Bible fallacies and internal contradictions - Page 8

tsig · 11th June 2012, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by blobru

Although to give Him His due, at the end of the NT (Revelation), He does revert to wrathful type; arguably, "love and peace" was just a stage He was going through.

I noticed MG ignored that post.

So the OT god is the infantile god, the NT god is the young, romantic god and the Revelation god is the grown up god.

Cults have been built on less.

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

How do you make a bank?

It is an English language idiom suggesting some one is making a lot of money. I forget sometimes not everyone has English as a first language

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by tsig

I noticed MG ignored that post.

So the OT god is the infantile god, the NT god is the young, romantic god and the Revelation god is the grown up god.

Cults have been built on less.

I didn't ignore it - If I have nothing to add to the discussion I dont post just for the sake of it

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

It is an English language idiom suggesting some one is making a lot of money. I forget sometimes not everyone has English as a first language

Where is that fact? Post it or we will be forced to conclude that you don't have one.

I Ratant · 11th June 2012, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

I can't think of any facts in the old testament.

.
There's all kinds of facts!
Egypt.
Jericho.
Babylon.
Nebuchadnezzar.
.
.
.
It's the way the facts are placed in the stories that make them ripping good yarns.
Any accomplished BS'er can embellish a flight of fancy with something like..
"And this is the very tree where that (totally absurd thing) happened".
Makes them delightful to listen to.

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

I didn't ignore it - If I have nothing to add to the discussion I dont post just for the sake of it

Dodge noted.

I Ratant · 11th June 2012, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

Yeah I have a couple and a few maybes depending on where archeology currently stands on the topic

.
Facts are not subject to viewpoint.
They withstand all points of view.

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
There's all kinds of facts!
Egypt.
Jericho.
Babylon.
Nebuchadnezzar.
.
.
.
It's the way the facts are placed in the stories that make them ripping good yarns.
Any accomplished BS'er can embellish a flight of fancy with something like..
"And this is the very tree where that (totally absurd thing) happened".
Makes them delightful to listen to.

Yes, but he said facts that were not mentioned anywhere else. Good luck to him with that one.

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:04 AM

deleted

TimCallahan · 11th June 2012, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

But the Persians were making bank in trade of Frankincense out of the Arabian pennisular all the way through to China

If you look at the old Incense Route, you will find that it begins in Saba (the biblical Sheba), now Yemen, and goes partway up the west coast of the Arabian peninsula before splitting. One branch continues north, through the Levant, ending at Damascus. the other branch turns east, through the oasis of Taima and leads to the southern end of the Tigris - Euphrates river valley, bypassing Roman territory. Also, as you can see here, there was a sea route from Yemen to India and China.

TimCallahan · 11th June 2012, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

What is the internal contradiction here? I'm not aware of any other accounts of Joshua actions in the Old Testament.

What I'm referring to here is a conflict between two books, supposedly inspired by the same God, that disagree with each other. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that. I realize this is a bit different from the internal contradictions of doublets in the same book, as in the case of Joseph's brothers selling him into slavery in Egypt (see post #168 on page 5).

blobru · 11th June 2012, 10:17 AM

Originally Posted by tsig

I noticed MG ignored that post.

So the OT god is the infantile god, the NT god is the young, romantic god and the Revelation god is the grown up god.

Cults have been built on less.

It could be He's a bit like a Star Trek computer (God, not MG). At the End of Days, He notices the contradiction between OT hate and NT love, gets caught in a logic loop, and starts to short circuit, destroying pretty much everything in the process. In the nick of time, the angels (highly-skilled IT techs, who can also fly) put out the fire (by flapping their wings, of course); then what's left of Him - basically a fried motherboard (fatherboard, to be patriarchal about it) and scary-sounding boombox - goes through Its memory bank - inscribed on extra-durable stone tablets - to see who was naughty and who was nice: the latter get to eat of the Tree of Life; the former, a career in sulfur management (plus free lessons in wailing and teeth-gnashing). At least, that's how Gene Roddenberry used to tell it, and he's probably as reliable as anyone.

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

Yes, but he said facts that were not mentioned anywhere else. Good luck to him with that one.

Hittites - Before 1889 They were an off handed comment in the Bible, before the discoveries most assumed they were some vague hill tribe the Hebrews had brushes with.

The truth turned out to be something really amazing

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

Hittites - Before 1889 They were an off handed comment in the Bible, before the discoveries most assumed they were some vague hill tribe the Hebrews had brushes with.

The truth turned out to be something really amazing

That doesn't prove that the bible is the word of god or even that this god exists. I don't what MG is going to try and prove with his fact, but he did try to get us to agree that if he had one then our argument would be blown out of the water. I don't know what he thinks this argument is, but mine is that there are no gods and that the bible is a work of fiction. If there was a fact in the bible that proves that god exists then believers would have seized on it a long time ago.

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

What I'm referring to here is a conflict between two books, supposedly inspired by the same God, that disagree with each other. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that. I realize this is a bit different from the internal contradictions of doublets in the same book, as in the case of Joseph's brothers selling him into slavery in Egypt.

Ahh okay got it, I understand now.

I have read some extremely interesting ideas about Exodus over the years

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:26 AM

No fact then, understood.

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

That doesn't prove that the bible is the word of god or even that this god exists. I don't what MG is going to try and prove with his fact, but he did try to get us to agree that if he had one then our argument would be blown out of the water. I don't know what he thinks this argument is, but mine is that there are no gods and that the bible is a work of fiction. If there was a fact in the bible that proves that god exists then believers would have seized on it a long time ago.

You are nothing if not predictable - refer your post 256 in this thread

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:29 AM

I refer you to your post

Originally Posted by MG1962

Yeah I have a couple and a few maybes depending on where archeology currently stands on the topic

What are they? If you can produce one then I will agree that my argument has been blown out of the water.

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:31 AM

Why do these threads always degenerate into fruitless attempts to get a straight answer from a believer?

I Ratant · 11th June 2012, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

Yes, but he said facts that were not mentioned anywhere else. Good luck to him with that one.

.
But if the "fact" quoted has real facts, doesn't that kinda make the bogus fact real, by association?

The stories do depend on the bleed-over from fiction to reality for acceptance.

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

Yeah I have a couple and a few maybes depending on where archeology currently stands on the topic

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
But if the "fact" quoted has real facts, doesn't that kinda make the bogus fact real, by association?

The stories do depend on the bleed-over from fiction to reality for acceptance.

Yes, he's backing the wrong horse here, if he ever gets as far as laying the bet.

pakeha · 11th June 2012, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

Yeah I have a couple and a few maybes depending on where archeology currently stands on the topic

That means we can count on at least two, maybe more examples from you?

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

Another Bible story that is replete with doublets is that of the miracle at the sea in Exodus. ...

Thanks for conributing such intersting posts- they are a pleasure to read.

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

If you look at the old Incense Route, you will find that it begins in Saba (the biblical Sheba), now Yemen, and goes partway up the west coast of the Arabian peninsula before splitting. One branch continues north, through the Levant, ending at Damascus. the other branch turns east, through the oasis of Taima and leads to the southern end of the Tigris - Euphrates river valley, bypassing Roman territory. Also, as you can see here, there was a sea route from Yemen to India and China.

ninja'd!
But you wrote about it so well I'm all too pleased you go in first.

Originally Posted by MG1962

Hittites - Before 1889 They were an off handed comment in the Bible, before the discoveries most assumed they were some vague hill tribe the Hebrews had brushes with.

The truth turned out to be something really amazing

Are you quite sure they weren't mentioned outside the OT?
Does the Battle of Kadesh ring a bell?

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

Why do these threads always degenerate into fruitless attempts to get a straight answer from a believer?

Because you never acknowledge an answer you don't like. I pointed you to your post 256 - I responded with something that showed that statement wrong. You immediately launch into a tanty about how does that prove the Bible is the word of God - which is something I have never claimed in any of my posts in my years her, and is introduced by you as some knee jerk reaction.

You seem to think creating smoke screens when you are shown to be incorrect is a valid debating tactic

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

Because you never acknowledge an answer you don't like. I

You will actually have to provide some answers first. Have you got a fact for us. Yes or no?

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

You will actually have to provide some answers first. Have you got a fact for us. Yes or no?

Post 293

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

the Bible is the word of God - which is something I have never claimed in any of my posts in my years her, and is introduced by you as some knee jerk reaction.

I'm sorry if I have misunderstood you. So you are not a Christian? If you are not, then I apologize.

pakeha · 11th June 2012, 10:56 AM

And let's not forget the Egyptian-Hittite peace treaty, either.

I think it's clear the Hittites don't qualify as something mentioned only in the bible.
What was the second fact you think is only mentioned in the bible?

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

Post 293

It's a bit mundane. It hasn't changed my opinion of the bible.

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by pakeha

And let's not forget the Egyptian-Hittite peace treaty, either.

I think it's clear the Hittites don't qualify as something mentioned only in the bible.
What was the second fact you think is only mentioned in the bible?

Oh, so they are mentioned somewhere else? One fact gone for a burton. Fact number 2 please.

pakeha · 11th June 2012, 10:58 AM

^
Yes, very much so.
The Battle of Kadesh, you know.

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 10:59 AM

I suppose that that the writers of the old testament would have got something right, if only by chance. They couldn't get their wildlife right, or even keep the creation myth straight so I'm not exactly filled with confidence.

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by pakeha

^
Yes, very much so.
The Battle of Kadesh, you know.

The temple depicting the battle was not excavated till 1809 - The ability to read the Egyptian version of events was not readable till the 1830-40s. So while it pushes the date back a little it does not disqualify the previous Biblical reference as the only source of the Hittites for thousands of years

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

The temple depicting the battle was not excavated till 1809 - The ability to read the Egyptian version of events was not readable till the 1830-40s. So while it pushes the date back a little it does not disqualify the previous Biblical reference as the only source of the Hittites for thousands of years

And?

TimCallahan · 11th June 2012, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

I'm sorry if I have misunderstood you. So you are not a Christian? If you are not, then I apologize.

I, too, am a bit confused as to MG1962's stance.

MG1962, you seem to have been arguing for some sort of validity, via astrological signs and planetary conjunctions, for the star of Bethlehem and the story of the visit of the Magi. However, you later said, if I understood you correctly, that you were not. Nevertheless, you also argued that, due to trade interests involving frankincense, the Parthians would be interested in a potential king of the Jews. All this seems to argue for the validity of the Matthean Nativity account.

Could you clarify your position?

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

I, too, am a bit confused as to MG1962's stance.

MG1962, you seem to have been arguing for some sort of validity, via astrological signs and planetary conjunctions, for the star of Bethlehem and the story of the visit of the Magi. However, you later said, if I understood you correctly, that you were not. Nevertheless, you also argued that, due to trade interests involving frankincense, the Parthians would be interested in a potential king of the Jews. All this seems to argue for the validity of the Matthean Nativity account.

Could you clarify your position?

I would appreciate some clarification too. Are we dealing with a closet Christian?

MG1962 · 11th June 2012, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

I suppose that that the writers of the old testament would have got something right, if only by chance. They couldn't get their wildlife right, or even keep the creation myth straight so I'm not exactly filled with confidence.

Thank you - thats pretty much all I was looking for. What is real and not real in the Bible will still be debated when the sun cools. The Bible has been an incendential witness to a lot of things not recorded anywhere else.

Jericho is another mystery. We know from the archeology Joshua could not have done it - But what happened there. The city walls collapse, the place is turned into a ghost town. Even by the latest dating of the Exodus the place could only have ever been a memory at least two generations removed

And while on destruction - Sodom and Gomorrah have been back in the archeological news. Two towns roughly in the right location have been found. One appears to have been devastated by an earthquake, the other by fire - geologists are real interested in this because their might be evidence of an underground gas pocket breaking through and igniting.

Was any of this caused by God...I certainly dont know, but the mention in the Bible was the trigger to conduct the search in the first place

pakeha · 11th June 2012, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

The temple depicting the battle was not excavated till 1809 - The ability to read the Egyptian version of events was not readable till the 1830-40s. So while it pushes the date back a little it does not disqualify the previous Biblical reference as the only source of the Hittites for thousands of years

Absolutely incorrect, I'm afraid.
The Egyptian records were carved into monuments and temple walls and stelae for all to see.
They simply weren't deciphered.

In fact, when they WERE deciphered, then the push to find the Hittite Empire began.
The race to find the Hittite Empire is interesting in its own right, of course.

All in all, I think your claim is pretty weak.
Yes, your average KJV reader only knew of the Hittites via the OT, I'll grant you.
But to claim the OT was the only source documenting the Hititites until the Germans dug up the remains of that Empire is not accurate.

Now for that second fact?

dafydd · 11th June 2012, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by MG1962

T

And while on destruction - Sodom and Gomorrah have been back in the archeological news. Two towns roughly in the right location have been found. One appears to have been devastated by an earthquake, the other by fire - geologists are real interested in this because their might be evidence of an underground gas pocket breaking through and igniting.

Was any of this caused by God...I certainly dont know, but the mention in the Bible was the trigger to conduct the search in the first place

If they ever find evidence of brimstone falling from heaven then god night come into it. Otherwise it's natural causes. I cannot discuss religious matters with somebody who refuses to make their position clear. Are you an atheist, agnostic or a christian? I am an atheist. See, answering is easy.

pakeha · 11th June 2012, 11:26 AM

Dear me, how wrong can I get!
he Germans didn't discover the remains of the Hittite Empire.
It was Charles Texier, in 1834.
Granted, it was the Germans who really 'discovered' the might of the Hittite Empire.
You can read more about the digs here:
http://archaeology.about.com/od/anci.../Hattusha-.htm

triadboy · 11th June 2012, 11:27 AM

My personal favorite is in Matthew. Jesus enters Jerusalem on two animals, because he doesn't understand the Jewish double-speak in Zecharia 9:9:

Quote:

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he [is] just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Quote:

Matthew 21:2 Saying unto them, Go into the village over against you, and straightway ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her: loose [them], and bring [them] unto me.

Because Matthew didn't understand the Jewish double-speak, he had Jesus enter Jerusalem on 2 animals - rootin' tootin' style!

11th June 2012, 10:00 AM	#284
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by MG1962 It is an English language idiom suggesting some one is making a lot of money. I forget sometimes not everyone has English as a first language Where is that fact? Post it or we will be forced to conclude that you don't have one.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away. Last edited by dafydd; 11th June 2012 at 10:01 AM.

11th June 2012, 10:01 AM	#286
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by MG1962 I didn't ignore it - If I have nothing to add to the discussion I dont post just for the sake of it Dodge noted.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 10:02 AM	#287
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Originally Posted by MG1962 Yeah I have a couple and a few maybes depending on where archeology currently stands on the topic . Facts are not subject to viewpoint. They withstand all points of view.
	Last edited by I Ratant; 11th June 2012 at 10:04 AM.

11th June 2012, 10:02 AM	#288
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by I Ratant . There's all kinds of facts! Egypt. Jericho. Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar. . . . It's the way the facts are placed in the stories that make them ripping good yarns. Any accomplished BS'er can embellish a flight of fancy with something like.. "And this is the very tree where that (totally absurd thing) happened". Makes them delightful to listen to. Yes, but he said facts that were not mentioned anywhere else. Good luck to him with that one.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away. Last edited by dafydd; 11th June 2012 at 10:08 AM.

11th June 2012, 10:04 AM	#289
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	deleted
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 09:56 AM	#281
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,779	Originally Posted by blobru Although to give Him His due, at the end of the NT (Revelation), He does revert to wrathful type; arguably, "love and peace" was just a stage He was going through. I noticed MG ignored that post. So the OT god is the infantile god, the NT god is the young, romantic god and the Revelation god is the grown up god. Cults have been built on less.

11th June 2012, 09:58 AM	#282
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by dafydd How do you make a bank? It is an English language idiom suggesting some one is making a lot of money. I forget sometimes not everyone has English as a first language

11th June 2012, 10:00 AM	#283
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by tsig I noticed MG ignored that post. So the OT god is the infantile god, the NT god is the young, romantic god and the Revelation god is the grown up god. Cults have been built on less. I didn't ignore it - If I have nothing to add to the discussion I dont post just for the sake of it

11th June 2012, 10:01 AM	#285
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Originally Posted by dafydd I can't think of any facts in the old testament. . There's all kinds of facts! Egypt. Jericho. Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar. . . . It's the way the facts are placed in the stories that make them ripping good yarns. Any accomplished BS'er can embellish a flight of fancy with something like.. "And this is the very tree where that (totally absurd thing) happened". Makes them delightful to listen to.

11th June 2012, 10:07 AM	#290
TimCallahan Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,131	Originally Posted by MG1962 But the Persians were making bank in trade of Frankincense out of the Arabian pennisular all the way through to China If you look at the old Incense Route, you will find that it begins in Saba (the biblical Sheba), now Yemen, and goes partway up the west coast of the Arabian peninsula before splitting. One branch continues north, through the Levant, ending at Damascus. the other branch turns east, through the oasis of Taima and leads to the southern end of the Tigris - Euphrates river valley, bypassing Roman territory. Also, as you can see here, there was a sea route from Yemen to India and China.
TimCallahan Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,131	Last edited by TimCallahan; 11th June 2012 at 10:11 AM.

11th June 2012, 10:16 AM	#291
TimCallahan Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,131	Originally Posted by MG1962 What is the internal contradiction here? I'm not aware of any other accounts of Joshua actions in the Old Testament. What I'm referring to here is a conflict between two books, supposedly inspired by the same God, that disagree with each other. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that. I realize this is a bit different from the internal contradictions of doublets in the same book, as in the case of Joseph's brothers selling him into slavery in Egypt (see post #168 on page 5).
TimCallahan Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,131	Last edited by TimCallahan; 11th June 2012 at 10:19 AM.

11th June 2012, 10:17 AM	#292
blobru Philosopher Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 6,592	Originally Posted by tsig I noticed MG ignored that post. So the OT god is the infantile god, the NT god is the young, romantic god and the Revelation god is the grown up god. Cults have been built on less. It could be He's a bit like a Star Trek computer (God, not MG). At the End of Days, He notices the contradiction between OT hate and NT love, gets caught in a logic loop, and starts to short circuit, destroying pretty much everything in the process. In the nick of time, the angels (highly-skilled IT techs, who can also fly) put out the fire (by flapping their wings, of course); then what's left of Him - basically a fried motherboard (fatherboard, to be patriarchal about it) and scary-sounding boombox - goes through Its memory bank - inscribed on extra-durable stone tablets - to see who was naughty and who was nice: the latter get to eat of the Tree of Life; the former, a career in sulfur management (plus free lessons in wailing and teeth-gnashing). At least, that's how Gene Roddenberry used to tell it, and he's probably as reliable as anyone.
blobru Philosopher Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 6,592	__________________ "Say to them, 'I am Nobody!'" -- Ulysses to the Cyclops "Never mind. I can't read." -- Hokulele to the Easter Bunny Last edited by blobru; 11th June 2012 at 10:24 AM.

11th June 2012, 10:18 AM	#293
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by dafydd Yes, but he said facts that were not mentioned anywhere else. Good luck to him with that one. Hittites - Before 1889 They were an off handed comment in the Bible, before the discoveries most assumed they were some vague hill tribe the Hebrews had brushes with. The truth turned out to be something really amazing

11th June 2012, 10:23 AM	#294
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by MG1962 Hittites - Before 1889 They were an off handed comment in the Bible, before the discoveries most assumed they were some vague hill tribe the Hebrews had brushes with. The truth turned out to be something really amazing That doesn't prove that the bible is the word of god or even that this god exists. I don't what MG is going to try and prove with his fact, but he did try to get us to agree that if he had one then our argument would be blown out of the water. I don't know what he thinks this argument is, but mine is that there are no gods and that the bible is a work of fiction. If there was a fact in the bible that proves that god exists then believers would have seized on it a long time ago.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away. Last edited by dafydd; 11th June 2012 at 10:25 AM.

11th June 2012, 10:25 AM	#295
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by TimCallahan What I'm referring to here is a conflict between two books, supposedly inspired by the same God, that disagree with each other. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that. I realize this is a bit different from the internal contradictions of doublets in the same book, as in the case of Joseph's brothers selling him into slavery in Egypt. Ahh okay got it, I understand now. I have read some extremely interesting ideas about Exodus over the years

11th June 2012, 10:26 AM	#296
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	No fact then, understood.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 10:27 AM	#297
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by dafydd That doesn't prove that the bible is the word of god or even that this god exists. I don't what MG is going to try and prove with his fact, but he did try to get us to agree that if he had one then our argument would be blown out of the water. I don't know what he thinks this argument is, but mine is that there are no gods and that the bible is a work of fiction. If there was a fact in the bible that proves that god exists then believers would have seized on it a long time ago. You are nothing if not predictable - refer your post 256 in this thread

11th June 2012, 10:29 AM	#298
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	I refer you to your post Originally Posted by MG1962 Yeah I have a couple and a few maybes depending on where archeology currently stands on the topic What are they? If you can produce one then I will agree that my argument has been blown out of the water.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away. Last edited by dafydd; 11th June 2012 at 10:30 AM.

11th June 2012, 10:31 AM	#299
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Why do these threads always degenerate into fruitless attempts to get a straight answer from a believer?
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 10:38 AM	#300
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Originally Posted by dafydd Yes, but he said facts that were not mentioned anywhere else. Good luck to him with that one. . But if the "fact" quoted has real facts, doesn't that kinda make the bogus fact real, by association? The stories do depend on the bleed-over from fiction to reality for acceptance.

11th June 2012, 10:40 AM	#301
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by MG1962 Yeah I have a couple and a few maybes depending on where archeology currently stands on the topic Originally Posted by I Ratant . But if the "fact" quoted has real facts, doesn't that kinda make the bogus fact real, by association? The stories do depend on the bleed-over from fiction to reality for acceptance. Yes, he's backing the wrong horse here, if he ever gets as far as laying the bet.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 10:42 AM	#302
pakeha Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 8,004	Originally Posted by MG1962 Yeah I have a couple and a few maybes depending on where archeology currently stands on the topic That means we can count on at least two, maybe more examples from you? Originally Posted by TimCallahan Another Bible story that is replete with doublets is that of the miracle at the sea in Exodus. ... Thanks for conributing such intersting posts- they are a pleasure to read. Originally Posted by TimCallahan If you look at the old Incense Route, you will find that it begins in Saba (the biblical Sheba), now Yemen, and goes partway up the west coast of the Arabian peninsula before splitting. One branch continues north, through the Levant, ending at Damascus. the other branch turns east, through the oasis of Taima and leads to the southern end of the Tigris - Euphrates river valley, bypassing Roman territory. Also, as you can see here, there was a sea route from Yemen to India and China. ninja'd! But you wrote about it so well I'm all too pleased you go in first. Originally Posted by MG1962 Hittites - Before 1889 They were an off handed comment in the Bible, before the discoveries most assumed they were some vague hill tribe the Hebrews had brushes with. The truth turned out to be something really amazing Are you quite sure they weren't mentioned outside the OT? Does the Battle of Kadesh ring a bell?
pakeha Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 8,004	__________________ To a conspiracy theorist, having double standards just means that they have twice as many standards. carlitos Last edited by pakeha; 11th June 2012 at 10:50 AM. Reason: added link

11th June 2012, 10:48 AM	#303
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by dafydd Why do these threads always degenerate into fruitless attempts to get a straight answer from a believer? Because you never acknowledge an answer you don't like. I pointed you to your post 256 - I responded with something that showed that statement wrong. You immediately launch into a tanty about how does that prove the Bible is the word of God - which is something I have never claimed in any of my posts in my years her, and is introduced by you as some knee jerk reaction. You seem to think creating smoke screens when you are shown to be incorrect is a valid debating tactic

11th June 2012, 10:53 AM	#304
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by MG1962 Because you never acknowledge an answer you don't like. I You will actually have to provide some answers first. Have you got a fact for us. Yes or no?
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 10:54 AM	#305
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by dafydd You will actually have to provide some answers first. Have you got a fact for us. Yes or no? Post 293

11th June 2012, 10:55 AM	#306
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by MG1962 the Bible is the word of God - which is something I have never claimed in any of my posts in my years her, and is introduced by you as some knee jerk reaction. I'm sorry if I have misunderstood you. So you are not a Christian? If you are not, then I apologize.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 10:56 AM	#307
pakeha Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 8,004	And let's not forget the Egyptian-Hittite peace treaty, either. I think it's clear the Hittites don't qualify as something mentioned only in the bible. What was the second fact you think is only mentioned in the bible?
pakeha Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 8,004	__________________ To a conspiracy theorist, having double standards just means that they have twice as many standards. carlitos

11th June 2012, 10:56 AM	#308
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by MG1962 Post 293 It's a bit mundane. It hasn't changed my opinion of the bible.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 10:57 AM	#309
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by pakeha And let's not forget the Egyptian-Hittite peace treaty, either. I think it's clear the Hittites don't qualify as something mentioned only in the bible. What was the second fact you think is only mentioned in the bible? Oh, so they are mentioned somewhere else? One fact gone for a burton. Fact number 2 please.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 10:58 AM	#310
pakeha Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 8,004	^ Yes, very much so. The Battle of Kadesh, you know.
pakeha Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 8,004	__________________ To a conspiracy theorist, having double standards just means that they have twice as many standards. carlitos Last edited by pakeha; 11th June 2012 at 11:00 AM. Reason: link

11th June 2012, 10:59 AM	#311
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	I suppose that that the writers of the old testament would have got something right, if only by chance. They couldn't get their wildlife right, or even keep the creation myth straight so I'm not exactly filled with confidence.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away. Last edited by dafydd; 11th June 2012 at 11:01 AM.

11th June 2012, 11:06 AM	#312
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by pakeha ^ Yes, very much so. The Battle of Kadesh, you know. The temple depicting the battle was not excavated till 1809 - The ability to read the Egyptian version of events was not readable till the 1830-40s. So while it pushes the date back a little it does not disqualify the previous Biblical reference as the only source of the Hittites for thousands of years

11th June 2012, 11:07 AM	#313
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by MG1962 The temple depicting the battle was not excavated till 1809 - The ability to read the Egyptian version of events was not readable till the 1830-40s. So while it pushes the date back a little it does not disqualify the previous Biblical reference as the only source of the Hittites for thousands of years And?
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

11th June 2012, 11:07 AM	#314
TimCallahan Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,131	Originally Posted by dafydd I'm sorry if I have misunderstood you. So you are not a Christian? If you are not, then I apologize. I, too, am a bit confused as to MG1962's stance. MG1962, you seem to have been arguing for some sort of validity, via astrological signs and planetary conjunctions, for the star of Bethlehem and the story of the visit of the Magi. However, you later said, if I understood you correctly, that you were not. Nevertheless, you also argued that, due to trade interests involving frankincense, the Parthians would be interested in a potential king of the Jews. All this seems to argue for the validity of the Matthean Nativity account. Could you clarify your position?
TimCallahan Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,131

11th June 2012, 11:08 AM	#315
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,480	Originally Posted by TimCallahan I, too, am a bit confused as to MG1962's stance. MG1962, you seem to have been arguing for some sort of validity, via astrological signs and planetary conjunctions, for the star of Bethlehem and the story of the visit of the Magi. However, you later said, if I understood you correctly, that you were not. Nevertheless, you also argued that, due to trade interests involving frankincense, the Parthians would be interested in a potential king of the Jews. All this seems to argue for the validity of the Matthean Nativity account. Could you clarify your position? I would appreciate some clarification too. Are we dealing with a closet Christian?
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.