Users Online Now:
1,941
(
Who's On?
)
Visitors Today:
1,592,763
Pageviews Today:
2,195,880
Threads Today:
531
Posts Today:
9,845
05:09 PM
Directory
Adv. Search
Topics
Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject
The role of myth in the bible
User Name
Font color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
Black
Font:
Default
Verdana
Tahoma
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:As I am 72761907:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYxNTU3X0NDRDM4RTY3] [quote:Dr VIP 1:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYxMzc2XzhENkZBMEMx] [quote:As I am 72761907:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYxMzUyX0I4MzQwNjVB] [quote:Dr VIP 1:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYxMTQxXzNCQTJCMkNG] [quote:As I am 72761907:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYxMTAzX0IxQzAxNkU3] [quote:Dr VIP 1:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYxMDAyX0M3MDU0QzQ2] [quote:As I am 72761907:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYwOTU5XzlBQ0QzRDYx] [quote:Dr VIP 1:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYwNjkxXzMzRkZCRDYy] [quote:As I am 72761907:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYwNjU5XzkxOTE3QTVD] [quote:Dr VIP 1:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYwNTU1XzlBNjE4ODJF] [quote:As I am 72761907:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYwMzIwX0ExQzc5NkQ0] [quote:Dr VIP 1:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYwMDUwX0VDQzBCRTRB] [quote:As I am 72761907:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjYwMDA0Xzk2REE4RTE2] [quote:Dr VIP 1:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjU5MDgyXzhEQzg5NDcx] [quote:As I am 72761907:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjU4OTg3XzRBQ0YzQzE0] [quote:Dr VIP 1:MV8zMjcwNzMwXzU4NjU3ODYzXzhBODBBRkUy] pepi 2 pharoah of the exodus plague papyri fall of the old kingdom chariots at the red sea mt Sinai in arabia what do you have instead of using the fallacious arguement that some of these evidence dont match the correct dating? dating is arbitrary... its really not counter evidence. [/quote] Pepi and the old kingdom do not have anything to do with your other dating dispute, the so-called missing years. Therefore, there's no justification for moving it a thousand years on a whim. The plague documents do exist, but the ones I have seen referenced make no mention of frogs, boils, or lice. But even if they exist, it doesn't follow that it proves the story. It could easily have been one of the models for the events in the tale, just as historical fiction uses known events to fold into the fictional account to give it verisimilitude. But as for that, it sure is curious why a guy who had direct and doings with the pharaoh somehow failed to even mention his name. Seems like you are a Ron Wyatt guy with your chariots and your sinai claims. Is there any reason to take his highly disputed findings more serious than the scholars you despise? Why side with a Christian apologist who has a distinct agenda to prove an a priori conclusion? Oh, wait. Never mind. I guess I answered that myself. Regardless, it's interesting to watch you reject all scholarly work yet grab any outlandish claim that fits your model and then insist it's true solely because it fits your model. But chariots in the red sea prove nothing about your story. And from what I can see about them, there aren't even actual chariots, just pictures of wheels. Needless to say, I can't find anything that is at all convincing of this claim, but if you have something, pass it on. As to sinai, I have seen full-on bible archaeologist sites that call that claim bogus and want nothing to do with it, and it would seem that if anyone was going to embrace such a historical find, it would be by folks who dearly want to show that the tale is true as real history. Yet they claim it is filled with errors from a scriptural standpoint and does not fit the bill. Again, I don't see any support for this beyond stuff connected to Wyatt, but maybe I am missing something and you can provide the information. [/quote] pepi the old kingdom plague papyrii fits my account perfectly. papyrii missing frogs and boils... ooh... lol thats so weak, its exactly like how you claim christians claim pagan accounts miss some christian narrative, so its not plagarazing. a man recounted choas, his chaos fits well with plagues, we shouldnt expect him write exodus word for word. your dating is based on manetho, and admitted faulty chronology... your stincking problem... not mine. deal with it, stop projecting. as I said you have nothing but the claim of academia chronology and trying to downplay actual evidence. emotion selling arbitrary choice of dating reverse engineering downplaying actual evidence thats what you have kido... it seems to me the bible has been proven to be historically accurate. [/quote] It seems to you it has been prove to be historically accurate? Based on what? You can't back up your "actual evidence" with anything. Even the stuff you call evidence isn't really evidence of your tale. You site the flood, but then retract it as being anything but evidence for itself. You have a tourist attraction that also doesn't prove anything in your tale even if it was a real boat, which certainly doesn't seem to be the case. But say it is, for argument's sake. What of it? How does it in any way prove the details of the tale. Be specific, please. The same with the chariots. Say they are really chariots. So what? They prove nothing else beyond that. Saying our tale has chariots, there are chariots, so it's true is like saying that the Titanic was a historically accurate movie because they found the boat at the bottom of the ocean. You have a scroll that mentions some plagues, but leaves out others. So? Plagues happen. What does that prove as far as your tale goes? This is all so vague and spotty, yet somehow you have taken the enormous leap in illogic and say that the bible has been proven historically accurate. Yet while doing so, you dismiss out of hand any evidence that does not fit your claim solely because it doesn't fit your claim. At bottom, the only thing you base your case on is just saying it is true because you choose it to be true. That's all well and good as far as a faith claim goes, but it doesn't constitute evidence by any acceptable standard. [/quote] flood - flood ark - ark chariots - red sea crossing plagues - plagues. bible says... and the ground gives evidence. so... yeah as I said, all you have all you can do is downplay "ooohh it doesnt prove anything blah blah blah too vague blah blah blah" what is acceptable standard? lets see, the bible says there was a flood, acceptable standard should be accounts of a flood... oh boy we have those. bible says ark rested in ararat, acceptable standard of evidence would be, finding the remains somewhere in the region of ararat... oh boy, we have that! bible says plagues... acceptable standard would be some account from the mouth of egyptians from the time of the fall of the old kingdom... oh we have that. sorry... as I am, you are forced into dishonesty. [/quote] The Titanic movie was about a ship that sunk, there was ship that sunk. Acceptable standard says that the Titanic movie was 100% accurate. Now how is that not the same as what you are saying? [/quote] the account says the was a ship that sunk. the remains of the ship were found. are you trying to say the bible is accurate just not 100% accurate? thats different but... yes I do claim its 100% accurate. its up to you to prove it is not 100% accurate [/quote] Right, it said a ship sunk and they found the ship. So the Titanic movie [i]is[/i] 100% accurate. I [i]knew[/i] it. [/quote] false analogy, I corrected you though I used the word - ACCOUNT. the bible is the account. the 50s movie 10 commandemnts is the paralell to that account. dont use false analogies [/quote] I don't see a false analogy. You laid out what you saw as acceptable standards and I used such parameters to demonstrate the Titanic was 100% accurate. The movie is the account and it says the Titanic sunk. Well, they found the thing right where it was said to have gone down, so that makes the Titanic 100% accurate. Easy-peasy. [/quote] well if you want to believe the movie is 100% accurate, ok, have fun. [/quote] By your methodology and standards, it is 100% accurate. How can you refute that it is? [/quote] easy... going to the list of passengers and see there was no rose dawson [/quote] Those list are incorrect and cannot be trusted. I have the screenplay, and it's perfect. It says Rose Dawson was there, so why would I listen to any list that didn't have her on it? [/quote] arbitrary choice is it? well at least now you see my point. [/quote] I saw your point a long time ago. I just don't agree with it because it sounds like my Titanic schtick. [/quote]
Original Message
Modern archaeology and textual analysis have cast serious doubt on the historical accuracy of the core of the OT. But as myths of a glorious past, it proved powerful in its ability to shape the consciousness of a nation. This same desire for unifying the disparate groups of early Christians would have also been a motivation of the NT, despite the lack of historical evidence for Jesus.
Pictures (click to insert)
General
Politics
Bananas
People
Potentially Offensive
Emotions
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Textual
Doom
Misc Small Smilies
Religion
Love
Random
View All Categories
|
Next Page >>