Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-08-2013, 09:47 AM
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
Quote:But then why did Daniel seemingly get details of Antiochus' later actions wrong?

Can you tell me more? I noticed he predicted (or postdicted!) his battle plans and movements, his outlawing of the Mosaic law and traditions that led to the Maccabean revolt, etc.

Thanks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-08-2013, 09:55 AM
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
Quote:"Party to a fraud" is 2013 modern mentality. "Presentism", remember ?
They thought they were doing what they thought was right, at the time.
"Pious fraud" is another matter, and was the generally accepted way they did business. It was pervasive. The ends justified the means.
It was not considered "unethical" as it would be today. More "Presentism". You can't look at ancient / "other" cultures with your own culture's eyes. (Did you never see "The Ugly American"?
He predicted nothing of the sort. Unless he specifically named them, along with specific dates, among his countless others that did not happen, it's just post-dictive bias, and reinterpretation.

I appreciate that perspective. I'd like to ask a question if I may. I'll start with acceptance that the style of writing was presentist and such was not considered unethical at the time. It would then follow, of course, that the presentist writers/preachers/prophets were genuinely interested in encouraging their readers/listeners.

If I accept this as true, on what basis or evidence can it be demonstrated that Daniel wrote in this style? I'm not saying we lack evidence. I'm saying it seems initially that we may start with a bias, such as "It's impossible to accurately predict the future using supernatural means, therefore the Bible writers were encouraging their audience using their cultural bias of presentism."

Are there apocryphal or contemporaneous examples of ancient presentist writings by the Israelites? Is there documentary evidence I'm not aware of? Again, from a documentary perspective, the Hebrew words for "this will happen" or "in that day" or "later", etc. pepper the prophecies, although I will concede to you that there was hardly ever a 1-2-3 chronological style of writing used in the scriptures, as we know...

I'm open here to furthering my understanding, sincerely. It looks on the surface as though scholars are stating "this is what they were *thinking* when they *wrote* in future tense" and if there is empirical evidence I'd be sincerely fascinated.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-08-2013, 04:07 PM
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
(13-08-2013 09:47 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:But then why did Daniel seemingly get details of Antiochus' later actions wrong?

Can you tell me more? I noticed he predicted (or postdicted!) his battle plans and movements, his outlawing of the Mosaic law and traditions that led to the Maccabean revolt, etc.

Thanks.

He seemingly predicts that Antiochus will invade Israel once again, conquer Egypt again, along with Libya and Ethiopia., and die between Mount Zion and the Mediterranean, he did none of these things, and died in Persia

I Will have My revenge on AlternateHistory.com, in this life or the next Evil_monster

~WrappedInShadows (AKA Me)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-08-2013, 10:17 AM (This post was last modified: 14-08-2013 01:20 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
(13-08-2013 09:55 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:"Party to a fraud" is 2013 modern mentality. "Presentism", remember ?
They thought they were doing what they thought was right, at the time.
"Pious fraud" is another matter, and was the generally accepted way they did business. It was pervasive. The ends justified the means.
It was not considered "unethical" as it would be today. More "Presentism". You can't look at ancient / "other" cultures with your own culture's eyes. (Did you never see "The Ugly American"?
He predicted nothing of the sort. Unless he specifically named them, along with specific dates, among his countless others that did not happen, it's just post-dictive bias, and reinterpretation.

I appreciate that perspective. I'd like to ask a question if I may. I'll start with acceptance that the style of writing was presentist and such was not considered unethical at the time. It would then follow, of course, that the presentist writers/preachers/prophets were genuinely interested in encouraging their readers/listeners.

If I accept this as true, on what basis or evidence can it be demonstrated that Daniel wrote in this style? I'm not saying we lack evidence. I'm saying it seems initially that we may start with a bias, such as "It's impossible to accurately predict the future using supernatural means, therefore the Bible writers were encouraging their audience using their cultural bias of presentism."

Are there apocryphal or contemporaneous examples of ancient presentist writings by the Israelites? Is there documentary evidence I'm not aware of? Again, from a documentary perspective, the Hebrew words for "this will happen" or "in that day" or "later", etc. pepper the prophecies, although I will concede to you that there was hardly ever a 1-2-3 chronological style of writing used in the scriptures, as we know...

I'm open here to furthering my understanding, sincerely. It looks on the surface as though scholars are stating "this is what they were *thinking* when they *wrote* in future tense" and if there is empirical evidence I'd be sincerely fascinated.

You need to look up "Presentism". Google it. It is OUR interpretation of texts and activities from other cultures in the past which did not have our cultural biases and unspoken assumptions. It's not a "writing style". It has NOTHING to do with ancient writers. "Presentism" is modern humans interpreting, (ignorant of the actual cultural and in this case "non-scientific" world view). It was TOTALLY "other". Science was unknown, History as "accurate" (what we would consider "factual") recounting was not important to these authors. They "remembered" things in their texts to promote an agenda. They had no intention to be, nor even had a concept of "objectivity". That is a modern concept. They did not have it, and it was not important to them. It is important to us, thus we read their texts with OUR modern assumptions, with no clue about how they actually saw the world, and the universe, and how it worked, and their relationship to it

We DO NOT share the same cultural biases, and assumptions. Daniel was written by at least 3 people/groups, from at least 3 distinctly different periods, and later "assembled" by (a)n editor(s). It was a time of HUGE cultural change in ancient Israe-El. Their underlying assumptions of how the universe works, and their relationships to each other, the destruction of the long family lines and groups in Exile, the rise of "individualism", and their changed ideas about their deity was undergoing fundamental shifts, secondary to repeated political defeats. The roots of many concepts which are associated with the later sub-sect of Jews who started the "Way" movement, in Judaism, arose during this period, and understanding how and why they arose is integral, if one wants to "get" why apocalypticism gave rise to the Christian cults. They grew directly out of it, for very specific historical, (non-religious) reasons.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
15-08-2013, 02:16 PM
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
Quote:He seemingly predicts that Antiochus will invade Israel once again, conquer Egypt again, along with Libya and Ethiopia., and die between Mount Zion and the Mediterranean, he did none of these things, and died in Persia.

Good. I'll have to study this although it isn't high on my list. Remember, the prophecies also touch successors of Antiochus including Seleucus IV, Alexander, the Ptolemaic rulers, etc. If you have a verse(s) or chapter in mind that will help me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2013, 02:22 PM
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
Quote:You need to look up "Presentism". Google it. It is OUR interpretation of texts and activities from other cultures in the past which did not have our cultural biases and unspoken assumptions. It's not a "writing style". It has NOTHING to do with ancient writers. "Presentism" is modern humans interpreting, (ignorant of the actual cultural and in this case "non-scientific" world view). It was TOTALLY "other". Science was unknown, History as "accurate" (what we would consider "factual") recounting was not important to these authors. They "remembered" things in their texts to promote an agenda. They had no intention to be, nor even had a concept of "objectivity". That is a modern concept. They did not have it, and it was not important to them. It is important to us, thus we read their texts with OUR modern assumptions, with no clue about how they actually saw the world, and the universe, and how it worked, and their relationship to it

We DO NOT share the same cultural biases, and assumptions. Daniel was written by at least 3 people/groups, from at least 3 distinctly different periods, and later "assembled" by (a)n editor(s). It was a time of HUGE cultural change in ancient Israe-El. Their underlying assumptions of how the universe works, and their relationships to each other, the destruction of the long family lines and groups in Exile, the rise of "individualism", and their changed ideas about their deity was undergoing fundamental shifts, secondary to repeated political defeats. The roots of many concepts which are associated with the later sub-sect of Jews who started the "Way" movement, in Judaism, arose during this period, and understanding how and why they arose is integral, if one wants to "get" why apocalypticism gave rise to the Christian cults. They grew directly out of it, for very specific historical, (non-religious) reasons.

I did read about Presentism and even again before my previous post. I must comment that where you write "It is important to us, thus we read their texts with OUR modern assumptions, with no clue about how they actually saw the world, and the universe, and how it worked, and their relationship to it" I'm going to have to ask if you have better tools than those texts to study to learn how they learned and to try to think as they thought?

I'm a little surprised you say science was unknown to them. Wouldn't you date Daniel to 150-200 BCE? And you'll say post-Babylonian diaspora Jews who lived in a dozen Hellenic countries had no understanding of science or history? Paul quoted Cretans and pagan scholars less than two centuries later. Josephus by your reckoning would be on the scene just after the Daniel editors wrote and was clearly conversant with every kind of history, panegyric and hagiography that existed in his day, and he's a Jewish man writing about Judaism, the Romans and the Way sect.

I'm NOT attacking you, BB. I'm asking...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2013, 02:27 PM
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
Also BB, for clarification's sake:

I understand by "presentism" you are referring to the lens or bias we impose on ancient texts. I also think of presentism of time, and understand fully that chronological order of presentation meant very little to the Bible authors, although they had a much better grasp on terms like past and future than Mohammed and his followers/chroniclers...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_...y_of_time)

Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-08-2013, 03:04 PM (This post was last modified: 15-08-2013 03:24 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
(15-08-2013 02:22 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:You need to look up "Presentism". Google it. It is OUR interpretation of texts and activities from other cultures in the past which did not have our cultural biases and unspoken assumptions. It's not a "writing style". It has NOTHING to do with ancient writers. "Presentism" is modern humans interpreting, (ignorant of the actual cultural and in this case "non-scientific" world view). It was TOTALLY "other". Science was unknown, History as "accurate" (what we would consider "factual") recounting was not important to these authors. They "remembered" things in their texts to promote an agenda. They had no intention to be, nor even had a concept of "objectivity". That is a modern concept. They did not have it, and it was not important to them. It is important to us, thus we read their texts with OUR modern assumptions, with no clue about how they actually saw the world, and the universe, and how it worked, and their relationship to it

We DO NOT share the same cultural biases, and assumptions. Daniel was written by at least 3 people/groups, from at least 3 distinctly different periods, and later "assembled" by (a)n editor(s). It was a time of HUGE cultural change in ancient Israe-El. Their underlying assumptions of how the universe works, and their relationships to each other, the destruction of the long family lines and groups in Exile, the rise of "individualism", and their changed ideas about their deity was undergoing fundamental shifts, secondary to repeated political defeats. The roots of many concepts which are associated with the later sub-sect of Jews who started the "Way" movement, in Judaism, arose during this period, and understanding how and why they arose is integral, if one wants to "get" why apocalypticism gave rise to the Christian cults. They grew directly out of it, for very specific historical, (non-religious) reasons.

I did read about Presentism and even again before my previous post. I must comment that where you write "It is important to us, thus we read their texts with OUR modern assumptions, with no clue about how they actually saw the world, and the universe, and how it worked, and their relationship to it" I'm going to have to ask if you have better tools than those texts to study to learn how they learned and to try to think as they thought?

I'm a little surprised you say science was unknown to them. Wouldn't you date Daniel to 150-200 BCE? And you'll say post-Babylonian diaspora Jews who lived in a dozen Hellenic countries had no understanding of science or history? Paul quoted Cretans and pagan scholars less than two centuries later. Josephus by your reckoning would be on the scene just after the Daniel editors wrote and was clearly conversant with every kind of history, panegyric and hagiography that existed in his day, and he's a Jewish man writing about Judaism, the Romans and the Way sect.

I'm NOT attacking you, BB. I'm asking...

We have far better tools. We have a much broader scope, and know all sorts of archaeology and science about the distant past they had no clue about, as well as cosmology, and how the solar system will likely end, (vs the apocalyptics). They had no idea there even were galaxies. Our present knowledge puts everything in a "different light" than they had. During the time of Tacitus in Rome, there was an intense debate about what it meant to study and write "history". It was an on-going discussion, about what it even meant to attempt to write it. The scientific method WAS unknown to them. It was an age of magic. A totally different world-view. Josephus' "history" was actually quite biased. He wrote for a purpose, and with a supporting "sponsor", (whom he had to please). He was hardly "objective".

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
20-08-2013, 06:33 AM
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
Quote:We have far better tools. We have a much broader scope, and know all sorts of archaeology and science about the distant past they had no clue about, as well as cosmology, and how the solar system will likely end, (vs the apocalyptics). They had no idea there even were galaxies. Our present knowledge puts everything in a "different light" than they had. During the time of Tacitus in Rome, there was an intense debate about what it meant to study and write "history". It was an on-going discussion, about what it even meant to attempt to write it. The scientific method WAS unknown to them. It was an age of magic. A totally different world-view. Josephus' "history" was actually quite biased. He wrote for a purpose, and with a supporting "sponsor", (whom he had to please). He was hardly "objective".

I was thinking about this some more. You are correct. Josephus and the "historians" of his day had slanted views and wrote panegyrics, although in Josephus's case, as a Jewish author, he could not deify a Caesar. Of course, most apologists point out that some of the scientific details in the scriptures are more compelling because the scriptures weren't written by scientists.

An issue remains, however. Regardless of when you date the authorship of the Penteteuch, it is clear that one is forbidden to bear false witness--all of us westerners know that lying is gravely forbidden in the decalogue. If the Jewish authors and editors of the scriptures believed that lying was forbidden, how can we say they took license with their stories?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2013, 06:38 AM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2013 06:41 AM by Hafnof.)
RE: Einstein Method, Book of Daniel
Bearing false witness is to accuse someone falsely of breaching commandments. To equate it with lying and then equate lying to storytelling to claim the authors certainly wouldn't have said anything we might consider untrue is tenuous at best.

If you're going to take a "scientific truths" approach to apologetics then you should review the truths found in the Koran and in other documents. The truths found in the Bible are no more convincing or less convincing than comparable alternatives.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: