Destroy a faith in one sentence
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-11-2014, 04:12 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 04:06 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(02-11-2014 04:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  Read the fucking references, you dolt.

Im NOT clicking links if you cant provide quotes... and telling me whether or not you believe Alexander LIVED as a REAL historical figure or not, has nothing to do with any references... DO you believe he existed, yes or no?

The evidence is clear that he did.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 04:27 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 04:09 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(02-11-2014 03:50 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  So you say... Arrian wrote more than 500 years AFTER Alexander...

Bro, do you even math? Arrian died ~160 CE. Alexander died ~323 BCE. By no possible arithmetic is that "more than 500".
(you furthermore accept Alexander's existence implicitly in that very sentence; you really aren't trying, are you?)

Anyway, I note that now you're accepting a lifetime date for Arrian, instead of the manuscript date you insisted on earlier in this very thread.

(02-11-2014 03:50 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  And only a few fragments exist. Show me one mentioning alexander specifically in the original manuscript fragments.

You furthermore concede the existence of fragments.

See, among many competent sources, Heckel's The Conquests of Alexander the Great, or even better, Hammond's Sources for Alexander the Great: An Analysis of Plutarch's 'Life' and Arrian's 'Anabasis Alexandrou'. Both refer explicitly to surviving fragments and excerpts of contemporaneous writings to Alexander himself (including Ptolemy, Aristobulus, Callisthenes, Cleitarchus, Nearchus, and more).

But why do I suspect that this is lost on you? You evidently have no interest whatsoever in either proper methods or even the remotest degree of intellectual honesty.

... hmm Im finding the earliest existing manuscripts from Arrian are 12th century... do you have anything earlier mentioning Alexander?

http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/manusc...htm#Arrian
Quote:Arrian

The Anabasis of Alexander was written in 7 books ca. 146 AD. The Indica is transmitted as book 8 of the work. The manuscripts on which the text is based are:

A Vienna. It was corrected later (=A2) 12th-13 th century
B Paris, gr. 1753. A copy of A; a lacuna in it corresponds exactly to one page of A 15 th century
C Constantinople. Also a copy of A. 15 th century
k Florence. Based on A2


Got anything earlier than 12th century? At least the 2 I provided FOR you date to the 10th and 11th
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 04:28 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 04:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-11-2014 04:06 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Im NOT clicking links if you cant provide quotes... and telling me whether or not you believe Alexander LIVED as a REAL historical figure or not, has nothing to do with any references... DO you believe he existed, yes or no?

The evidence is clear that he did.

What evidence are you deciding proves he lived specifically? Name it and quote it please... so far I show nothing more than the 3 manuscripts provided, the earliest dating to the 10th century... you believe something 1500 years removed from alexander?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 04:31 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 04:09 PM)cjlr Wrote:  See, among many competent sources, Heckel's The Conquests of Alexander the Great, or even better, Hammond's Sources for Alexander the Great: An Analysis of Plutarch's 'Life' and Arrian's 'Anabasis Alexandrou'. Both refer explicitly to surviving fragments and excerpts of contemporaneous writings to Alexander himself (including Ptolemy, Aristobulus, Callisthenes, Cleitarchus, Nearchus, and more).

Wrong... your earliest manuscript for Arrian's 'Anabasis Alexandrou dates to the 12th century.

http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/manusc...htm#Arrian


Quote:Arrian

The Anabasis of Alexander was written in 7 books ca. 146 AD. The Indica is transmitted as book 8 of the work. The manuscripts on which the text is based are:

A Vienna. It was corrected later (=A2) 12th-13 th century
B Paris, gr. 1753. A copy of A; a lacuna in it corresponds exactly to one page of A 15 th century
C Constantinople. Also a copy of A. 15 th century
k Florence. Based on A2

Got anything earlier than 12th century? At least the 2 I provided FOR you date to the 10th and 11th
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 05:36 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 12:48 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  I didn't read past the first post, so if this is already addressed my apologies. I was compelled to address the OP.

This is one of the haughtiest posts iv ever seen. WHY would any mature person WANT to destroy a faith in anything decent?

And the OP is SO WRONG in your points, that you are showing GROSS IGNORANCE of the subject. I prefer charging you with ignorance of the subject to charging you with intentional deception.

Jesus Christ is the best documented ancient historical figure in all of history, from His time back. The manuscripts are CENTURIES more contemporaneous to the life of Christ than anything YOU can get for Alexander the great.

What a hateful OP... absolutely biased and INCORRECT... nothing but propaganda and piss poor propaganda at that.

So, you entered this thread with an angry post making that assertion. You have gone down a rat hole on Alexander - Julius Caesar is better documented. You clearly don't understand historiography very well - the age of the earliest extant manuscript is important, but in no way critical. It proves something was known no later than, but does not prove it wasn't known earlier. It is the content, the supporting documents, the artifacts, and the interlocking evidence that is important.

What is your point? What are you actually arguing?

The only thing you might show is whether or not Jesus existed. The evidence for the truth of the Bible is spectacularly weak, as in non-existent. The stories are not supported anywhere outside the Bible.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Rik's post
02-11-2014, 05:46 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
Colin Farrell is more popular than Jim Cavizel. So there's that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 06:34 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 05:46 PM)Fodder_From_The_Truth Wrote:  Colin Farrell is more popular than Jim Cavizel. So there's that.

Yup. That's good enough for me.

Conclusive evidence if ever there was any.

Clap

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 06:37 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 05:36 PM)Rik Wrote:  
(02-11-2014 12:48 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  I didn't read past the first post, so if this is already addressed my apologies. I was compelled to address the OP.

This is one of the haughtiest posts iv ever seen. WHY would any mature person WANT to destroy a faith in anything decent?

And the OP is SO WRONG in your points, that you are showing GROSS IGNORANCE of the subject. I prefer charging you with ignorance of the subject to charging you with intentional deception.

Jesus Christ is the best documented ancient historical figure in all of history, from His time back. The manuscripts are CENTURIES more contemporaneous to the life of Christ than anything YOU can get for Alexander the great.

What a hateful OP... absolutely biased and INCORRECT... nothing but propaganda and piss poor propaganda at that.

So, you entered this thread with an angry post making that assertion. You have gone down a rat hole on Alexander - Julius Caesar is better documented. You clearly don't understand historiography very well - the age of the earliest extant manuscript is important, but in no way critical. It proves something was known no later than, but does not prove it wasn't known earlier. It is the content, the supporting documents, the artifacts, and the interlocking evidence that is important.

What is your point? What are you actually arguing?

The only thing you might show is whether or not Jesus existed. The evidence for the truth of the Bible is spectacularly weak, as in non-existent. The stories are not supported anywhere outside the Bible.


Blah blah, you've read nothing. Iv already provided 6 historians, one born about the time Christ was resurrected, and the rest in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, AND iv proven theres more documentation for Christ and closer to contemporary, than alexander the great by a LANDSLIDE... The EALIEST document for alexander is from the 10th century.

... do you believe in Alexander the Great? I'm betting you do... why?
.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 06:38 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 06:34 PM)DLJ Wrote:  
(02-11-2014 05:46 PM)Fodder_From_The_Truth Wrote:  Colin Farrell is more popular than Jim Cavizel. So there's that.

Yup. That's good enough for me.

Conclusive evidence if ever there was any.

Clap

So do you believe Alexander the Great lived? Why?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-11-2014, 06:44 PM
RE: Destroy a faith in one sentence
(02-11-2014 06:37 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(02-11-2014 05:36 PM)Rik Wrote:  So, you entered this thread with an angry post making that assertion. You have gone down a rat hole on Alexander - Julius Caesar is better documented. You clearly don't understand historiography very well - the age of the earliest extant manuscript is important, but in no way critical. It proves something was known no later than, but does not prove it wasn't known earlier. It is the content, the supporting documents, the artifacts, and the interlocking evidence that is important.

What is your point? What are you actually arguing?

The only thing you might show is whether or not Jesus existed. The evidence for the truth of the Bible is spectacularly weak, as in non-existent. The stories are not supported anywhere outside the Bible.


Blah blah, you've read nothing. Iv already provided 6 historians, one born about the time Christ was resurrected, and the rest in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, AND iv proven theres more documentation for Christ and closer to contemporary, than alexander the great by a LANDSLIDE... The EALIEST document for alexander is from the 10th century.
I've read the entire thread.

Quote:... do you believe in Alexander the Great? I'm betting you do... why?
.

It doesn't matter. There is no evidence that the stories in the Bible are true. No virgin birth, no miracles, no resurrection. What point are you trying to make?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: