn't been written, the tribes would still have been where they were and probably were there before it was written.

Like I pointed out in Message 44, storytelling has a purpose and was very important in ancient times. Storytelling was a creative way to make a point and make the info more memorable.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by foreveryoung, posted 08-19-2012 9:50 PM foreveryoung has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by bluescat48, posted 09-11-2012 12:45 PM purpledawn has taken no action
 Message 67 by arachnophilia, posted 09-12-2012 10:02 PM purpledawn has taken no action

  
Hawkins
Member (Idle past 606 days)
Posts: 150
From: Hong Kong
Joined: 08-25-2005


Message 64 of 86 (672376)
09-07-2012 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by foreveryoung
08-07-2012 11:38 PM


I have seen a few Christians claim that many of what appears to be historical documents in the bible, actually did not occur at all.
===============

What makes think that except for your own faith or based on the fallacy that the absence of evidence is the evidence of absence?

It's pretty safe to say that the most parts of human history (of 1000 more nations and over up to 5000 years) are not evidence base. You choose to believe what the historians wrote, that's the case. In the case that you acquired the evidence, it can only be a bonus. Still the most parts of it are without the so-called evidence.

It's actually a process of witnessing, that is, to some parts of human history you have to trust what was written by other humans. Religions behave the same way, it is because so that a true must have a criteria in choosing His witnesses and to set up rules to ban false witnessing. Christian God could be the only God doing so. Other gods don't seem to understand this nature of history/religion to do the same.

Measures taken:
1) the scriptures must be witnessed and written by authenticated witnesses such as the formally assigned prophets or apostles.

2) through the commandments the Jews were educated not to bear false witnessing. This is to prepare the prophets (OT) to bear witness for God, as they are exclusively the Jews. Thus in the Jews culture, a witnessing is valid only when witnessed by more than 1 humans.

3) as for NT, 10 out of the 12 direct witnesses (the disciples) martyred themselves as a witness to what was said and done. And there are several verses saying that "don't do false witnessing". In the book of revelation, it is even said that the liars will be burnt to the Lake of Fire.

Other gods don't take such a measure perhaps because they are clueless about what the nature of human history is.

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by foreveryoung, posted 08-07-2012 11:38 PM foreveryoung has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by ringo, posted 09-11-2012 12:58 PM Hawkins has replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 3422 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 65 of 86 (672796)
09-11-2012 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by purpledawn
08-20-2012 7:59 AM


Re: On Israel
Well put. You idea make much more sense than most of anything else I have heard on this subject.

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 63 by purpledawn, posted 08-20-2012 7:59 AM purpledawn has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19520
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 66 of 86 (672799)
09-11-2012 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Hawkins
09-07-2012 2:31 PM


Hawkins writes:

the scriptures must be witnessed and written by authenticated witnesses such as the formally assigned prophets or apostles.


Treasure Island was written by Jim Hawkins with a chapter or two added by Dr. Livesey. How would you authenticate them as witnesses?

Edited by ringo, : Spellng.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Hawkins, posted 09-07-2012 2:31 PM Hawkins has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Hawkins, posted 09-18-2012 1:14 PM ringo has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 576 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 67 of 86 (672993)
09-12-2012 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by purpledawn
08-20-2012 7:59 AM


Re: On Israel
purpledawn writes:

quote:
If the exodus was pure fiction, then there was no state of Israel for God to condemn. You just defeated your ownself.
As Arach pointed out in Message 54, per the Bible, Israel was formed from Jacob and his twelve sons. (Genesis 35:9-13)

right; the exodus is the formation of first temple judaism, not the nation. the nation (that is, the people) are merely the descendants of jacob. the kingdom is formed under saul (but mostly david). these are related concepts, so people like to conflate them. but they're separate concerns...

(1) An earlier historical work cited as: "The Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel" (II Chron. xvi. 11, xxv. 26, xxviii. 26); "The Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah" (ib. xxvii. 7, xxxv. 26); "The Acts of the Kings of Israel" (ib. xxxiii. 18); and perhaps also as "The Midrash of the Book of Kings" (ib. xxiv. 27).

"the book of the kings of israel and judah" (or "...judah and israel") might well be something very much like the modern book of kings.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by purpledawn, posted 08-20-2012 7:59 AM purpledawn has taken no action

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 576 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 68 of 86 (672994)
09-12-2012 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by jar
08-19-2012 9:55 PM


Re: On Israel
jar writes:

Further the Exodus had NOTHING to do with the creation of a nation state called Israel but rather of a people identified as Hebrews.

er, a people identified as "israel" or "the sons of israel". even the biblical authors like to equivocate the kingdom and the people, so it's not surprising that people confuse them.

the "hebrews" would have been a larger linguistic group; all people speaking hebrew. biblically, they are the sons of eber. עֵבֶר = "eber", עִבְרִית = "ibrit" or "hebrew".


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 08-19-2012 9:55 PM jar has seen this message

  
Hawkins
Member (Idle past 606 days)
Posts: 150
From: Hong Kong
Joined: 08-25-2005


Message 69 of 86 (673299)
09-18-2012 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by ringo
09-11-2012 12:58 PM


Treasure Island was written by Jim Hawkins with a chapter or two added by Dr. Livesey. How would you authenticate them as witnesses?
=============================================

Do they martyr themselves to say the truth?

The point is, by the nature of history itself, most part of history cannot be 'proven', it all relies on humans' eye witnessing. "cannot be proven" is a nature of history (including the 5000 years of written history of over 1000 nations). You choose to believe what was written by the historians or not. Deal with it.

So for something historical, the best "witnessing" is,

1) write a book about it
2) martyr as a direct witness to say the truth

Whether you believe or not remains one's own choice. If you'd like to say that human history is like a book of "Treasure Island". The question is, since when the book of "Treasure Island" gained 1/3 humans as believers?!

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by ringo, posted 09-11-2012 12:58 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by jar, posted 09-18-2012 1:30 PM Hawkins has replied
 Message 73 by ringo, posted 09-18-2012 2:17 PM Hawkins has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33890
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 70 of 86 (673302)
09-18-2012 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Hawkins
09-18-2012 1:14 PM


on martyrs
So for something historical, the best "witnessing" is,

1) write a book about it
2) martyr as a direct witness to say the truth

Martyrdom has little or nothing to do with truth and in no way adds any weight to decisions of whether something is true or not.

In addition there is very little evidence of "Christian Martyrs" until fairly recently, and in almost all those cases the people killed themselves or allowed themselves to be killed for rather silly reasons.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Hawkins, posted 09-18-2012 1:14 PM Hawkins has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Hawkins, posted 09-18-2012 1:35 PM jar has replied

  
Hawkins
Member (Idle past 606 days)
Posts: 150
From: Hong Kong
Joined: 08-25-2005


Message 71 of 86 (673303)
09-18-2012 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by jar
09-18-2012 1:30 PM


Re: on martyrs
quote:
Martyrdom has little or nothing to do with truth and in no way adds any weight to decisions of whether something is true or not.

In addition there is very little evidence of "Christian Martyrs" until fairly recently, and in almost all those cases the people killed themselves or allowed themselves to be killed for rather silly reasons.



========================

I am talking about the BEST one can do! As by nature, history cannot be proven, generally speaking.

As a common sense, no one dies for his own lie. That's the point made by a martyrdom.

Edited by AdminPhat, : highlighted quote


This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by jar, posted 09-18-2012 1:30 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by jar, posted 09-18-2012 2:06 PM Hawkins has taken no action
 Message 74 by Coragyps, posted 09-18-2012 2:19 PM Hawkins has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33890
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 72 of 86 (673309)
09-18-2012 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Hawkins
09-18-2012 1:35 PM


Re: on martyrs
I am talking about the BEST one can do! As by nature, history cannot be proven, generally speaking.

As a common sense, no one dies for his own lie. That's the point made by a martyrdom.

Sorry but wrong again.

History can be proven or disproved based on physical evidence. For example that the Biblical Floods never happened has been proven.

And sure people die for their own ********* and their belief in things that are false.

Look at the martyrs that died because they believed that the Ghost Dance would protect them from bullets.

Becoming a martyr says nothing about whether or not a belief is true.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Hawkins, posted 09-18-2012 1:35 PM Hawkins has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19520
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.8


(2)
Message 73 of 86 (673310)
09-18-2012 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Hawkins
09-18-2012 1:14 PM


Hawkins writes:

The point is, by the nature of history itself, most part of history cannot be 'proven', it all relies on humans' eye witnessing.


I think you missed my point. I asked, "How would you authenticate them as witnesses?"

Jim Hawkins and Dr. Livesey both claimed to be eyewitnesses of the events in Treasure Island - but both of them were fictional characters created by Robert Louis Stevenson. How do you know that the "eyewitnesses" to the Bible events really existed?

Hawkins writes:

So for something historical, the best "witnessing" is,

1) write a book about it
2) martyr as a direct witness to say the truth


But how do you know that the book and the martyrdom aren't fiction?

Hawkins writes:

If you'd like to say that human history is like a book of "Treasure Island".


I'm not saying that history is like Treasure Island - history can be authenticated. I'm saying that the Bible is like Treasure Island - neither is history because neither can be authenticated. Both claim to be written by eyewitnesses but those claims can't be authenticated.

Hawkins writes:

The question is, since when the book of "Treasure Island" gained 1/3 humans as believers?!


Why do only a minority of people believe the Bible?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Hawkins, posted 09-18-2012 1:14 PM Hawkins has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Hawkins, posted 09-18-2012 3:15 PM ringo has replied

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


(2)
Message 74 of 86 (673311)
09-18-2012 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Hawkins
09-18-2012 1:35 PM


Re: on martyrs
As a common sense, no one dies for his own lie. That's the point made by a martyrdom.

And this applies to 9/11/2001 hijackers and to suicide bombers? Yes? They die to prove that Mohammed got it right?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Hawkins, posted 09-18-2012 1:35 PM Hawkins has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Hawkins, posted 09-18-2012 3:16 PM Coragyps has replied

  
Hawkins
Member (Idle past 606 days)
Posts: 150
From: Hong Kong
Joined: 08-25-2005


Message 75 of 86 (673328)
09-18-2012 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by ringo
09-18-2012 2:17 PM


I think you missed my point. I asked, "How would you authenticate them as witnesses?"
=========================================

Why do they need to be authenticated in the first place. Do you need someone to authenticate you for you to write down something your encountered or experienced?

-------------------------
But how do you know that the book and the martyrdom aren't fiction?
===================

As I already said, it's normal that history cannot be proven. At least theologically it is so. There are also historical supports which are written by humans though.

=================
I'm not saying that history is like Treasure Island - history can be authenticated. I'm saying that the Bible is like Treasure Island - neither is history because neither can be authenticated. Both claim to be written by eyewitnesses but those claims can't be authenticated.
===================

So you swallow whatever authenticated by humans? Moreover, who says all parts of human history is authenticated by anyone. Some are just books written at a certain time but authenticated much later as formal history.

Even the authentication process itself is not evidence based. It's at best a trust of the historians (by faith should I say).

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by ringo, posted 09-18-2012 2:17 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by ringo, posted 09-18-2012 3:26 PM Hawkins 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