Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-10-2016, 01:05 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
One of the problems with biblical archaeology is that many archaeologists have gone to Israel and the surround areas with a bible in one hand and a shovel in the other hell bent on proving that the bible was correct. And prior to about 30 to 40 years ago churches sponsored many of these archaeologists so, of course, they're going to prove the bible is correct no matter what. It's only been in more recent times that archaeologists have looked at their findings with a more unbiased eye.

Also, many findings by Christian archaeologists have not been peer-reviewed and some "archaeologists" aren't even actual accredited, university trained archaeologists. Ron Wyatt is a good example of this. He was a total con man but christians STILL claim he found Noah's ark and chariot wheels on the bottom of the Red Sea.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like dancefortwo's post
28-10-2016, 01:11 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
(28-10-2016 01:05 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  ...chariot wheels on the bottom of the Red Sea.

That was always one of my favorite "proofs" that the bible was true. If you found some ancient chariot wheels at the bottom of a body of water it would be obvious that the ONLY way they could have gotten there is when the sea was parted magically. Nothing ever falls off boats and boats never sink and water currents never move things underwater... Facepalm

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2016, 01:12 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Uuuuuum, no. Not even close.

Firstly, you need to be more clear. "Texts and manuscripts" regarding what? What sources outside the bible?

Secondly, you are making a claim. You need to cite sources and provide evidence to support that claim. Name some texts and manuscripts and evidence and link to your sources.

Thirdly, none of the miraculous or supernatural aspects of the bible have been proven. Most have been disproven.
I mean oldest copies of the Bible(not as a whole). Its an indication these texts would have had considerable influence at the time.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  When a theist claims to believe that a person rose from the dead and performed miracles, their understanding of science needs, MUST, be questioned.
Actually, I once met a professor from Yale who was a firm believer!

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  There is NO evidence to support any of the miracles or supernatural aspects of the bible. NONE.
Of course there isn't any evidence for supernatural feats, if there were we wouldn't be having this conversation.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Are you aware that the books in the bible were written by different (mostly) unknown authors over hundreds of years?

Are you aware that there are multiple versions of the bible in use by different churches?

What is your opinion on the apocryphal books of the bible?

What about the forged gospels and apostolic letters?
Yes, Yes and the apocryphal books do not contain anything that contradicts the bible in any major way as far as I know and forged gospels and apostolic letters I have never heard about officially(Which makes me wonder about its credibility).

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(28-10-2016 08:00 AM)underdogFTW Wrote:  I am not saying that since some of it is true, all of it must be..

Actually, you are saying that.
No, I am not. Please tell me how I am doing that.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  We have an extensive collection of books, movies and other media, documenting the existence of Spiderman. Since this evidence contains accurate information (New York, the United States, etc. all exist) will people worship Spiderman in 2000 years?
Probably not, but then I could ask what made jesus so special..

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  No. The Dead Sea Scrolls are Jewish/Hebrew. They are not Christian and contain no references to Christian theology. Any claims to a Christian connection have either been proven false or remain unproven.
I may be wrong here. But I thought it contained some verses from the old testament that have made it into the bible we know.( I think the book of Isiah)

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Also, don't generalize. Many of us here are more than willing to prove you wrong about archaeology and the bible.
I apologize. I speak from personal experiences.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  As a matter of fact, you are pointing fingers. Doing something, then denying the fact does not erase the fact that you did the thing in the first place.
I apologize again. Allow me to rephrase, It is not my intention to point fingers.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Is there any evidence of presence?

Please provide evidence of that unicorns do not exist.
Please provide evidence that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a god.
etc.
etc.
The problem here is that neither of us can prove the other one wrong. A stalemate still means you have failed to win.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Question: Why would you ask that to some atheists on the internet, instead of doing the actual research yourself? Why believe us?
Had to start somewhere. I have heard the theist side of the story. Its only fair I hear both sides. Also, why do you think I will just take your word for it? I just wanted to hear your opinion.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  "Legally" a Christian?
Yes, is that not a thing in your country?

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  If you are willing to base your beliefs on what a bunch of random people on the internet tell you, then you are making a very big mistake.

Verify things. Investigate for yourself. Don't take things at face value.

For example: You claimed the Dead Sea Scrolls supported Christianity. I denied that. Prove me wrong. Prove yourself right.
You are making a lot of assumptions about me here buddy. If I wanted to base my beliefs on what a bunch of random people said, I'd goto church. Atleast that way it would be socially beneficial to me! My very presence on this site should hint at my lack of belief!


(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Will you remain civil when your views are questioned and debunked, I wonder?
Hey, as long as I don't ask you to have incestuous relations with your immediate family members, I'm gold! Tongue

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Can you prove Christianity from an archeological point of view?
I can't. But I don't think no one can.

(28-10-2016 08:56 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Read Ehrman's "How Jesus Became God, the *exaltation* of a Jewish preacher from Gallile"
I will, thanks for the info.

(28-10-2016 09:29 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Absence of evidence can be evidence of absence if evidence would be expected. If you tell me you own a dog but I go to your house and see no dog, no dog food, no bedding, and nothing to indicate that you do have a dog then that's reason to not believe you.
It could be that the dog is with my sister, so I gave her the dog food and the bedding. I get your point , but it still cannot be called evidence untill it is refutable in all scenarios. It does give you a damn good reason not to believe though..

(28-10-2016 11:55 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Also, as others have pointed out, I'd like to ask why you come here to ask atheists about it, instead of simply doing the research and learning about the actual history of the Israelite/Jewish peoples. If your intentions are honest, and you really want to know, we're not the people to whom you should be turning for such information.

(28-10-2016 11:55 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Being an atheist just means we don't accept your religion's claims as legitimate. It's not our job to learn your scriptures and the pseudo-history it claims, in order to refute every part of it, when we can clearly see that the overall arc of the story is bogus. You do the same thing, if you think about it, with the Hindu scriptures and claims to historical information. Imagine if Hindus popped onto a Christian forum and asked why you don't accept the Historical Truth contained in the Hindu scriptures like the Bahagavad Gita and the Vedas.

Firstly, I don't get to talk to atheists. I am curious to hear what you have to say. But if I read a book, its going to be compelling. A good writer can make anything compelling! Besides, finding an unbiased book is not easy. You realize that bias can be on both sides, right?
Secondly, anything specific can be found instantly on the internet. Your vague answers help me judge your version, just like I judge the theist's version.
People seem to think, their comment is going to shape my beliefs...
Calm down people...just wanted to hear your opinions..

I never implied it was your job to do anything, those with the time and/or patience may reply. Just like if Hindus popped up on Christian message boards, not everyone is expected to reply, anybody with the necessary knowledge and the time to spare may reply if they want to. As long as the Hindu is not calling them out or trolling, why shouldn't he be allowed to have a discussion?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-10-2016, 01:28 PM (This post was last modified: 28-10-2016 01:32 PM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  Firstly, I don't get to talk to atheists. I am curious to hear what you have to say. But if I read a book, its going to be compelling. A good writer can make anything compelling! Besides, finding an unbiased book is not easy. You realize that bias can be on both sides, right?
Secondly, anything specific can be found instantly on the internet. Your vague answers help me judge your version, just like I judge the theist's version.
People seem to think, their comment is going to shape my beliefs...
Calm down people...just wanted to hear your opinions..

I never implied it was your job to do anything, those with the time and/or patience may reply. Just like if Hindus popped up on Christian message boards, not everyone is expected to reply, anybody with the necessary knowledge and the time to spare may reply if they want to. As long as the Hindu is not calling them out or trolling, why shouldn't he be allowed to have a discussion?

There is no "both sides", though. Everyone may have some personal bias, but in order to create a "both sides" scenario, you have to assume that Christians will automatically try to support the fundamentalist/literalist version (which we know that the evangelical types have a history of doing) and that everyone else will be trying to disprove the Bible's claims. That's just not so. Most people in those fields have no agenda except to discover what actually happened. I was simply trying to warn you about the plethora of fundamentalist "researchers" who try to muddy the waters with their biased research, which they do their best to feature prominently in online searches, while the real researchers are more obscure and take more work to find.

We love discussion. My question was why did you want to come ask atheists about it in the first place? We're always glad to have people who genuinely want to know what we think (rather than assuming, as is too often the case).

However, it is usually the case that when a Christian comes here and asks the things you're asking, what they're really saying is that they think unless an atheist has all the knowledge of an evolutionary biologist, an astrophysicist, an archaeologist, a Biblical scholar, and an historian, in order to answer the questions asked of us "to refute", then we shouldn't be atheists. It comes from the assumption of all Believers (but especially Christians, in our experience) that their version is the correct, default answer, and that unless it is specifically refuted at every point by every atheist then we should adopt The Truth™. Luckily, there are several of us here (myself included) who greatly enjoy fielding such questions. The reason we asked you why you asked us is because of the common motivation of people who go atheist sites to ask the members such questions-- it's not usually about wanting to actually know what we think and have a real discussion, but for the purpose of telling us how stupid we are, essentially, and getting mad at us when we point out that the assumptions and conclusions being posted are counterfactual.

Finally, the only person who can shape your opinions is you. All we can do for you, as we do for one another, is to point out when the information upon which you are relying comes from poor sources and/or to show you that your premises and/or methodology of thinking/reasoning are flawed.

And since I have volunteered (calmly) to answer the questions you brought: I am still not sure what your claim actually is. What parts of the Bible do you think we should be refuting? Please be more specific in your claims, if you want to have that discussion. I welcome it, and am glad you're here. You seem much more intellectually honest than most of the Christians we get, here, which will make a good discussion much more likely. Frankly, I'm exhausted from the dishonest ones. If you look at posts over the last couple of weeks, I've had to tell WAY WAY WAY too many people that "Lying for Jesus™ is still lying."

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
28-10-2016, 01:32 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
It might help that you don't have to take on all comers. You can request a discussion of the issues with one individual who agrees to be your adversary. It won't be me, as I find religion so silly that I can't keep a straight face.

You can do that here-

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...oxing-Ring

HTH
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fireball's post
28-10-2016, 01:39 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  
(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  When a theist claims to believe that a person rose from the dead and performed miracles, their understanding of science needs, MUST, be questioned.
Actually, I once met a professor from Yale who was a firm believer!

That doesn't mean that his understanding of science should not be questioned. It may be that he is compartmentalizing. Many intelligent, educated theists seem to have one set of criteria for mundane beliefs and no apparent criteria for supernatural beliefs. "Faith" is not a reasonable criterion.

Quote:Of course there isn't any evidence for supernatural feats, if there were we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The question why we are having it when there is no evidence that they have ever occurred. Why would you believe something without any evidence? It's like having a serious discussion about the properties of gremlins.

Quote:Yes, Yes and the apocryphal books do not contain anything that contradicts the bible in any major way as far as I know and forged gospels and apostolic letters I have never heard about officially(Which makes me wonder about its credibility).

Much of what is in the accepted bible is recognized as forgeries even by Christian scholars. "Paul" did not write all the letters attributed to him. The same is true for parts of Acts. We do not know who wrote the 4 gospels.

Bart Ehrman has some decent stuff on this, as does Richard Carrier and Richard Friedman.

Quote:
(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  No. The Dead Sea Scrolls are Jewish/Hebrew. They are not Christian and contain no references to Christian theology. Any claims to a Christian connection have either been proven false or remain unproven.
I may be wrong here. But I thought it contained some verses from the old testament that have made it into the bible we know.( I think the book of Isiah)

That's what he said. They are parts of the Jewish Torah/Tanakh which was later badly translated into the Christian Old Testament. It isn't that Christians didn't adopt much of it but that when they were written there were no Christians.


Quote:The problem here is that neither of us can prove the other one wrong. A stalemate still means you have failed to win.

The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Not being able to prove that no god exists is not reason to believe that one does.


Quote:
(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Can you prove Christianity from an archeological point of view?
I can't. But I don't think no one can.

The time to believe it is when somebody does. I don't see how archaeology could ever prove anything supernatural happened but if it does then that will be taken into the evaluation process.

Quote:
(28-10-2016 09:29 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Absence of evidence can be evidence of absence if evidence would be expected. If you tell me you own a dog but I go to your house and see no dog, no dog food, no bedding, and nothing to indicate that you do have a dog then that's reason to not believe you.
It could be that the dog is with my sister, so I gave her the dog food and the bedding. I get your point , but it still cannot be called evidence untill it is refutable in all scenarios. It does give you a damn good reason not to believe though..

That's the point. The dog is a simple example that could be explained for one instance but if I check randomly for months and never see evidence then that absence of evidence builds up to evidence of absence. it may not be conclusive but it moves the needle further towards not believing the claim. After thousands of years worth of arguments for the existence of a god nobody has ever produced anything worthwhile.

Quote:Calm down people...just wanted to hear your opinions..

We are calm (go read one of theBorg's threads for comparison Big Grin)
Realize that we get the same arguments over and over so it is sometimes a bit frustrating. Also, most of us are fairly passionate about disliking what religion is doing in the world so it can be a touchy subject.

If you aren't getting called names then the passion is being directed at the topic, not you personally. One thing that's fairly common with atheists is the tendency to not show respect for what they see as bad ideas whereas theists are typically indoctrinated to think that all opinions deserve respect. They don't.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like unfogged's post
28-10-2016, 01:46 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  I mean oldest copies of the Bible(not as a whole). Its an indication these texts would have had considerable influence at the time.

The Torah of Moses was introduced by Ezra the Prophet in a Fall Festival, as recounted in Nehemiah. The year is known. It had never been seen before. "Old" in NO WAY means "influential". The oldest texts have multiple sources (Documentary Hypothesis .... look that up). The Bible was NEVER the cultural center of Hebrew life and culture, (until well after the Exile). It wasn't even assembled until during the Exile.

It's not about "proving or winning". No one can prove anything to a theist ... OR faith would be unnecessary. It's a fools errand. On the other hand, scholars KNOW a lot, which Fundamentalists either know nothing about, or pretend they don't know.

Quote:Actually, I once met a professor from Yale who was a firm believer!

Intelligence and religious belief are not incompatible. Google "compartmentalization".


Quote:Yes, Yes and the apocryphal books do not contain anything that contradicts the bible in any major way as far as I know and forged gospels and apostolic letters I have never heard about officially(Which makes me wonder about its credibility).

Then you've never read the Gospels of Thomas, or Judas, or Mary Magdalene.

Quote:I may be wrong here. But I thought it contained some verses from the old testament that have made it into the bible we know.( I think the book of Isiah

They were quoting the Books of Isaiah. It proves nothing except that the Isaiah texts were known to them.

Also "Who Wrote the Bible" ... Dr. Richard Elliott Friedmann .... good book. (He may be Jewish, I'm not sure). And if you're REALLY nerdy, "How the Bible became a Book, the Textualization of Ancient Israel" .. Dr. William Schneidewind

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
28-10-2016, 01:56 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  I mean oldest copies of the Bible(not as a whole). Its an indication these texts would have had considerable influence at the time.

To clarify: "The bible" means the entire collection, as understood in modern times. In ancient times there was no "bible". There were books from the Jewish religion, like the Torah. Aliza can tell you more about those.

The Jewish texts are important historically and culturally, as Aliza noted. But they do not offer support for the Christian religion.


(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  Actually, I once met a professor from Yale who was a firm believer!

This is not relevant. Highly educated people are believers. Francis Collins, the physician-geneticist, is devoutly religious.

I don't know how someone can reconcile the dichotomy between faith and science.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  Yes, Yes and the apocryphal books do not contain anything that contradicts the bible in any major way as far as I know and forged gospels and apostolic letters I have never heard about officially(Which makes me wonder about its credibility).

Biblical scholars are certain that some of the apostolic letters are forged.

The apocryphal books certainly contradict the bible. Have you heard of the Gospel of Judas? The Infantile Gospel? To put it bluntly, there was some weird shit going on.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  No, I am not. Please tell me how I am doing that.

Because archeology and other sciences have disproved many parts of the bible, such as Exodus, Genesis and the Flood. By relying on the parts that haven't been debunked, yet, you are assuming that if part is true, then all is true.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  Probably not, but then I could ask what made jesus so special..

Saul of Tarsus and Emperor Constantine.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  I may be wrong here. But I thought it contained some verses from the old testament that have made it into the bible we know.( I think the book of Isiah)

Oh no, you are correct that the Dead Sea Scrolls do contain many books of the Old Testament. But the OT is not Christianity. It is Jewish/Hebrew.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  I apologize. I speak from personal experiences.

I apologize as well.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  The problem here is that neither of us can prove the other one wrong. A stalemate still means you have failed to win.

My point was not to win. My point was simply that you have to start out disbelieving something, until it is proven to be true. If you believe claims without proof or evidence then you're going to run into problems.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  Had to start somewhere. I have heard the theist side of the story. Its only fair I hear both sides. Also, why do you think I will just take your word for it? I just wanted to hear your opinion.

It was the phrasing you were using and the statement that you were starting here. I was simply trying to encourage you to continue researching after you talked with us.


(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  
(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  "Legally" a Christian?
Yes, is that not a thing in your country?

I'm in the US. I don't think I've ever heard it phrased like that before. Legally implies formality and while you can formally be a Christian, anyone can call themselves one. Like I said, the phrasing struck me and I wasn't sure if you were meaning something else.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  You are making a lot of assumptions about me here buddy. If I wanted to base my beliefs on what a bunch of random people said, I'd goto church. Atleast that way it would be socially beneficial to me! My very presence on this site should hint at my lack of belief!

No. I am basing my impression on your post. You indicated that you had just started asking questions and that this site was one of the first stops. You indicated uncertainty in your beliefs but that you had at least started on the side of theism. And there are believers on this site, both traditional and nontraditional.

(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  
(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Will you remain civil when your views are questioned and debunked, I wonder?
Hey, as long as I don't ask you to have incestuous relations with your immediate family members, I'm gold! Tongue

So far so good.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Fatbaldhobbit's post
28-10-2016, 02:01 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
(28-10-2016 01:12 PM)underdogFTW Wrote:  
(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Uuuuuum, no. Not even close.

Firstly, you need to be more clear. "Texts and manuscripts" regarding what? What sources outside the bible?

Secondly, you are making a claim. You need to cite sources and provide evidence to support that claim. Name some texts and manuscripts and evidence and link to your sources.

Thirdly, none of the miraculous or supernatural aspects of the bible have been proven. Most have been disproven.
I mean oldest copies of the Bible(not as a whole). Its an indication these texts would have had considerable influence at the time.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  When a theist claims to believe that a person rose from the dead and performed miracles, their understanding of science needs, MUST, be questioned.
Actually, I once met a professor from Yale who was a firm believer!

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  There is NO evidence to support any of the miracles or supernatural aspects of the bible. NONE.
Of course there isn't any evidence for supernatural feats, if there were we wouldn't be having this conversation.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Are you aware that the books in the bible were written by different (mostly) unknown authors over hundreds of years?

Are you aware that there are multiple versions of the bible in use by different churches?

What is your opinion on the apocryphal books of the bible?

What about the forged gospels and apostolic letters?
Yes, Yes and the apocryphal books do not contain anything that contradicts the bible in any major way as far as I know and forged gospels and apostolic letters I have never heard about officially(Which makes me wonder about its credibility).

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Actually, you are saying that.
No, I am not. Please tell me how I am doing that.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  We have an extensive collection of books, movies and other media, documenting the existence of Spiderman. Since this evidence contains accurate information (New York, the United States, etc. all exist) will people worship Spiderman in 2000 years?
Probably not, but then I could ask what made jesus so special..

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  No. The Dead Sea Scrolls are Jewish/Hebrew. They are not Christian and contain no references to Christian theology. Any claims to a Christian connection have either been proven false or remain unproven.
I may be wrong here. But I thought it contained some verses from the old testament that have made it into the bible we know.( I think the book of Isiah)

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Also, don't generalize. Many of us here are more than willing to prove you wrong about archaeology and the bible.
I apologize. I speak from personal experiences.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  As a matter of fact, you are pointing fingers. Doing something, then denying the fact does not erase the fact that you did the thing in the first place.
I apologize again. Allow me to rephrase, It is not my intention to point fingers.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Is there any evidence of presence?

Please provide evidence of that unicorns do not exist.
Please provide evidence that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a god.
etc.
etc.
The problem here is that neither of us can prove the other one wrong. A stalemate still means you have failed to win.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Question: Why would you ask that to some atheists on the internet, instead of doing the actual research yourself? Why believe us?
Had to start somewhere. I have heard the theist side of the story. Its only fair I hear both sides. Also, why do you think I will just take your word for it? I just wanted to hear your opinion.

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  "Legally" a Christian?
Yes, is that not a thing in your country?

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  If you are willing to base your beliefs on what a bunch of random people on the internet tell you, then you are making a very big mistake.

Verify things. Investigate for yourself. Don't take things at face value.

For example: You claimed the Dead Sea Scrolls supported Christianity. I denied that. Prove me wrong. Prove yourself right.
You are making a lot of assumptions about me here buddy. If I wanted to base my beliefs on what a bunch of random people said, I'd goto church. Atleast that way it would be socially beneficial to me! My very presence on this site should hint at my lack of belief!


(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Will you remain civil when your views are questioned and debunked, I wonder?
Hey, as long as I don't ask you to have incestuous relations with your immediate family members, I'm gold! Tongue

(28-10-2016 09:27 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Can you prove Christianity from an archeological point of view?
I can't. But I don't think no one can.

(28-10-2016 08:56 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Read Ehrman's "How Jesus Became God, the *exaltation* of a Jewish preacher from Gallile"
I will, thanks for the info.

(28-10-2016 09:29 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Absence of evidence can be evidence of absence if evidence would be expected. If you tell me you own a dog but I go to your house and see no dog, no dog food, no bedding, and nothing to indicate that you do have a dog then that's reason to not believe you.
It could be that the dog is with my sister, so I gave her the dog food and the bedding. I get your point , but it still cannot be called evidence untill it is refutable in all scenarios. It does give you a damn good reason not to believe though..

(28-10-2016 11:55 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Also, as others have pointed out, I'd like to ask why you come here to ask atheists about it, instead of simply doing the research and learning about the actual history of the Israelite/Jewish peoples. If your intentions are honest, and you really want to know, we're not the people to whom you should be turning for such information.

(28-10-2016 11:55 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Being an atheist just means we don't accept your religion's claims as legitimate. It's not our job to learn your scriptures and the pseudo-history it claims, in order to refute every part of it, when we can clearly see that the overall arc of the story is bogus. You do the same thing, if you think about it, with the Hindu scriptures and claims to historical information. Imagine if Hindus popped onto a Christian forum and asked why you don't accept the Historical Truth contained in the Hindu scriptures like the Bahagavad Gita and the Vedas.

Firstly, I don't get to talk to atheists. I am curious to hear what you have to say. But if I read a book, its going to be compelling. A good writer can make anything compelling! Besides, finding an unbiased book is not easy. You realize that bias can be on both sides, right?
Secondly, anything specific can be found instantly on the internet. Your vague answers help me judge your version, just like I judge the theist's version.
People seem to think, their comment is going to shape my beliefs...
Calm down people...just wanted to hear your opinions..

I never implied it was your job to do anything, those with the time and/or patience may reply. Just like if Hindus popped up on Christian message boards, not everyone is expected to reply, anybody with the necessary knowledge and the time to spare may reply if they want to. As long as the Hindu is not calling them out or trolling, why shouldn't he be allowed to have a discussion?

Nothing made Jesus special (if he existed at all). There were a lot of people running around during this time period, claiming to perform magical feats and claiming to be the messiah. Check out this article by Richard Carrier.

http://infidels.org/library/modern/richa...kooks.html
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like jennybee's post
28-10-2016, 02:24 PM
RE: Arguments against Biblio-archaeological findings
(28-10-2016 01:11 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(28-10-2016 01:05 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  ...chariot wheels on the bottom of the Red Sea.

That was always one of my favorite "proofs" that the bible was true. If you found some ancient chariot wheels at the bottom of a body of water it would be obvious that the ONLY way they could have gotten there is when the sea was parted magically. Nothing ever falls off boats and boats never sink and water currents never move things underwater... Facepalm

Oh, don't get me started on the chariot wheel crap.



.........Ooops, too late.

First of all, the Red Sea has thousands of sunken ships and boats along with bicycles, motorcycles and there's even part of a train down there. Someone came across a baby pram during a dive. It's a destination for sunken deep sea exploration because it's littered with 6000 years worth of stuff along the trade routes. So Ron Wyatt finds what he thinks are chariot wheels. He takes some photos:

[Image: 1133a1b7066ba8eb6c7ab202680670c5.jpg]

He has no other evidence except these photos. He doesn't have any other archaeologist look at the dive sight or confirm anything further. No tests were taken.....oh no. He simply emerges and announces to the world that he's found Egyptian chariot wheels and christians everywhere jump for joy.

There's a slight problem. One of the wheels was a ship valve from the 20th century.

[Image: stock-photo-steam-valves-from-an-old-shi...586789.jpg]

The other problem is that Egyptians never made their chariot wheels out of metal. They were made out of wood which would have rotted after several decades in the water. Metal wheels would sink in the Egyptian sand and the horse would actually be dragging the wheel. It does not turn at all. They DID put a thin coating of gold leaf on the outside wheel of the pharaohs but it was simply for decoration and probably made it look metal to the passerby but the wheel itself was wood.






Even though this whole Ron Wyatt thing has been exposed as nonsense and fraudulent christians still bring it up when talking about biblical archaeology and there's no way to dissuade them of this idiocy.

Ok. Rant over.

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like dancefortwo's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: