Total Posts:95|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Religion and its authenticity

bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
I find it interesting on this forum that the anti religious seem to constantly be asking things in a scientific frame of mind or making blind assertions. Often times when I get into a discussion with any opposed to say the various books within the bible, time and time again its almost impossible to get a specific contention out of anybody and generally ends up with unwarranted insults said person would never utilize in a face to face conversation.

It seems people tend to value internet based arguments rather than actual scholarly sources reviewed by historians, archaeologists, and where the discussion permits scientists of various fields.

To take the approach for example that religion is not verifiable because theres no way to test for a God so to speak is absolute nonsense and misses the whole of what religion is based on. Religion, all of it, is based on history and a consistency there of. Christianity for example is based on Judaism and the continuation of it in that the Jewish Messiah has already come. You have for example Messianic Jews which carry on their Jewish traditions while also acknowledging Jesus as the son of God and Lord of all things.

All of Judaism is based on the written text found throughout the Old Testament. Its a testament over a long period of time from multiple authors and eye witness accounts to various events that are attributed to God. It was the testing, verification and observation of God to prove and show that the God of Israel was the God of all things and that there was no other above Him. Jesus himself quoted the Old Testament extensively to make a lot of his points and to prove who he is. The New Testament is just a historical recording of this even, also written by multiple authors and compiled into one easy to go to source. It is just a recording that follows the observation, testing and verification of Jesus and if he is who he said he was. This is what is followed up after the gospels in the 13 letters.

The impact of what Jesus did on this earth was so great it converted eventually the emperor of the very state that heavily persecuted Christianity and spawned an unstoppable movement that is more than alive and well today. It has close to 2,000 years of roots now and Judaism has over 3,000 years of history.
The history matters.
This is just the Christian/Judaism perspective

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

Before one gives a critique why don't they consider if that same critique would make it impossible to know if Alexander the great, George Washington, Charles Darwin, Napoleon and just about any other historical figure, ever existed; the details of their individual lives and their influence on the world from the things they did.
To merely dismiss something because you don't like what it says isn't an argument or a statement of fact. Its a statement of opinion and it doesn't matter.
If you don't think history actually matters or how historians operate is useless then feel free to check out this link here.
http://www.history.ac.uk...
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:28:06 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

I disagree, B. One might argue the logical impossibility of claims or characteristics normally attributed to specific gods. For instance, an immortal god 'dying' or any unlimited descriptor such as omnipotence, etc. So, arguing against religion need not regard history at all.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
rcreynolds
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:41:14 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:
I find it interesting on this forum that the anti religious seem to constantly be asking things in a scientific frame of mind or making blind assertions. Often times when I get into a discussion with any opposed to say the various books within the bible, time and time again its almost impossible to get a specific contention out of anybody and generally ends up with unwarranted insults said person would never utilize in a face to face conversation.

It seems people tend to value internet based arguments rather than actual scholarly sources reviewed by historians, archaeologists, and where the discussion permits scientists of various fields.

To take the approach for example that religion is not verifiable because theres no way to test for a God so to speak is absolute nonsense and misses the whole of what religion is based on. Religion, all of it, is based on history and a consistency there of. Christianity for example is based on Judaism and the continuation of it in that the Jewish Messiah has already come. You have for example Messianic Jews which carry on their Jewish traditions while also acknowledging Jesus as the son of God and Lord of all things.

All of Judaism is based on the written text found throughout the Old Testament. Its a testament over a long period of time from multiple authors and eye witness accounts to various events that are attributed to God. It was the testing, verification and observation of God to prove and show that the God of Israel was the God of all things and that there was no other above Him. Jesus himself quoted the Old Testament extensively to make a lot of his points and to prove who he is. The New Testament is just a historical recording of this even, also written by multiple authors and compiled into one easy to go to source. It is just a recording that follows the observation, testing and verification of Jesus and if he is who he said he was. This is what is followed up after the gospels in the 13 letters.

The impact of what Jesus did on this earth was so great it converted eventually the emperor of the very state that heavily persecuted Christianity and spawned an unstoppable movement that is more than alive and well today. It has close to 2,000 years of roots now and Judaism has over 3,000 years of history.
The history matters.
This is just the Christian/Judaism perspective

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

Before one gives a critique why don't they consider if that same critique would make it impossible to know if Alexander the great, George Washington, Charles Darwin, Napoleon and just about any other historical figure, ever existed; the details of their individual lives and their influence on the world from the things they did.
To merely dismiss something because you don't like what it says isn't an argument or a statement of fact. Its a statement of opinion and it doesn't matter.
If you don't think history actually matters or how historians operate is useless then feel free to check out this link here.
http://www.history.ac.uk... : :
Did Jesus make a big impact on the world or did religious Christians make a big impact in the world with the name of "Jesus" as their lord and savior?
bulproof
Posts: 25,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.
rcreynolds
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 7:28:51 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot. : :

LOL !!!!!!
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 3:15:44 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:28:06 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

I disagree, B. One might argue the logical impossibility of claims or characteristics normally attributed to specific gods. For instance, an immortal god 'dying' or any unlimited descriptor such as omnipotence, etc. So, arguing against religion need not regard history at all.

There are unexplained phenomena that people record these days all the time, does that mean that what they have recorded isn't true just because it doesn't fit within a certain world view?
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 3:19:34 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:41:14 AM, rcreynolds wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:
I find it interesting on this forum that the anti religious seem to constantly be asking things in a scientific frame of mind or making blind assertions. Often times when I get into a discussion with any opposed to say the various books within the bible, time and time again its almost impossible to get a specific contention out of anybody and generally ends up with unwarranted insults said person would never utilize in a face to face conversation.

It seems people tend to value internet based arguments rather than actual scholarly sources reviewed by historians, archaeologists, and where the discussion permits scientists of various fields.

To take the approach for example that religion is not verifiable because theres no way to test for a God so to speak is absolute nonsense and misses the whole of what religion is based on. Religion, all of it, is based on history and a consistency there of. Christianity for example is based on Judaism and the continuation of it in that the Jewish Messiah has already come. You have for example Messianic Jews which carry on their Jewish traditions while also acknowledging Jesus as the son of God and Lord of all things.

All of Judaism is based on the written text found throughout the Old Testament. Its a testament over a long period of time from multiple authors and eye witness accounts to various events that are attributed to God. It was the testing, verification and observation of God to prove and show that the God of Israel was the God of all things and that there was no other above Him. Jesus himself quoted the Old Testament extensively to make a lot of his points and to prove who he is. The New Testament is just a historical recording of this even, also written by multiple authors and compiled into one easy to go to source. It is just a recording that follows the observation, testing and verification of Jesus and if he is who he said he was. This is what is followed up after the gospels in the 13 letters.

The impact of what Jesus did on this earth was so great it converted eventually the emperor of the very state that heavily persecuted Christianity and spawned an unstoppable movement that is more than alive and well today. It has close to 2,000 years of roots now and Judaism has over 3,000 years of history.
The history matters.
This is just the Christian/Judaism perspective

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

Before one gives a critique why don't they consider if that same critique would make it impossible to know if Alexander the great, George Washington, Charles Darwin, Napoleon and just about any other historical figure, ever existed; the details of their individual lives and their influence on the world from the things they did.
To merely dismiss something because you don't like what it says isn't an argument or a statement of fact. Its a statement of opinion and it doesn't matter.
If you don't think history actually matters or how historians operate is useless then feel free to check out this link here.
http://www.history.ac.uk... : :
Did Jesus make a big impact on the world or did religious Christians make a big impact in the world with the name of "Jesus" as their lord and savior?

While the name was used, it was Jesus alone that made the impact in order to swell enough numbers. These numbers would only have been swollen had people seen what he had done and were around to testify to his death and resurrection. Christians may make the impact afterwards and sometime into the past till now, but outside of organized denominations people are still being moved by the name. Oddly in a negative way in which you bring up Jesus and a bunch of hate comes your way or in a positive way in which a bunch of love comes your way
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 3:21:56 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:
I find it interesting on this forum that the anti religious seem to constantly be asking things in a scientific frame of mind or making blind assertions. Often times when I get into a discussion with any opposed to say the various books within the bible, time and time again its almost impossible to get a specific contention out of anybody and generally ends up with unwarranted insults said person would never utilize in a face to face conversation.

It seems people tend to value internet based arguments rather than actual scholarly sources reviewed by historians, archaeologists, and where the discussion permits scientists of various fields.

Of course, if believers did actually use scholarly sources, they too would observe their religions collapse into obscurity.

To take the approach for example that religion is not verifiable because theres no way to test for a God so to speak is absolute nonsense and misses the whole of what religion is based on.

It is well understood that religions are based on blind faith.

Religion, all of it, is based on history and a consistency there of.

And yet, history doesn't often agree with religions, there is no consistency.

Christianity for example is based on Judaism and the continuation of it in that the Jewish Messiah has already come. You have for example Messianic Jews which carry on their Jewish traditions while also acknowledging Jesus as the son of God and Lord of all things.

Yes, that is all blind faith throughout the ages.

All of Judaism is based on the written text found throughout the Old Testament. Its a testament over a long period of time from multiple authors and eye witness accounts to various events that are attributed to God.

Or, the eye witness accounts are hallucinations resulting from mental disorder, which is far more likely.

It was the testing, verification and observation of God to prove and show that the God of Israel was the God of all things and that there was no other above Him.

Sorry, but that is baloney. Testing is something that has to be repeatable by anyone which is impossible with alleged gods.

Jesus himself quoted the Old Testament extensively to make a lot of his points and to prove who he is.

So, if anyone quotes the Old Testament, they can prove they are the son of God?

The New Testament is just a historical recording of this even, also written by multiple authors and compiled into one easy to go to source.

And yet, it has been shown the various accounts from those authors do not agree with one another.

It is just a recording that follows the observation, testing and verification of Jesus and if he is who he said he was.

Then, all accounts would all agree, but they don't. So much for the alleged testing and verification.

This is what is followed up after the gospels in the 13 letters.

The impact of what Jesus did on this earth was so great it converted eventually the emperor of the very state that heavily persecuted Christianity and spawned an unstoppable movement that is more than alive and well today. It has close to 2,000 years of roots now and Judaism has over 3,000 years of history.

So what? That doesn't show Christianity is valid.

The history matters.
This is just the Christian/Judaism perspective

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

Perhaps, you should move away from the Bible and actually research the history of Christianity so you may learn something about it.

Before one gives a critique why don't they consider if that same critique would make it impossible to know if Alexander the great, George Washington, Charles Darwin, Napoleon and just about any other historical figure, ever existed; the details of their individual lives and their influence on the world from the things they did.

That is irrelevant to the claims made by those people and if their claims are repeatable and testable. The OT and NT fail in that regard.

To merely dismiss something because you don't like what it says isn't an argument or a statement of fact. Its a statement of opinion and it doesn't matter.
If you don't think history actually matters or how historians operate is useless then feel free to check out this link here.
http://www.history.ac.uk...

Here is a good excerpt from the link relevant to the OP:

"If educational systems do not provide a systematic grounding in the study of History, then people will glean some picture of the past and the role of themselves, their families, and their significant associations (which include everything from nations and religions to local clubs and neighbourhood networks) from a medley of other resources " from cultural traditions, from collective memories, from myths, rumours, songs, sagas, from political and religious teachings and customs, from their families, their friends, and from every form of human communication from gossip to the printing press and on to the web.

But what is learned may be patchy or confused, leaving some feeling rootless; or it may be simplified and partisan, leaving others feeling embattled or embittered. A good educational system should help people to study History more formally, more systematically, more accurately, more critically and more longitudinally."
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
rcreynolds
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 3:24:41 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 3:19:34 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:41:14 AM, rcreynolds wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:
I find it interesting on this forum that the anti religious seem to constantly be asking things in a scientific frame of mind or making blind assertions. Often times when I get into a discussion with any opposed to say the various books within the bible, time and time again its almost impossible to get a specific contention out of anybody and generally ends up with unwarranted insults said person would never utilize in a face to face conversation.

It seems people tend to value internet based arguments rather than actual scholarly sources reviewed by historians, archaeologists, and where the discussion permits scientists of various fields.

To take the approach for example that religion is not verifiable because theres no way to test for a God so to speak is absolute nonsense and misses the whole of what religion is based on. Religion, all of it, is based on history and a consistency there of. Christianity for example is based on Judaism and the continuation of it in that the Jewish Messiah has already come. You have for example Messianic Jews which carry on their Jewish traditions while also acknowledging Jesus as the son of God and Lord of all things.

All of Judaism is based on the written text found throughout the Old Testament. Its a testament over a long period of time from multiple authors and eye witness accounts to various events that are attributed to God. It was the testing, verification and observation of God to prove and show that the God of Israel was the God of all things and that there was no other above Him. Jesus himself quoted the Old Testament extensively to make a lot of his points and to prove who he is. The New Testament is just a historical recording of this even, also written by multiple authors and compiled into one easy to go to source. It is just a recording that follows the observation, testing and verification of Jesus and if he is who he said he was. This is what is followed up after the gospels in the 13 letters.

The impact of what Jesus did on this earth was so great it converted eventually the emperor of the very state that heavily persecuted Christianity and spawned an unstoppable movement that is more than alive and well today. It has close to 2,000 years of roots now and Judaism has over 3,000 years of history.
The history matters.
This is just the Christian/Judaism perspective

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

Before one gives a critique why don't they consider if that same critique would make it impossible to know if Alexander the great, George Washington, Charles Darwin, Napoleon and just about any other historical figure, ever existed; the details of their individual lives and their influence on the world from the things they did.
To merely dismiss something because you don't like what it says isn't an argument or a statement of fact. Its a statement of opinion and it doesn't matter.
If you don't think history actually matters or how historians operate is useless then feel free to check out this link here.
http://www.history.ac.uk... : :
Did Jesus make a big impact on the world or did religious Christians make a big impact in the world with the name of "Jesus" as their lord and savior?

While the name was used, it was Jesus alone that made the impact in order to swell enough numbers. These numbers would only have been swollen had people seen what he had done and were around to testify to his death and resurrection. Christians may make the impact afterwards and sometime into the past till now, but outside of organized denominations people are still being moved by the name. Oddly in a negative way in which you bring up Jesus and a bunch of hate comes your way or in a positive way in which a bunch of love comes your way : :

None of the prophets who came before Jesus or Jesus is important to me. It was their testimonies of the Word that are important because their testimonies came from the same technology that my testimonies came from. Jesus, Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Peter, Paul, Timothy, Ezekiel, are a few names of characters that God used to reveal his knowledge about the future and how we're created.
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 3:34:02 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 3:24:41 PM, rcreynolds wrote:
At 8/28/2016 3:19:34 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:41:14 AM, rcreynolds wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:
I find it interesting on this forum that the anti religious seem to constantly be asking things in a scientific frame of mind or making blind assertions. Often times when I get into a discussion with any opposed to say the various books within the bible, time and time again its almost impossible to get a specific contention out of anybody and generally ends up with unwarranted insults said person would never utilize in a face to face conversation.

It seems people tend to value internet based arguments rather than actual scholarly sources reviewed by historians, archaeologists, and where the discussion permits scientists of various fields.

To take the approach for example that religion is not verifiable because theres no way to test for a God so to speak is absolute nonsense and misses the whole of what religion is based on. Religion, all of it, is based on history and a consistency there of. Christianity for example is based on Judaism and the continuation of it in that the Jewish Messiah has already come. You have for example Messianic Jews which carry on their Jewish traditions while also acknowledging Jesus as the son of God and Lord of all things.

All of Judaism is based on the written text found throughout the Old Testament. Its a testament over a long period of time from multiple authors and eye witness accounts to various events that are attributed to God. It was the testing, verification and observation of God to prove and show that the God of Israel was the God of all things and that there was no other above Him. Jesus himself quoted the Old Testament extensively to make a lot of his points and to prove who he is. The New Testament is just a historical recording of this even, also written by multiple authors and compiled into one easy to go to source. It is just a recording that follows the observation, testing and verification of Jesus and if he is who he said he was. This is what is followed up after the gospels in the 13 letters.

The impact of what Jesus did on this earth was so great it converted eventually the emperor of the very state that heavily persecuted Christianity and spawned an unstoppable movement that is more than alive and well today. It has close to 2,000 years of roots now and Judaism has over 3,000 years of history.
The history matters.
This is just the Christian/Judaism perspective

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

Before one gives a critique why don't they consider if that same critique would make it impossible to know if Alexander the great, George Washington, Charles Darwin, Napoleon and just about any other historical figure, ever existed; the details of their individual lives and their influence on the world from the things they did.
To merely dismiss something because you don't like what it says isn't an argument or a statement of fact. Its a statement of opinion and it doesn't matter.
If you don't think history actually matters or how historians operate is useless then feel free to check out this link here.
http://www.history.ac.uk... : :
Did Jesus make a big impact on the world or did religious Christians make a big impact in the world with the name of "Jesus" as their lord and savior?

While the name was used, it was Jesus alone that made the impact in order to swell enough numbers. These numbers would only have been swollen had people seen what he had done and were around to testify to his death and resurrection. Christians may make the impact afterwards and sometime into the past till now, but outside of organized denominations people are still being moved by the name. Oddly in a negative way in which you bring up Jesus and a bunch of hate comes your way or in a positive way in which a bunch of love comes your way : :

None of the prophets who came before Jesus or Jesus is important to me. It was their testimonies of the Word that are important because their testimonies came from the same technology that my testimonies came from. Jesus, Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Peter, Paul, Timothy, Ezekiel, are a few names of characters that God used to reveal his knowledge about the future and how we're created.

They should be, they were important to God and they paved the way for the things to come. Without the prophets you don't have any historical testimony and simply just a God popping up out of nowhere that suddenly out of the blue wants a relationship directly with people. Without them you would have their testimonies of the word and you wouldn't have their lessons to learn from. The content is all about teaching humanity how to conduct yourself and what to do when you find yourself in various situations and how to know God and what God will do for you, because we cant do anything for God. Jesus is God so I wouldn't place him in the same list.
bulproof
Posts: 25,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 3:40:30 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 3:15:44 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:28:06 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

I disagree, B. One might argue the logical impossibility of claims or characteristics normally attributed to specific gods. For instance, an immortal god 'dying' or any unlimited descriptor such as omnipotence, etc. So, arguing against religion need not regard history at all.

There are unexplained phenomena that people record these days all the time, does that mean that what they have recorded isn't true just because it doesn't fit within a certain world view?
Ooh yes, look at the face on that bit of toast. Muuuuurikal.
How did your history lesson go?
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 4:24:58 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 3:40:30 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/28/2016 3:15:44 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:28:06 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

I disagree, B. One might argue the logical impossibility of claims or characteristics normally attributed to specific gods. For instance, an immortal god 'dying' or any unlimited descriptor such as omnipotence, etc. So, arguing against religion need not regard history at all.

There are unexplained phenomena that people record these days all the time, does that mean that what they have recorded isn't true just because it doesn't fit within a certain world view?
Ooh yes, look at the face on that bit of toast. Muuuuurikal.
How did your history lesson go?
Are you disagreeing unexplained phenomena exist?
Try using a non internet based argument next time.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 4:31:23 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.

But, Wikipedia is full of words, hence it is evidence according to you.

Aren't words evidence?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 4:56:39 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 4:31:23 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.

But, Wikipedia is full of words, hence it is evidence according to you.

Aren't words evidence?

Sure but its who the words are from thats important. Ill let Harvard explain it to you even though you disagree with their academic practices:
Nevertheless, when you're doing academic research, you should be extremely cautious about using Wikipedia. As its own disclaimer states, information on Wikipedia is contributed by anyone who wants to post material, and the expertise of the posters is not taken into consideration. Users may be reading information that is outdated or that has been posted by someone who is not an expert in the field or by someone who wishes to provide misinformation. (Case in point: Four years ago, an Expos student who was writing a paper about the limitations of Wikipedia posted a fictional entry for himself, stating that he was the mayor of a small town in China. Four years later, if you type in his name, or if you do a subject search on Wikipedia for mayors of towns in China, you will still find this fictional entry.) Some information on Wikipedia may well be accurate, but because experts do not review the site's entries, there is a considerable risk in relying on this source for your essays.
http://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu...
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 5:00:20 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 4:56:39 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:31:23 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.

But, Wikipedia is full of words, hence it is evidence according to you.

Aren't words evidence?

Sure but its who the words are from thats important.

No, it isn't, that is a fallacy. It is the claims being made that are important.

Ill let Harvard explain it to you even though you disagree with their academic practices:

But, I don't disagree, it is you who is confused.

Nevertheless, when you're doing academic research, you should be extremely cautious about using Wikipedia. As its own disclaimer states, information on Wikipedia is contributed by anyone who wants to post material, and the expertise of the posters is not taken into consideration. Users may be reading information that is outdated or that has been posted by someone who is not an expert in the field or by someone who wishes to provide misinformation. (Case in point: Four years ago, an Expos student who was writing a paper about the limitations of Wikipedia posted a fictional entry for himself, stating that he was the mayor of a small town in China. Four years later, if you type in his name, or if you do a subject search on Wikipedia for mayors of towns in China, you will still find this fictional entry.) Some information on Wikipedia may well be accurate, but because experts do not review the site's entries, there is a considerable risk in relying on this source for your essays.
http://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu...

Yes, and the exact same thing can be said about Gospels, that the information contained within is fictional even though written by someone who claimed it is the truth. See how that works?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
keithprosser
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 5:15:24 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
While the name was used, it was Jesus alone that made the impact in order to swell enough numbers.

From a historical point of view, Christianity was an important but far from universal religion until historical accident caused a Roman Emperor (Theodosius the first) to declare Christianity to be the sole official religion of the Roman Empire which made millions of people 'Christians' overnight and resulted in Christianity being the only 'game in town' in Europe (and much, much later in the Americas) for the next 1,600 years.
bulproof
Posts: 25,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:11:33 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.
It's more of a source than you and it provides historical and archaeological references to the actual sources.
Your claim that the bible is history is bullcrap, as I've already told you little ignorant coward.
I guess you'll just have to run away again. bwuahahahahaha.
cedertree
Posts: 21
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:17:21 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Help me understand what the OP is asserting or questioning. My take on this post is that the OP is asserting Christianity as true based on historical consistency yes? The challenge seems to be to shoot down the historical authenticity of the Bible. the theory then is to confine the proof of the religion's validity to purely historical accountability. So is scientific accuracy of said holy text out in this conversation?
bulproof
Posts: 25,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:21:50 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts,[1] a book published in 2001, discusses the archaeology of Israel and its relationship to the origins and content of the Hebrew Bible. The authors are Israel Finkelstein, Professor of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University, and Neil Asher Silberman, an archaeologist, historian and contributing editor to Archaeology Magazine.

The book remarks that, despite modern archaeological investigations and the meticulous ancient Egyptian records from the period of Ramesses II, there is an obvious lack of any archaeological evidence for the migration of a band of semitic people across the Sinai Peninsula,[17] except for the Hyksos. Although the Hyksos are in some ways a good match, their main centre being at Avaris (later renamed 'Pi-Ramesses'), in the heart of the region corresponding to the 'land of Goshen', and Manetho later writing that the Hyksos eventually founded the Temple in Jerusalem,[18] it throws up other problems, as the Hyksos became not slaves but rulers, and they were chased away rather than chased to bring them back.[18] Nevertheless, the book posits that the exodus narrative perhaps evolved from vague memories of the Hyksos expulsion, spun to encourage resistance to the 7th century domination of Judah by Egypt.[19]

Finkelstein and Silberman argue that instead of the Israelites conquering Canaan after the Exodus (as suggested by the book of Joshua), most of them had in fact always been there; the Israelites were simply Canaanites who developed into a distinct culture.[20] Recent surveys of long-term settlement patterns in the Israelite heartlands show no sign of violent invasion or even peaceful infiltration, but rather a sudden demographic transformation about 1200 BCE in which villages appear in the previously unpopulated highlands;[21] these settlements have a similar appearance to modern Bedouin camps, suggesting that the inhabitants were once pastoral nomads, driven to take up farming by the Late Bronze Age collapse of the Canaanite city-culture.[22]

The authors take issue with the book of Joshua's depiction of the Israelites conquering Canaan in only a few years"far less than the lifetime of one individual"in which cities such as Hazor, Ai, and Jericho, are destroyed. Finkelstein and Silberman view this account as the result of the telescoping effect of the vagaries of folk memory about destruction caused by other events;[23] modern archaeological examination of these cities shows that their destruction spanned a period of many centuries, with Hazor being destroyed 100 to 300 years after Jericho,[24][citation needed] while Ai (whose name actually means 'the ruin') was completely abandoned for roughly a millennium "before the collapse of Late Bronze Canaan. ... Like Jericho, there was no settlement at the time of its supposed conquest by the children of Israel."[25]
David and Solomon or the Omrides?

Although the book of Samuel, and initial parts of the books of Kings, portray Saul, David and Solomon ruling in succession over a powerful and cosmopolitan united kingdom of Israel and Judah, Finkelstein and Silberman regard modern archaeological evidence as showing that this may not be true. Archaeology instead shows that in the time of Solomon, the northern kingdom of Israel was quite small, too poor to be able to pay for a vast army, and with too little bureaucracy to be able to administer a kingdom, certainly not an empire;[26] it only emerged later, around the beginning of the 9th century BCE, in the time of Omri.[27] There is little to suggest that Jerusalem, called by the Bible David's capital, was "perhaps not more than a typical hill country village" during the time of David and of Solomon,[28] and Judah remained little more than a sparsely populated rural region, until the 8th century BCE.[29][30] Though the Tel Dan Stele seems to confirm that a "House of David" existed, and "clearly validates the biblical description of a figure named David becoming the founder of the dynasty of Judahite kings in Jerusalem", it says nothing else about him.[31]
Mesha Stele

There are remains of once grand cities at Megiddo, Hazor and Gezer, with archeological evidence showing that they suffered violent destruction.[32] This destruction once was attributed to the 10th century BCE campaigns by Shishak, these cities therefore being ascribed to David and Solomon as proof of the Bible's account of them,[33] but the destruction layers have since been redated to the late 9th century BCE campaign of Hazael, and the cities to the time of the Omride kings.[33]

The Tel Dan Stele, the Mesha Stele, the Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser, and direct evidence from excavations, together paint a picture of the Omride kings ruling a rich, powerful, and cosmopolitan empire, stretching from Damascus to Moab,[34] and building some of the largest and most beautiful constructions of Iron Age Israel;[35] by contrast, the Bible only remarks that the Omrides 'married foreign women' (presumably to make alliances) and upheld Canaanite religion, both of which it regards as wicked.[36] The Bible Unearthed concludes that the biblical writers deliberately invented the empire, power, and wealth, of Saul, David, and Solomon, by appropriating the deeds and achievements of the Omrides, so that they could then denigrate the Omrides and obscure their accomplishments, since these kings held a religious viewpoint that was anathema to the biblical editors.[37]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

Simpleton.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:36:48 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 3:15:44 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:28:06 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

I disagree, B. One might argue the logical impossibility of claims or characteristics normally attributed to specific gods. For instance, an immortal god 'dying' or any unlimited descriptor such as omnipotence, etc. So, arguing against religion need not regard history at all.

There are unexplained phenomena that people record these days all the time, does that mean that what they have recorded isn't true just because it doesn't fit within a certain world view?

I don't see the relevance of your reply.

If something is logically impossible, no empirical observation can make it possible. If an individual says they have a square circle that grants wishes, no amount of evidence will ever redeem the claim from the logical impossibility of a square circle.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:37:31 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 5:00:20 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:56:39 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:31:23 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.

But, Wikipedia is full of words, hence it is evidence according to you.

Aren't words evidence?

Sure but its who the words are from thats important.

No, it isn't, that is a fallacy. It is the claims being made that are important.

Ill let Harvard explain it to you even though you disagree with their academic practices:

But, I don't disagree, it is you who is confused.

Nevertheless, when you're doing academic research, you should be extremely cautious about using Wikipedia. As its own disclaimer states, information on Wikipedia is contributed by anyone who wants to post material, and the expertise of the posters is not taken into consideration. Users may be reading information that is outdated or that has been posted by someone who is not an expert in the field or by someone who wishes to provide misinformation. (Case in point: Four years ago, an Expos student who was writing a paper about the limitations of Wikipedia posted a fictional entry for himself, stating that he was the mayor of a small town in China. Four years later, if you type in his name, or if you do a subject search on Wikipedia for mayors of towns in China, you will still find this fictional entry.) Some information on Wikipedia may well be accurate, but because experts do not review the site's entries, there is a considerable risk in relying on this source for your essays.
http://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu...

Yes, and the exact same thing can be said about Gospels, that the information contained within is fictional even though written by someone who claimed it is the truth. See how that works?

That's just a blatant ignoring of the consistency and extra biblical sources supporting it. Like I said, anytime you want to do the debate let me know.
bulproof
Posts: 25,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:42:41 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:37:31 PM, bigotry wrote:
That's just a blatant ignoring of the consistency and extra biblical sources supporting it. Like I said, anytime you want to do the debate let me know.
Bring forth these extra biblical sources that support the nonsense in the bible.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 6:45:23 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:37:31 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 5:00:20 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:56:39 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:31:23 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.

But, Wikipedia is full of words, hence it is evidence according to you.

Aren't words evidence?

Sure but its who the words are from thats important.

No, it isn't, that is a fallacy. It is the claims being made that are important.

Ill let Harvard explain it to you even though you disagree with their academic practices:

But, I don't disagree, it is you who is confused.

Nevertheless, when you're doing academic research, you should be extremely cautious about using Wikipedia. As its own disclaimer states, information on Wikipedia is contributed by anyone who wants to post material, and the expertise of the posters is not taken into consideration. Users may be reading information that is outdated or that has been posted by someone who is not an expert in the field or by someone who wishes to provide misinformation. (Case in point: Four years ago, an Expos student who was writing a paper about the limitations of Wikipedia posted a fictional entry for himself, stating that he was the mayor of a small town in China. Four years later, if you type in his name, or if you do a subject search on Wikipedia for mayors of towns in China, you will still find this fictional entry.) Some information on Wikipedia may well be accurate, but because experts do not review the site's entries, there is a considerable risk in relying on this source for your essays.
http://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu...

Yes, and the exact same thing can be said about Gospels, that the information contained within is fictional even though written by someone who claimed it is the truth. See how that works?

That's just a blatant ignoring of the consistency and extra biblical sources supporting it. Like I said, anytime you want to do the debate let me know.

You mean like you ignoring Wiki and the sources that support it?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 7:26:20 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:36:48 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/28/2016 3:15:44 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:28:06 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

I disagree, B. One might argue the logical impossibility of claims or characteristics normally attributed to specific gods. For instance, an immortal god 'dying' or any unlimited descriptor such as omnipotence, etc. So, arguing against religion need not regard history at all.

There are unexplained phenomena that people record these days all the time, does that mean that what they have recorded isn't true just because it doesn't fit within a certain world view?

I don't see the relevance of your reply.

If something is logically impossible, no empirical observation can make it possible. If an individual says they have a square circle that grants wishes, no amount of evidence will ever redeem the claim from the logical impossibility of a square circle.

So are you going to say the Dyatlov Pass incident never happened because you cant make it logically possible or make any empirical observations that make sense?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

Nobody knows the origins of the Antikytheral Mechanism, its logically impossible that ancients possessed such knowledge of gear making and there are no empirical observations anyone in that time period it is from knew how to create one.
http://www.antikythera-mechanism.com...

Do you think spontaneous human combustion never happens? Theres no empirical observational evidence for this either and its completely illogical yet it happens.

Since no one has ever observered a Genus transforming into another, would you then say evolution can be thrown out of the window because theres no empirical evidence for this ever happening?
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 7:27:43 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:42:41 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:37:31 PM, bigotry wrote:
That's just a blatant ignoring of the consistency and extra biblical sources supporting it. Like I said, anytime you want to do the debate let me know.
Bring forth these extra biblical sources that support the nonsense in the bible.
Why would I bother giving you anything if your already using combative terms like "nonsense in the bible"
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 7:29:06 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 6:45:23 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:37:31 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 5:00:20 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:56:39 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:31:23 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.

But, Wikipedia is full of words, hence it is evidence according to you.

Aren't words evidence?

Sure but its who the words are from thats important.

No, it isn't, that is a fallacy. It is the claims being made that are important.

Ill let Harvard explain it to you even though you disagree with their academic practices:

But, I don't disagree, it is you who is confused.

Nevertheless, when you're doing academic research, you should be extremely cautious about using Wikipedia. As its own disclaimer states, information on Wikipedia is contributed by anyone who wants to post material, and the expertise of the posters is not taken into consideration. Users may be reading information that is outdated or that has been posted by someone who is not an expert in the field or by someone who wishes to provide misinformation. (Case in point: Four years ago, an Expos student who was writing a paper about the limitations of Wikipedia posted a fictional entry for himself, stating that he was the mayor of a small town in China. Four years later, if you type in his name, or if you do a subject search on Wikipedia for mayors of towns in China, you will still find this fictional entry.) Some information on Wikipedia may well be accurate, but because experts do not review the site's entries, there is a considerable risk in relying on this source for your essays.
http://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu...

Yes, and the exact same thing can be said about Gospels, that the information contained within is fictional even though written by someone who claimed it is the truth. See how that works?

That's just a blatant ignoring of the consistency and extra biblical sources supporting it. Like I said, anytime you want to do the debate let me know.

You mean like you ignoring Wiki and the sources that support it?
How does that deal with my point? Do you have any evidence the biblical sources are just like Wikipedia?
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 7:31:05 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Interesting to me the same people arguing against religious authenticity have not yet shown a single historical inconsistency or are even willing to debate such a thing on a debate forum!
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,652
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 7:50:19 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 7:29:06 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:45:23 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:37:31 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 5:00:20 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:56:39 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:31:23 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2016 4:22:40 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 7:22:20 AM, bulproof wrote:
Numbers and logistics

According to Exodus 12:37"38, the Israelites numbered "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children," plus many non-Israelites and livestock.[19] Numbers 1:46 gives a more precise total of 603,550 men aged 20 and up.[20] It is difficult to reconcile the idea of 600,000 Israelite fighting men with the information that the Israelites were afraid of the Philistines and Egyptians.[21] The 600,000, plus wives, children, the elderly, and the "mixed multitude" of non-Israelites would have numbered some 2 million people.[22] Marching ten abreast, and without accounting for livestock, they would have formed a line 150 miles long.[23] The entire Egyptian population in 1250 BCE is estimated to have been around 3 to 3.5 million,[24][22] and no evidence has been found that Egypt ever suffered the demographic and economic catastrophe such a loss of population would represent, nor that the Sinai desert ever hosted (or could have hosted) these millions of people and their herds.[25]

Some have rationalised the numbers into smaller figures, for example reading the Hebrew as "600 families" rather than 600,000 men, but all such solutions have their own set of problems.[26] The most probable explanation is that 600,000 symbolises the total destruction of the generation of Israel which left Egypt, none of whom lived to see the Promised Land,[27] while the 603,550 is a gematria (a code in which numbers represent letters or words) for bnei yisra'el kol rosh, "the children of Israel, every individual".[28]
Archaeology

A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness,[29] and archaeologists generally agree that the Israelites had Canaanite origins.[30] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains are in the Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite.[31] Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones, although whether even this is an ethnic marker or is due to other factors remains a matter of dispute.[31]
Anachronisms

Despite the Bible's internal dating of the Exodus to the 2nd millennium BCE, details point to a 1st millennium date for the composition of the Book of Exodus: Ezion-Geber, (one of the Stations of the Exodus), for example, dates to a period between the 8th and 6th centuries BCE with possible further occupation into the 4th century BCE,[32] and those place-names on the Exodus route which have been identified " Goshen, Pithom, Succoth, Ramesses and Kadesh Barnea " point to the geography of the 1st millennium rather than the 2nd.[33]

Similarly, the Pharaoh's fear that the Israelites might ally themselves with foreign invaders seems unlikely in the context of the late 2nd millennium, when Canaan was part of an Egyptian empire and Egypt faced no enemies in that direction, but does make sense in a 1st millennium context, when Egypt was considerably weaker and faced invasion first from the Achaemenid Empire and later from the Seleucid Empire.[34]

The mention of the dromedary in Exodus 9:3 also suggests a later date of composition " the widespread domestication of the camel as a herd animal is thought not to have taken place before the late 2nd millennium, after the Israelites had already emerged in Canaan,[35] and they did not become widespread in Egypt until c.200"100 BCE.[36]
Chronology

The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature. The number seven was sacred to God in Judaism, and so the Israelites arrive at the Sinai Peninsula, where they will meet God, at the beginning of the seventh week after their departure from Egypt,[37] while the erection of the Tabernacle, God's dwelling-place among his people, occurs in the year 2666 after God creates the world, two-thirds of the way through a four thousand year era which culminates in or around the re-dedication of the Second Temple in 164 BCE.[38][39][Notes 2]
https://en.wikipedia.org...

History for you bigot.

Wikipedia isnt a soure. Nice try though.

But, Wikipedia is full of words, hence it is evidence according to you.

Aren't words evidence?

Sure but its who the words are from thats important.

No, it isn't, that is a fallacy. It is the claims being made that are important.

Ill let Harvard explain it to you even though you disagree with their academic practices:

But, I don't disagree, it is you who is confused.

Nevertheless, when you're doing academic research, you should be extremely cautious about using Wikipedia. As its own disclaimer states, information on Wikipedia is contributed by anyone who wants to post material, and the expertise of the posters is not taken into consideration. Users may be reading information that is outdated or that has been posted by someone who is not an expert in the field or by someone who wishes to provide misinformation. (Case in point: Four years ago, an Expos student who was writing a paper about the limitations of Wikipedia posted a fictional entry for himself, stating that he was the mayor of a small town in China. Four years later, if you type in his name, or if you do a subject search on Wikipedia for mayors of towns in China, you will still find this fictional entry.) Some information on Wikipedia may well be accurate, but because experts do not review the site's entries, there is a considerable risk in relying on this source for your essays.
http://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu...

Yes, and the exact same thing can be said about Gospels, that the information contained within is fictional even though written by someone who claimed it is the truth. See how that works?

That's just a blatant ignoring of the consistency and extra biblical sources supporting it. Like I said, anytime you want to do the debate let me know.

You mean like you ignoring Wiki and the sources that support it?
How does that deal with my point?

It shows you're a hypocrite, of course.

Do you have any evidence the biblical sources are just like Wikipedia?

Is that your claim? Why would you ask me to support your claim?
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2016 8:09:55 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/28/2016 7:26:20 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:36:48 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/28/2016 3:15:44 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:28:06 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/28/2016 6:00:53 AM, bigotry wrote:

If anyone is going to argue against any religion it has to be done in a historical framework.

I disagree, B. One might argue the logical impossibility of claims or characteristics normally attributed to specific gods. For instance, an immortal god 'dying' or any unlimited descriptor such as omnipotence, etc. So, arguing against religion need not regard history at all.

There are unexplained phenomena that people record these days all the time, does that mean that what they have recorded isn't true just because it doesn't fit within a certain world view?

I don't see the relevance of your reply.

If something is logically impossible, no empirical observation can make it possible. If an individual says they have a square circle that grants wishes, no amount of evidence will ever redeem the claim from the logical impossibility of a square circle.

So are you going to say the Dyatlov Pass incident never happened because you cant make it logically possible or make any empirical observations that make sense?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

Nobody knows the origins of the Antikytheral Mechanism, its logically impossible that ancients possessed such knowledge of gear making and there are no empirical observations anyone in that time period it is from knew how to create one.
http://www.antikythera-mechanism.com...

Do you think spontaneous human combustion never happens? Theres no empirical observational evidence for this either and its completely illogical yet it happens.

Since no one has ever observered a Genus transforming into another, would you then say evolution can be thrown out of the window because theres no empirical evidence for this ever happening?

You're confusing logically impossible with implausible and/or misunderstood. Your examples are all possible even though some are unexplained or viewed incredulously. Something that is logically impossible is, and forever shall be, impossible unless logic itself is shown to be faulty.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten