Is there any religious argument that actually stands when scrutinized with reason?

[outhouse]

Dever said they are probably historical memories.

This shows dishonesty or a lack of comprehension

Because he does not say that


reflect some historical memories of people and places, but the 'larger than life' portraits of the Bible are unrealistic and contradicted by the archaeological evidence

 

[outhouse]

The overwhelming modern scholarly consensus is, according to William Dever, that Moses is a figure of myth, not of history.[25]

Try reading in context

 

[Theunis]

Your arguing just to argue.


Its obvious desperation because your getting shut down hard for every pseudohistorical thing you attempt to posit in this whole forum.

You claimed I posted something in error, and you were factually wrong. Just as you have been with almost everything you write here.

And regardless of what you say Mr Dever did say this.

The overwhelming modern scholarly consensus is, according to William Dever, that Moses is a figure of myth, not of history.[25]

#25 is part of the first one

The Biblical Archaeologist, American Schools of Oriental Research, Scholars Press, Vol. 56, No 1, 2 March 1993 pp.25-35, p.33:'the overwhelming scholarly consensus today is that Moses is a mythical figure.'

Dear me try reading what he actually said. The fact of the matter is you cannot face facts even when as per your foregoing paragraph. you twist it to say that is what Dever said ! No it say according to consensus The link to Dever refers to other possibilities.

Cheers for now - the time difference between where I am is - Washington 5 hours; Seattle 10 hours.

 

[Theunis]

This shows dishonesty or a lack of comprehension

Because he does not say that


reflect some historical memories of people and places, but the 'larger than life' portraits of the Bible are unrealistic and contradicted by the archaeological evidence

Dear Lord now you are resorting to bald faced lies.
"reflect some historical memories of people and places,"

 

[outhouse]

Dear Lord now you are resorting to bald faced lies.
"reflect some historical memories of people and places,"

You said probably NOT reflect


but the 'larger than life' portraits of the Bible are unrealistic and contradicted by the archaeological evidence


The overwhelming modern scholarly consensus is, according to William Dever, that Moses is a figure of myth, not of history.[25]

Try reading in context

 

[outhouse]

And its is obvious neither statement contradicts each other in any way.

 

[Shad]

I did not say what you are now putting in my mouth. I quoted from the article.
Dever said they are probably historical memories.

He does not consider the biblical figures as true. He believes these people are figures constructed from memories of other figures. There is a massive difference.Think of Robinhood stories. There is a historical basis for it. There was a King John, King Richard, a Sheriff of Nottingham. There could even be one or more figures used as a basis for Robin, if there are I am not aware of any specifics. However having basis in history does not mean the figure as depicted in the stories reflect an accurate depiction of the figures in history. Especially King John as he became one of the most hated English monarchs later in history.

 

[muhammad_isa]

The overwhelming modern scholarly consensus is, according to William Dever, that Moses is a figure of myth, not of history.[25]

Try reading in context...

I have no argument with that. I don't think that anybody with certainty can say how long ago Moses, peace be with him, lived. The further one goes back, the more difficult it becomes to find historical evidence.

We already discussed the meaning of 'mythology'. Our conclusion is that it doesn't mean that it has to be a fabrication.

ALL IT MEANS IS THAT THERE IS LITTLE HISTORIC EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE BIBLICAL STORY.

So what!

 

[outhouse]

So what!

We know it was a literary creation without any doubt.

And when islam plagiarized/copied this mythology, they did not know in the future we would possess the knowledge to catch them red handed.

We know with certainty the biblical events did no take place.

We know with certainty to the point it is not disputed with any credibility, that the origins of Israelites were for the most part Canaanite in nature.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

The universe exists in 4-d space.
You can move up and down in a direction which is not at first obvious.

 

[muhammad_isa]

And when islam plagiarized/copied this mythology, they did not know in the future we would possess the knowledge to catch them red handed.

What tosh!

We know with certainty the biblical events did no take place.

Ditto! You believe that they did not take place. You do not have any evidence to prove categorically that they didn't. It is impossible! Do you know everything that happened in the last million years? Are you some kind of superman?

We know with certainty to the point it is not disputed with any credibility, that the origins of Israelites were for the most part Canaanite in nature.

It's statements like that which show how conceited you are. While billions of people think that the Abrahamic God exists, you claim that they are all ignorant dreamers .. with no credibility.

How sad..

 

[outhouse]

You believe that they did not take place.

We know they did not place, with certainty we know they were literary creations.

It is obvious you do not understand the title of this thread


Is there any religious argument that actually stands when scrutinized with reason?

What you posit lacks all this.

While billions of people think that the Abrahamic God exists,

Billions of people are historically uneducated.

 

[Thief]

Where did this come from?

this thread....go back and then try to stay with us.....

 

[Theunis]

What tosh!



Ditto! You believe that they did not take place. You do not have any evidence to prove categorically that they didn't. It is impossible! Do you know everything that happened in the last million years? Are you some kind of superman?



It's statements like that which show how conceited you are. While billions of people think that the Abrahamic God exists, you claim that they are all ignorant dreamers .. with no credibility.

How sad..

muhammad_isa, I fully agree with you.
The question is why should we believe outsiders, and not the Jewish people who know their history better than anyone else.
In this regard please see the following link. They even say when Moses was born and who his parents were !

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/73398/jewish/Moses.htm

 

[Theunis]

We know it was a literary creation without any doubt.

And when islam plagiarized/copied this mythology, they did not know in the future we would possess the knowledge to catch them red handed.

We know with certainty the biblical events did no take place.

We know with certainty to the point it is not disputed with any credibility, that the origins of Israelites were for the most part Canaanite in nature.

When a man was commissioned to investigate the history of and the areas surrounding Austin, Texas, he could not find anything factual older than two-hundred years.
Here you come and say we know with certainty about things that may or may not have happened thousands of years/millenia ago. Surely you must be a superman or possess a time machine.

We is all encompassing but I can assure you this is not factual for I and many others definitely are not included in your we !

 

[Theunis]

He does not consider the biblical figures as true. He believes these people are figures constructed from memories of other figures. There is a massive difference.Think of Robinhood stories. There is a historical basis for it. There was a King John, King Richard, a Sheriff of Nottingham. There could even be one or more figures used as a basis for Robin, if there are I am not aware of any specifics. However having basis in history does not mean the figure as depicted in the stories reflect an accurate depiction of the figures in history. Especially King John as he became one of the most hated English monarchs later in history.

He can believe whatever he wishes but a belief only remains a belief and as he can only guess and use conjecture without concrete proof what he believes is not a proven fact. (yet for him it could be a case of - as you believe so it will be unto you. i.e to him it becomes a fact)

 

[leibowde84]

this thread....go back and then try to stay with us.....

You said this, which has nothing to do with this thread, as no one claimed anything about required knowledge for "leaving this life". It is not at issue in this thread, as we are discussing the meaning of the terms in question (reason/wisdom).

you can't experience all that you need for leaving this life.
you have to think about it.
use your head.....

It seems as though you are trying to move this conversation away from rational discourse and into some realm of prosteltyzing.

 

[Thief]

You said this, which has nothing to do with this thread, as no one claimed anything about required knowledge for "leaving this life". It is not at issue in this thread, as we are discussing the meaning of the terms in question (reason/wisdom).
It seems as though you are trying to move this conversation away from rational discourse and into some realm of prosteltyzing.

ANY religious argument is up for grabs.....note the title
try to stay with us....

 

[outhouse]

Jewish people who know their history better than anyone else

So only the biased should dictate history

 

[outhouse]

Surely you must be a superman or possess a time machine

You did not know these time machines are everywhere.

We call them universities, and they have books and professors