Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 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:   Is the bible the word of God or men?
Nimrod
Member (Idle past 4916 days)
Posts: 277
Joined: 06-22-2006


Message 301 of 309 (478513)
08-16-2008 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 300 by Brian
06-08-2008 3:41 AM


Joseph ignores archaeology completely.
(dont have a Bible handy but going by memory)
Look at the archaeological record for a 1220 Exodus and Conquest(which he believes).
Taking Conquest sites in the order they appear in the Bible,look at the record for 1220 BCE.
First Hebron wasnt occupied in 1220 BCE but the Bible (in Numbers) describes a hugh walled city.
NEXT
Arad (in the Negev)wasnt occupied.
Hormah (in the Negev) wasnt occupied.
Kadesh Barnea is a problem of sorts.
Edom had little settlement then.
Next Moab...
Dibon wasnt occupied at all.
Heshbon wasnt occupied.
Nor Madeba.
Nor Aroer.
Only Ar was possibly occupied.
Bashan and Ammon were occupied though the Ammonite capital doesnt seem to have been.
Take Palestine now.
Jericho was an un-occupied waste.
Same with Ai.
Ditto for Gibeon.
Same with Makkedah, Libnah, Hebron, Jarmuth , Tirzah, and possibly Dor.I also think Tanaach was lacking a settlement then.
Hazor was also in ruins during 1220 BCE, 40 years after Ramses II's first-born son was last mentioned in records (thus the earliest date for a Ramaases Exodus).Kochavi says Hazor was destroyed in 1275 BCE.Mazar says it was destroyed before 1250 BCE.Even ben-Tor says it was probably destroyed before 1220 BCE.
The book of Judges says Jerusalem was destroyed but it wasnt.
How on earth a fundamentalist like IamJoseph can support a c1200 Exodus and Conquest when the highland region of Palestine(the Israelite region which Merenptah mentioned in 1209 BCE) was such a wasteland is beyond me UNLESS we understand that reality doesnt matter to him.
Also, I wont mention the problem of the Philistines because he will ignore the issue at hand and make some anti-Arab rant as if it has anything to do with the issue. (The PLST didnt arrive in Palestine until 1177 BCE, or the 8th year of Ramses III--- according to the majority view which holds the "low chronology" at this date. Its all relative and no matter what chronology one holds, it still falls 40-43 years after the Conquest date even if one raises the Egyptian dates 10-23 years.)
There is no evidence for a c1260 Exodus or a c1446 Exodus (the Late Bronze Age wasteland of highland palestine is even worse in c1406 BCE).There were 220 sites in the central-highlands in the Middle Bronze Age(ended 1550 BCE) but no more than 40 in the Late Bronze Age (1550-1200), and almost none of the Joshua sites had occupation in the latter.
I will bet you any amount of money that Joseph doesnt care.He will keep on ranting about "evidence" for his c1250 Exodus and Conquest.His evidence will be 4 words long:"Merneptah reference to Israel".
Just the mention of Israel in 1209 BCE Palestine (or Anson Rainey thinks Merenptah's "Israel" refers to Trans-Jordan peoples and NOT to central Palestine) somehow proves to joseph there was an Exodus and Conquest earlier?
I guess a reference to Mike Tyson in 2008 proves he defeated Clay/Ali in a 2007 bout.I suppose a reference to me, Nimrod, in August 2008 proves that the entire world recently spoke a single language in say...1980.
The Merneptah reference only proves that there were possibly distinct Israelites (from Canaanites) conscious in 1200 BCE. It doesnt disprove the common scholarly archaeological view that Israelites were simply native Canaanites (ie not immigrants from Egypt) who were not yet conscious YHWH believers nor does it prove that they yet became the Israelites we all know from the Bible.
It sure doesnt prove there was an Exodus or Conquest.
It only shows that there was a people caling themselves Israelite's by 1200 BCE.And probably in the central-highlands though it could be a reference to people living in Jordan.There is SOME sort of connection to the Israelites of 850 BCE (next historical reference to Israel)but it isnt clear how conscious the c1210 group was of its identity and what-if anything- would distinguish the "Israel" group from other Canaanites.
The central highlands only had a population of about 4000 people in 1210 BCE.
By 1000 BCE it was up to 50,000 and more by 850 BCE.Anson Rainy feels that the population explosion of the Iron Age (began around 1175 BCE)was due to incoming Aramean tribes.He feels that the Hebrew language is actually closer to Aramaic than Canaanite, plus he identifys the population increase in Trans-Jordan (Israelites, Moabites, Ammonites,etc.) and Israel during the early Iron Age as Arameans who were known to have moved into south-west Syria (right at israel and Jordan)during the early Iron Age.He feels the Biblical references to Abraham as a "wandering Aramean" (see Deuteronomy) reflects the memory of their major ancestry.
Thus "Israel" in 1210 could have simply been a Canaanite people of a few thousand (but significant in a barren land that central-highland palestine and trans-Jordan was then)that later were built into a later nation around 1000 BCE made up of immigrant Arameans.
Possible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 300 by Brian, posted 06-08-2008 3:41 AM Brian has not replied

DannyPartridge
Junior Member (Idle past 5565 days)
Posts: 5
From: San Pueblo, Ca
Joined: 12-28-2008


Message 302 of 309 (492585)
01-01-2009 3:09 PM


Yea this is God's word, because he really said this....
Ezekiel 23 Yahway will commit the murder of children again, commit ARSON, commit theft, & bring terror! (God is going to slay the sons and daughters of those whores, Oholah and Oholibah and burn down their houses as well as cut their noses and ears off, even take their clothes and & fine jewelry) God said that Oholibah wanted her lovers genitals to be the size of a donkeys, and their ejaculations to be like horses!
"There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.
25 I will direct my jealous anger against you, and they will deal with you in fury. They will cut off your noses and your ears, and those of you who are left will fall by the sword.
26 They will also strip you of your clothes and take your fine jewelry. (I'm sure they're going to worry about their clothes and "FINE" jewelry after their noses and ears are chopped off!)
46 This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Bring a mob against them and give them over to terror and plunder. 47 The mob will stone them and cut them down with their swords; they will kill their sons and daughters and burn down their houses"
Edited by DannyPartridge, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 303 by Bailey, posted 01-01-2009 3:22 PM DannyPartridge has not replied

Bailey
Member (Idle past 4370 days)
Posts: 574
From: Earth
Joined: 08-24-2003


Message 303 of 309 (492586)
01-01-2009 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 302 by DannyPartridge
01-01-2009 3:09 PM


dawnkey fuhkerz
Hi Danny ...
Yea this is God's word, because he really said this....
Ezekiel 23 Yahway will commit the murder of children again, commit ARSON, commit theft, & bring terror! (God is going to slay the sons and daughters of those whores, Oholah and Oholibah and burn down their houses as well as cut their noses and ears off, even take their clothes and & fine jewelry) God said that Oholibah wanted her lovers genitals to be the size of a donkeys, and their ejaculations to be like horses!
Are you suggesting influential people should stop misrepresenting the nature of the Father of Life and jews should leave donkey fuhkerz alone?
If so, I will sign your petition.
One Love

I'm not here to mock or condemn what you believe, I'm just a fool playing with ideas.
My only intention is to tickle your thinker. Trust nothing I say. Learn for yourself.
Think for yourself.
Mercy Trumps Judgement,
Love Weary

This message is a reply to:
 Message 302 by DannyPartridge, posted 01-01-2009 3:09 PM DannyPartridge has not replied

deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2893 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 304 of 309 (493593)
01-09-2009 4:22 PM


The Bible is a liturature mosaic.
Anyone who does even a cursory examination of the historical context of the Bible will be convinced that it clearly was written and assembled by men - men with the same passions and motivations as men today - which is to say there were saints and rogues, jealousies, self serving agendas, scholars of varying abilities and biases, political trading (you include my favorite text and I will include yours) etc. Chronologies got rearranged, books got "stuck together" that should have remained apart, stuff was "lifted" from various sources, authorships were assigned capriciously, etc. In other words, the Bible is like any other sacred text. Does this mean that God was not involved? I guess that depends on your view or God. If you believe as I do that God = the goodness in people, the answer is yes. If you believe that God is some kind of infallible magician - no.

MentalSword
Junior Member (Idle past 5516 days)
Posts: 3
Joined: 02-26-2009


Message 305 of 309 (499704)
02-19-2009 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by sidelined
10-13-2007 9:33 AM


Hi Sidelined,
I have to say, your little signature really gave me a chuckle! It’s so illogical it’s cute. Such a statement makes no sense — just think of how many things have been true before they were proven: the world was round before it was proven to be so; the Earth was really at the fringe of creation before it was proven to not be at the center; there really are giant squids that could sink a small fishing craft and lead to the legend of the Kraken. To say something isn’t so simply because you choose not to see the proof of its existence is pure silliness. Especially in a case where proof is all around you and you need only open your eyes (and that means your heart and mind) and see it.
At any rate, the Christian Bible is a compendium of various writings. Different parts of it come from different stages of history, and its final form was compiled under political duress. The collection can be divided loosely into histories and stories. The histories are the long boring parts that few people talk about. The stories are the parts that generate all the hub-bub.
To say that the individual books of the Bible are the ‘divinely inspired words of God’ is accurate in the sense that the people who wrote them were inspired to record the divine happenings of their day. That being said, they were also never intended to end up in the form in which they have been presented to the world. So the book itself, as a compilation of divinely inspired writings, is manmade. With man’s intents and motives affecting its design.
But that doesn’t mean that the word of God is not contained within the Bible. One of the interesting things I’ve seen in my life about the way God works (if you will) is that it’s always indirectly, through an unbelievable set of circumstances. The important messages contained in the Bible are no different. If you read through each book, and take it on its own, at the time it was written (as best that’s known), trying to know the person who wrote it and their intent, then you can find valuable meaning in its content.
My favorite example of this is the Book of Luke. I call it ‘Luke’s Lament’. I think this is a classic case of misuse of intent. Luke’s intent was to write the story that one of his good friends had told him in a form that would be acceptable to another good friend of his; a rich, pagan friend who lived in another country but traveled from time to time to the area in which Luke practiced. Luke wanted to save the man’s soul, but knew he’d never believe the simple truth of the story. So he spruced it up to make it sound a bit more like a pagan god story. Little did he realize that his story, written to one good friend, would be duplicated a thousand times over... For when the rich friend received the manuscript, with its attached letter of introduction, he was so taken with the story that he sought to spread this knowledge to all of his countrymen. It was many years before copies began to make their way back to mainland from where the story had originated. But once that happened, people who had actually been there began to hear and then read this story. They knew the dilemma: thousands upon thousands had been converted by this story so it could not be debunked; yet neither could it go down purely as the way things happened. So two individuals, individually, took it upon themselves to record the real story as much as possible without directly contradicting what was already written. One of them was particularly successful in also providing a bit of a roadmap for deciphering the story Luke had created. These three books together each represent divinely inspired writing at different times for different purposes and little of any of that has to do with how it is all seen today.
Now, I will say that all of that is speculation on my part — however, it is educated speculation and there is history which supports the possibility of it.
In the end, my views being correct, incorrect, or indifferent to the truth, I think the answer to your question is that the Bible is a compilation book of histories and stories, held holy in its various forms by a number of Christian religions, which contains meaningful content to those who wish to take the time and effort (doesn’t have to be a lot of either, either) to find it for themselves.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by sidelined, posted 10-13-2007 9:33 AM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 306 by Theodoric, posted 02-19-2009 10:53 PM MentalSword has replied

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


Message 306 of 309 (499705)
02-19-2009 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 305 by MentalSword
02-19-2009 10:34 PM


Welcome
You are new here so I will explain to you a little how things work.
Forum Rules
As you can see this is a thread in the Science forum. Posts should include evidence to support the statements. Statements of faith should be restricted to threads in the Social and Religious Issues Forum.
That said
Such a statement makes no sense — just think of how many things have been true before they were proven: the world was round before it was proven to be so; the Earth was really at the fringe of creation before it was proven to not be at the center; there really are giant squids that could sink a small fishing craft and lead to the legend of the Kraken. To say something isn’t so simply because you choose not to see the proof of its existence is pure silliness.
Please show this proof that a god exists.
I think this is a classic case of misuse of intent. Luke’s intent was to write the story that one of his good friends had told him in a form that would be acceptable to another good friend of his; a rich, pagan friend who lived in another country but traveled from time to time to the area in which Luke practiced. Luke wanted to save the man’s soul, but knew he’d never believe the simple truth of the story. So he spruced it up to make it sound a bit more like a pagan god story.
Source please
These three books together each represent divinely inspired writing at different times for different purposes and little of any of that has to do with how it is all seen today.
This is a statement of faith. There is no evidence to back such a conclusion.
Now, I will say that all of that is speculation on my part — however, it is educated speculation and there is history which supports the possibility of it.
I am getting a little tired of you bold statements. Love to know this "history" that supports this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 305 by MentalSword, posted 02-19-2009 10:34 PM MentalSword has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 307 by MentalSword, posted 02-19-2009 11:32 PM Theodoric has replied

MentalSword
Junior Member (Idle past 5516 days)
Posts: 3
Joined: 02-26-2009


Message 307 of 309 (499708)
02-19-2009 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 306 by Theodoric
02-19-2009 10:53 PM


Re: Welcome
Hi Theodoric, thanks for the introduction.
I may be new here, but I am not new to forums. I do not believe I have violated any usage policy, but if I did a moderator will let me know and I'll be sure not to do it again.
The first text you quote does not specifically pertain to a belief in God. Yes, I was responding to a statement about the belief in God (which, by your reasoning should also violate some rule of this forum) but my point was that the logic of the statement was faulty. It could have been about belief in baked-sausages - you placed it in the context of your choosing.
On the second quote, I clearly stated that this is conjecture. But you are welcome to do the research just as I did. You will find that there is some knowledge of Luke and fair speculation on Theophilus. Again, the specific circumstances of the story I told is my speculation based on what is known and on what I've come to know of the writer, Luke, himself. Good authors leave something of themselves in what they write, and so something of that person can be known from their words.
The third quote is not a matter of faith - I would agree that the second half of the statement is opinion though. But I'm not sure what you could argue about the first part other than perhaps the term "divinely inspired".
The rest I've covered already.
Although you've picked the post apart, I think that my response does address the initial question. If I have indeed abused some sensibilities in my previous post, or this one, I will heed the call of any moderator who stifles me.
Thanks for your feedback and I hope I've generated no hard feelings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by Theodoric, posted 02-19-2009 10:53 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 308 by Theodoric, posted 02-20-2009 7:12 AM MentalSword has not replied

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


Message 308 of 309 (499752)
02-20-2009 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 307 by MentalSword
02-19-2009 11:32 PM


So you have no evidence?
Again I ask. Evidence please to verify your assertions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 307 by MentalSword, posted 02-19-2009 11:32 PM MentalSword has not replied

AdminModulous
Administrator
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 309 of 309 (499783)
02-20-2009 11:01 AM


This post thread seems to have been risen from the dead. It is over 300 posts, and from start to finish is about 18 months of posts. If anyone wants a fresh discussion about whether or not the Bible is the word of God or the word of Man, please propose a New Thread.
For those who don't know - we generally wind debates up at around 300 posts for a variety of reasons.
Thank you.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024