Interesting discussion about religion and evolution

[Kenny]

You are just telling yourself stories again. Please give some examples. Do you remember about a year or two about the meteor strike and Sodom and Gomorrah? That was refuted. Do you remember about the "cursing tablet". That was refuted.

I'm not sure who is telling stories

Don't give me that "same evidence" nonsense. That has never worked out well for believers. The fact is that there are severe problems with many Bible tales. And not just in the Old Testament. The two nativity myths have a birth date ten years apart. f one reads them in parallel the differences become irreconcilable.

This sounds more like a personal viewpoint to me.

It is better to try to focus on the message of the Bible rather than trying to act as if it were infallible in any way at all.

This also is a personal viewpoint. Like two people looking at the same evidence and coming to a different conclusion or a blind man saying, as he touches a tail, "You are sooo out there to think that this trunk can breathe."

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not sure who is telling stories

That would be you.

This sounds more like a personal viewpoint to me.

No, it is recognized by most Bible scholars. But you don't follow Bible scholars, if you did not remember scholars want to know, they do not care that much about personal belief. You go to apologists. Apologists do not want to know. They only want to believe. I have gone over this many times. Wikipedia has the quick and bare bones version. But here is the TLDR version: In Luke the birth happens during the Census of Quirinius. It even names the man. This is a well dated event. It occurred when Herod's son who took over Judea after he died failed so badly that the Romans had to take over and it seems that they were preferred to Archelaus. They did not like that for taxation purposes (Hey! Luke got something right!) that they had to have a census, but that was still better than Archelaus. Mathew had the birth happen while Herod was still King. His kingdom was not part of the Roman Empire, it would not have been under a census. And Herod died about 4 BC. That is the generally agreed upon date. If one is really desperate one can push it to maybe 1 BC, but that is still two rulers and seven years in difference.

This also is a personal viewpoint. Like two people looking at the same evidence and coming to a different conclusion or a blind man saying, as he touches a tail, "You are sooo out there to think that this trunk can breathe."

Yes, that is a personal viewpoint. But at least one would not be clearly factually wrong all of the time.

 

[Kenny]

That would be you.

No, it is recognized by most Bible scholars. But you don't follow Bible scholars, if you did not remember scholars want to know, they do not care that much about personal belief. You go to apologists. Apologists do not want to know. They only want to believe. I have gone over this many times. Wikipedia has the quick and bare bones version. But here is the TLDR version: In Luke the birth happens during the Census of Quirinius. It even names the man. This is a well dated event. It occurred when Herod's son who took over Judea after he died failed so badly that the Romans had to take over and it seems that they were preferred to Archelaus. They did not like that for taxation purposes (Hey! Luke got something right!) that they had to have a census, but that was still better than Archelaus. Mathew had the birth happen while Herod was still King. His kingdom was not part of the Roman Empire, it would not have been under a census. And Herod died about 4 BC. That is the generally agreed upon date. If one is really desperate one can push it to maybe 1 BC, but that is still two rulers and seven years in difference.

Yes, that is a personal viewpoint. But at least one would not be clearly factually wrong all of the time.

LOL... talking about tales and story telling... you are getting real good at it. D

 

[Subduction Zone]

LOL... talking about tales and story telling... you are getting real good at it. D

Really? What part do you think is wrong? I do not have to make up false stories about those who I am debating against. Right now it looks as if that is all that you have.

 

[Brian2]

It is about the whole history of the conquest of Canaan. You have not acknowledged the corroborating archaeological and Egyptian writing that confirms the Stella evidence I referenced including numerous Egyptian forts, temples, and expensive residences built between the 1500-1200 BCE

Nobody is denying that Egypt was a conquering Kingdom and it's conquests included Canaan.
That does not mean that Egypt was always in Canaan building and fighting etc
Egypt was not there when Joshua was conquering Canaan and settling the Israelites there. I suppose it was still recovering from the devastation of the plagues.

Amarna Letters | Egyptian, Pharaohs, Diplomacy | Britannica

Amarna Letters, cache of clay tablets discovered at Tell el-Amarna in Egypt and dating to the reigns of kings Amenhotep III and Akhenaton of the 18th dynasty. The Amarna Letters provide invaluable insight into the nature of diplomatic relations among the great nations and petty states of the 14th

www.britannica.com

There was a lack or Egyptian presence in Canaan at around the time Joshua and the Israelites were there creating havoc in a place where Egypt was meant to taking care of it's various states in it's Kingdom.
BUT we are talking about the Stele, the Merneptah Stele, and that does not cover the period of 1500 to 1200 BC.

The date of Exodus does not concern me, because there remains no evidence for Moses, Exodus, and the invasion of Canaan by Joshua.

Thou I do not find any reference that David Rohl believes in evolution and his new chronology is not generally accepted. Nonetheless, it does not change the lack of evidence and the overwhelming evidence that Egypt invaded, conquered, and colonized Canaan not Joshua's army which did not exist,

Well I guess if that is your attitude to the dating of the Exodus and you accept only the 1200 date for Israel in Canaan (however it got there) then you will always say there is no evidence for the conquest,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, which is specific to the archaeology of 1400 and a bit later. When the complaints about Egyptian lack of presence were coming to Egypt from Canaan kingdoms and they were complaining about Habiru causing problems.

 

[Brian2]

The Merneptah Stele is a historical record of the invasion and colonization of Canaan over a period of 300 years confirmed by vast archaeological evidence and other Egyptian records. It is foolish to assume that the invasion and colonization took place all at once when the archaeological and Egyptian records demonstrate the war and colonization took place over 300 years. Egypt was still fighting various armies in the North over Canaan at the time just before the Stella was made actually loosing the battle for Canaan.

The Merneptah Stele, the Only Ancient Egyptian Document that Mentions Israel : History of Information

The Merneptah Stele, the Only Ancient Egyptian Document that Mentions Israel

www.historyofinformation.com

No the Stele covers a fairly short period of time and Canaan is mentioned only for a couple of lines.

 

[YoursTrue]

Differences are simply a product of evolution in response to changing environments over billions of years.

So you and other evolutionists say. To the best of my knowledge, being as uneducated as you say I am, maybe you know better -- Man is the only one/type/species-whatever that has invented writing. For one thing. Oh, and to the best my knowledge, things like splints and operations in case of a broken leg, etc. Carry on...

 

[Brian2]

It has nothing to do with skepticism and everything with what the bible actually says.




I'm not talking about "the creation". I'm talking about the flood story. The bible is quite clear that it talks about a global flood, not a local one.


I don't believe in any mythical biblical story.
I just don't feel the need to misrepresent what it actually says about this flood.

That's nice, you are fighting for the honour of the Word of God.
But the Bible can be translated and understood in such a way that it represents a large local flood.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Me either, but it makes sense to me that man is different from, let's say, gorillas or fish, in their desire and ability to heal themselves with things like splints, operations, also write history books. There is, in my mind, a vast difference between humans in general==assuming they are of reasonable mental capabilities--and chimpanzees or, as I say, fish.

The fact of the matter is that we are a LOT more similar to chimps and gorilla's then we are different.

Another fact is that if we even only look at the differences that YOU are pointing to... in reality they are a LOT smaller then you make them out to be.

You essentially make an argument from awe.
The fact of the matter is that the underlying difference between building a space telescope (what humans do) and an ant catching stick (what chimps do) isn't actually that big.

Also note that these high tech things are only a very recent development. Even civilization tech as a whole (smelting iron, primitive agriculture etc) is a very recent development in the great scheme of things.

If we look at the total span of homo sapiens' existence, the VAST majority of that time was spend as nomads, gathering fruits from trees and hunting with sticks and stones.

 

[shunyadragon]

Nobody is denying that Egypt was a conquering Kingdom and it's conquests included Canaan.
That does not mean that Egypt was always in Canaan building and fighting etc
Egypt was not there when Joshua was conquering Canaan and settling the Israelites there. I suppose it was still recovering from the devastation of the plagues.

You're ignoring the actual archaeological evidence of the presence of Egypt all over Canaan. There are forts, mansions, temples, and other structures all over Canaan dating from before 1500 BCE to about 1200 BCE.

Check the dates Egypt was there for more than 300 years over the period that Joshua was supposed to invade Canaan. No the devastation of the plagues(?) did not stop the conquest and colonization which started before the plagues.

Amarna Letters | Egyptian, Pharaohs, Diplomacy | Britannica

Amarna Letters, cache of clay tablets discovered at Tell el-Amarna in Egypt and dating to the reigns of kings Amenhotep III and Akhenaton of the 18th dynasty. The Amarna Letters provide invaluable insight into the nature of diplomatic relations among the great nations and petty states of the 14th

www.britannica.com

There was a lack or Egyptian presence in Canaan at around the time Joshua and the Israelites were there creating havoc in a place where Egypt was meant to taking care of it's various states in it's Kingdom.
BUT we are talking about the Stele, the Merneptah Stele, and that does not cover the period of 1500 to 1200 BC.

Excellent reference om the history of languages found in the tablets at this site, but it does not remotely address the issue of Egypt in Canaan between 1500 BCE and about 1200 BCE. The communication with Letters from the great powers (Babylonia, Assyria, Mitanni, and the Hittite court) and not Canaan. This reference describes an important archaeological site Akhetaton on the Nile River

The Merneptah Stele does cover that period as referenced because it began with the conquest of Libya

Well I guess if that is your attitude to the dating of the Exodus and you accept only the 1200 date for Israel in Canaan (however it got there) then you will always say there is no evidence for the conquest,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, which is specific to the archaeology of 1400 and a bit later. When the complaints about Egyptian lack of presence were coming to Egypt from Canaan kingdoms and they were complaining about Habiru causing problems.

The ~1400 BCE date is okay for the battle of Jericho when the Egyptians captured the city. That date is right in the middle of Egypt's Conquest of Canaan as referenced. Egypt's colonization of Canaan ended about 1200-1100 BCE when Israel arose and first became a kingdom and occupied much of Canaan territory. Yes, the evidence is overwhelming that the kingdom of Israel arose after Egypt retreated from Canaan about 1200-1000 BCE the archaeological evidence and the first primitive Hebrew written language evolved.

You still have not responded to the problem of Joshua's claim of the conquest of Canaan I cited, which conflicts with your statements and later references in the Torah. It remains there is absolutely no evidence of Joshua's army and the conquest of Canaan as described in the reference I provided,

Still waiting . . .

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So you and other evolutionists say

So the evidence says.

To the best of my knowledge, being as uneducated as you say I am, maybe you know better -- Man is the only one/type/species-whatever that has invented writing.

So?

Oh, and to the best my knowledge, things like splints and operations in case of a broken leg, etc. Carry on...

So?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That's nice, you are fighting for the honour of the Word of God.

Lol, no.
I'm just pointing out that you are misrepresenting what it says.
Likely you do this because you realize that you are fighting a losing battle unless you change the story.

But the Bible can be translated and understood in such a way that it represents a large local flood.

I disagree.

@SkepticThinker quoted a few passages to illustrate. I don't see how you can "re-interprete" those passages to mean something opposite to what they say.

 

[Kenny]

Really? What part do you think is wrong? I do not have to make up false stories about those who I am debating against. Right now it looks as if that is all that you have.

What part of all your tales is wrong? What part of "tales" do you not comprehend?

Hey... you even say there is no God. Not THAT is a TALL tale.

 

[Brian2]

"Not and authority, but" you curate your sources to support your biases and then speak with absolute, albeit unearned, certainty. As a result, you're one peer-reviewed study away from looking foolish. (been there - done that)

Be that as it may, you'll likely find the following 2016 article interesting (if you can find it):

Elusive Scrolls: Could Any Hebrew Literature Have Been Written Prior to the Eighth Century BCE?, by Matthieu Richelle, 2016​

Interesting article,,,,,,,,,,, what I read of it.

 

[Brian2]

Egyptian Steles and obelisks are often historical monuments of past achievements and religious monuments. As I said the documented history confirms the Stele and you have failed to repond to the evidence. Israel did not become a kingdom with writing, significant military and influence until after 1200=1000 BCE with the collapse of the Egyptian Canaanite colony.

As previously cited

Egypt’s Final Redoubt in Canaan


The fiery end of the last Egyptian colony

By ROGER ATWOOD

July/August 2017

(Image copyright © The Metropolitan Museum of Art/Art Resource, NY)
A fragment of a painted limestone relief dating to about 1400 B.C. from Thebes in Egypt depicts defeated Canaanites.


For three centuries, Egyptians ruled the land of Canaan. Armies of chariots and 10,000 foot soldiers under the pharaoh Thutmose III thundered through Gaza and defeated a coalition of Canaanite chiefdoms at Megiddo, in what is now northern Israel, in 1458 B.C. The Egyptians then built fortresses, mansions, and agricultural estates from Gaza to Galilee, taking Canaan’s finest products—copper from Dead Sea mines, cedar from Lebanon, olive oil and wine from the Mediterranean coast, along with untold numbers of slaves and concubines—and sending them overland and across the Mediterranean and Red Seas to Egypt to please its elites.

(© The Israel Museum, Jerusalem, Nachom Selpak)

(Courtesy Aaron Burke)
Wealthy Canaanites adopted many Egyptian customs and decorative motifs, such as clay coffins (top) dating to the 13th century B.C. from Deir el-Balah in Gaza and the Eye of Horus (above) such as this faience one found at Jaffa in Israel.
As with many colonial ventures before and since, military conquest led to a new cultural order in the occupied lands. Across Israel, archaeologists have found evidence that Canaanites took to Egyptian customs. They created items worthy of tombs on the Nile, including clay coffins modeled with human faces and burial goods such as faience necklaces and decorated pots. They also adopted Egyptian imagery such as sphinxes and scarabs. For the Egyptians, Canaan was a major trophy. Artists in Egypt carved and painted narratives on the stone walls of temples boasting about vanquished subjects and depicting Canaanite prisoners naked and bound at the wrists.

Yet Egypt’s presence in Canaan ended sooner than the pharaohs might have expected. With Canaan under assault from seaborne invaders and hit by drought so severe it caused food shortages, Egypt’s colonial rule began to crumble around 1200 B.C., starting in the north and gradually spreading south. Egypt did not fall alone. The eastern Mediterranean’s two other great powers of the day, the Hittites in central Turkey and the Mycenaeans in Greece, saw their capitals sacked and their governments fail. They all toppled in the pan-Mediterranean Late Bronze Age collapse of the twelfth century B.C. Egypt’s 2,000-year-old dynastic system survived, but it lost its trade ties throughout the Mediterranean and its valuable outposts in Canaan.

Does any of that show that Joshua's conquest did not happen?

 

[Brian2]

My sources are accurate and specific and do not support any biases.
This reference is not available to me. Need one that is available

"Elusive Scrolls: Could Any Hebrew Literature Have Been Written Prior to the Eighth Century B.C.E.?", Vetus Testamentum 66 (2016): 556-594

Two reasons lead many scholars today to think that the Israelites were not able to produce long, literary works during the 10th and 9th centuries BCE. First, there is a dearth of Hebrew inscriptions from that time; second, the Israelites did not have

www.academia.edu

 

[Brian2]

Belief in an alternative does not help your case without independent evidence The description in Genesis is clear and specific and supported by what the authors of the NT believed.

The Gilgamesh flood is support imo.
The NT authors also seem to be translated to reflect the translation of the Genesis account, but the Genesis account can be translated to read as a local flood, and the NT mention of the flood do not necessarily mean the whole globe imo.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Does any of that show that Joshua's conquest did not happen?

No. Nor does it falsify claims concerning Area 51. You continue to demonstrate that these discussions with you are hopeless.​

 

[Brian2]

Because the story in the Bible is clearly talking about a global flood.

Genesis 6:9-9:17​

​

9 This is the account of Noah and his family.
Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God. 10 Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth.
11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. 14 So make yourself an ark of cypress[a] wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. 15 This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high.[b] 16 Make a roof for it, leaving below the roof an opening one cubit[c] high all around.[d] Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. 17 I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish. 18 But I will establish my covenant with you, and you will enter the ark—you and your sons and your wife and your sons’ wives with you. 19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. 20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. 21 You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them.”
22 Noah did everything just as God commanded him.
7 The Lord then said to Noah, “Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation. 2 Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, 3 and also seven pairs of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. 4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.”
5 And Noah did all that the Lord commanded him.



That's a description of a global flood, not a local flood.

Yes as translated it is a global flood.

 

[Brian2]

Reread the reference to the Merneptah Stele carefully. It is a historical record covering the conquests beginning with Libya and then describing the Conquest of Canaan and Israel.

Like many monuments in history, it was bragging about its history of conquests. Unfortunately, it was put up at a time when Egypt was retreating from Canaan, and Israel was becoming a Kingdom.

Looks like it is all about Mernepthah and his victories to me. Mernepthah bragging about his conquests, not about the conquests of Egypt over 300 years in Canaan. You need your glasses.