Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Cheerful Charlie · 05-29-2013, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

The story of Job is an obvious allegory for Jewish captivity or oppression. The biblical wisdom literature in the bible tends to be prefaced as teacher to student or father to son. My Oxford commentary says Job was probably part of a larger set of teaching materials.

It seems to me, that job is an attempt to deal with the Problem of Evil. Plato noted in his time, the PoE created atheists. The fool has said in his heart there is no God. Atheism then was known in Biblical times and we can be assured as in the time of Plato, existence of a powerful God and evil was a creator of disbelief.

Job then is a failed attempt to deal with the issue of explaining evil. the answer is simply
divine command theory. God makes the rules and we may not question God's decisions.
There is no absolute except what God decides to do. It is an answer dressed up in some ugly bluster. A main point is we have no right to demand answers of a seemingly arbitrary and cruel God.

I note with interest that Plato answers with his good workman theory, god is a good workman that never lets the job go unfinished. All will be made good in the afterlife, the evil punished, the good rewarded. i note Job does not have a belief in an afterlife where the good workman God will set things right

Blustering divine command is all the writer of Job could come up with. Plato's Euthryphro is a far more searching analysis of the problem.

Cheerful Charlie

semiopen · 05-29-2013, 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I will know not toseek dialogue with you, Semiopen, on these issues. You aren't the slightest bit interested in discussing any issue related to 2000 years of commentary from th Jewish sources. Only heaven knows whereyou come up with outlandish ideas. A " priest" added three plagues? Who, what, where, when, and why?

Just to be clear, by "priest" Semiopen was referring to what is commonly called the "

Priestly source" in all scholarly analyses of the pentateuch since Wellhausen. Far from only heaven knowing where the "outlandish idea" came from, if Duvduv opened a scholarly book on the subject he might find out for himself and not seem so totally oblivious to pentateuch scholarship.

A striking part in all of this is that I quoted Jeffrey Leonard above, who frankly was so conservative that I hesitated to use him.

There isn't a single Jewish studies scholar, to my knowledge, that would argue that any of the Torah was written by Moses.

The accounts of the Exodus were written almost 1000 years after it allegedly happened.

Leonard suggests Psalm 78 was written during the reign of

Hezekiah

Quote:

Hezekiah /ˌhɛzɨˈkaɪ.ə/ (Hebrew: חִזְקִיָּ֫הוּ, חִזְקִיָּ֫ה, יְחִזְקִיָּ֫הוּ; Greek: Ἐζεκίας, Ezekias, in the Septuagint; Latin: Ezechias; also transliterated as Ḥizkiyyahu or Ḥizkiyyah) was the son of Ahaz and the 13th king of Judah.[1] Edwin Thiele has concluded that his reign was between c. 715 and 686 BC.[2]

That's quite recent for old Hebrew. The vast majority of the Torah was undoubtedly written after this.

I mentioned footnote 53 in my previous post but didn't quote it

Quote:

53 The fact that Psalm 78 and P share so few terms, especially when compared to the psalm's extensive use of JE vocabulary, raises the possibility that the psalmist and the Priestly writer drew independently on common traditions or even that P relied on Psalm 78. Unfortunately, there is not enough evidence to decide conclusively in favor of one or the other of these possibilities. Taking a step back, however, the larger point is that the psalmist clearly did not rely on P.

The most likely scenario seems to be that the author of psalm 78 was reading a version of the Exodus plague account before the priestly stuff was inserted.

The passage of so much time, and the character of the insertions that we know happened has to make the biblical account totally questionable.

Duvi has no problem with subjecting us to his hysterical anti-archaeology tirades, but asks us to believe that the Torah is literally true. Moreover, he has hinted that 900 year old guys were running around before the flood because of something different in the air.

Duvduv · 05-29-2013, 07:29 AM

Your personal insults (hysteria?) do nothing for your argument except to demonstrate the intolerance and bigotry of your branch of secularism. Is there such a thing as a secular Ku Klux Klan burning something on religious people's front yards?

PS. I am no more anti-archaeology than I am against architects. They are engaged in a technology. What I might disagree with are interpretations, though I understand if you accept archaeological interpretation as your religion.

Iskander · 05-29-2013, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Your personal insults (hysteria?) do nothing for your argument except to demonstrate the intolerance and bigotry of your branch of secularism. Is there such a thing as a secular Ku Klux Klan burning something on religious people's front yards?

PS. I am no more anti-archaeology than I am against architects. They are engaged in a technology. What I might disagree with are interpretations, though I understand if you accept archaeological interpretation as your religion.

This should cheer you up a little. Translate satan and devil as ‘the adversary’. And it becomes the song before the sea; the song of those moving forward in the expectation of a sweeter future.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amznb...eature=related
I am on my way
Elmer Gantry movie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9RIvXxG0iU
Patti Page - I'm On My Way (from the film "Elmer Gantry")
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amznbi

semiopen · 05-29-2013, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Your personal insults (hysteria?) do nothing for your argument except to demonstrate the intolerance and bigotry of your branch of secularism. Is there such a thing as a secular Ku Klux Klan burning something on religious people's front yards?

PS. I am no more anti-archaeology than I am against architects. They are engaged in a technology. What I might disagree with are interpretations, though I understand if you accept archaeological interpretation as your religion.

We are in a debating forum.

You initiated a totally uncalled for attack on archaeology because it (in your mind) is not capable of finding evidence for an event that to any rational observer is mythical.

The absence of archaeological evidence seems to be significant in this case. Why is that a religion? The lack of evidence gave you a problem, so you mounted an hysterical argument to try and paint over the deficiencies in your position.

Hysterical

Quote:

1. of, pertaining to, or characterized by hysteria.
2. uncontrollably emotional.
3. irrational from fear, emotion, or an emotional shock.

Hysteria

Quote:

1. an uncontrollable outburst of emotion or fear, often characterized by irrationality, laughter, weeping, etc.

Your argument and behavior fits this definition. You failed to respond to my repeated request for clarification on your North African example, you spoiled an interesting digression into the Elephantine Papyri with an idiotic and irrational joke about Eva Frank, and irrationally maintained that she was the

Black Madonna of Częstochowa even after I had demonstrated that this title was not appropriate (at least the Black part).

Had you wanted to make the point that the lack of evidence does not absolutely prove that the (an) Exodus didn't happen, there were better ways to go about it.

You are insisting on the literal truth of the Exodus account, without providing the slightest defense of your position.

In addition to your attack on archaeology, you hinted that you are also perpared to attack Geology, Physics, and probably every other scientific discipline in post 257

Quote:

The creation of the universe is beyond human comprehension and our concepts of time and space. That's why dating creation to billions of years ago makes no sense. If God created the universe he did it beyond our conceptions of time and space, so what appears within our definitions of time and space to be billions of years is not really the case.

Finally, it is practically an indisputable fact that the Torah was not written by Moses. I don't go seeking out Haredim to tell them that their views aren't true but you are participating in a secular forum, and I have the right to call you out on that without expecting to be insulted.

Sarpedon · 05-29-2013, 08:27 AM

Read my post again.

There is ONE ancient source for the Hyksos: Manetho.

There is NO archaelogical evidence to support a massive invasion of Egypt from Asia at that time.

I do not deny the possibility of Asiatic immigration at that time, nor that some immigrants may have ended up in charge of one or more of the petty delta kingdoms at that time.

Since I won't believe in Exodus because there's one legendary source and no evidence, I can't logically believe in a Hyksos invasion, can I? Duvduv pointed this out.

The whole Hyksos thing has been overplayed because of its possible connection to the Exodus anyway. Once the Exodus passed into myth, people stopped giving a rats ass about the Hyksos, so there's not much present scholarship.

Adam · 05-29-2013, 09:23 AM

Sources, please. And define the word "massive" as you use it here. Are you admitting that there is massive evidence for leaving Egypt, which is the point at issue.

Or is your view based on the fallacy, "Absence of evidence is evidence of absence", modified here to be, "Absence of much current scholarship on the Hyksos is evidence there were no Hyksos and that all prior scholarship about the Hyksos is bogus." What about Manfred Bietak's archaeological digs?

Duvduv · 05-29-2013, 10:04 AM

This is an open forum. Please reread its FAQs unless you serve as moderator and have changed them. What is prohibited in this Forum is "evangelizing" and promoting one's own theology. If this were an issue for me in relation to my postings I think I would have heard of it by now.

I honestly do not know where you get your descriptions of me. I also think you should check up on the history of Jacob Frank. Beyond that you should probably relax a bit. You do not have to attack me personally as I do not attack you personally. It's called argumentum ad hominem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Your personal insults (hysteria?) do nothing for your argument except to demonstrate the intolerance and bigotry of your branch of secularism. Is there such a thing as a secular Ku Klux Klan burning something on religious people's front yards?

PS. I am no more anti-archaeology than I am against architects. They are engaged in a technology. What I might disagree with are interpretations, though I understand if you accept archaeological interpretation as your religion.

We are in a debating forum.

You initiated a totally uncalled for attack on archaeology because it (in your mind) is not capable of finding evidence for an event that to any rational observer is mythical.

The absence of archaeological evidence seems to be significant in this case. Why is that a religion? The lack of evidence gave you a problem, so you mounted an hysterical argument to try and paint over the deficiencies in your position.

Hysterical

Hysteria

Your argument and behavior fits this definition. You failed to respond to my repeated request for clarification on your North African example, you spoiled an interesting digression into the Elephantine Papyri with an idiotic and irrational joke about Eva Frank, and irrationally maintained that she was the

Black Madonna of Częstochowa even after I had demonstrated that this title was not appropriate (at least the Black part).

Had you wanted to make the point that the lack of evidence does not absolutely prove that the (an) Exodus didn't happen, there were better ways to go about it.

You are insisting on the literal truth of the Exodus account, without providing the slightest defense of your position.

In addition to your attack on archaeology, you hinted that you are also perpared to attack Geology, Physics, and probably every other scientific discipline in post 257

Quote:

The creation of the universe is beyond human comprehension and our concepts of time and space. That's why dating creation to billions of years ago makes no sense. If God created the universe he did it beyond our conceptions of time and space, so what appears within our definitions of time and space to be billions of years is not really the case.

Finally, it is practically an indisputable fact that the Torah was not written by Moses. I don't go seeking out Haredim to tell them that their views aren't true but you are participating in a secular forum, and I have the right to call you out on that without expecting to be insulted.

steve_bnk · 05-29-2013, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheerful Charlie

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

The story of Job is an obvious allegory for Jewish captivity or oppression. The biblical wisdom literature in the bible tends to be prefaced as teacher to student or father to son. My Oxford commentary says Job was probably part of a larger set of teaching materials.

It seems to me, that job is an attempt to deal with the Problem of Evil. Plato noted in his time, the PoE created atheists. The fool has said in his heart there is no God. Atheism then was known in Biblical times and we can be assured as in the time of Plato, existence of a powerful God and evil was a creator of disbelief.

Job then is a failed attempt to deal with the issue of explaining evil. the answer is simply
divine command theory. God makes the rules and we may not question God's decisions.
There is no absolute except what God decides to do. It is an answer dressed up in some ugly bluster. A main point is we have no right to demand answers of a seemingly arbitrary and cruel God.

I note with interest that Plato answers with his good workman theory, god is a good workman that never lets the job go unfinished. All will be made good in the afterlife, the evil punished, the good rewarded. i note Job does not have a belief in an afterlife where the good workman God will set things right

Blustering divine command is all the writer of Job could come up with. Plato's Euthryphro is a far more searching analysis of the problem.

Cheerful Charlie

Shit happens to good people.

steve_bnk · 05-29-2013, 10:18 AM

duvduv

Evangelizing is using a thread to promote a personal faih while not entering into debate, testifying to your faith is another word for it.

A Christian repeatedly saying Jesus saved him or Jesus is lord in response to questions would be evangelizing. It happens. A thread gets hijacked.

I don't see you as evangelizing, at leas not to any major degree. .If you get filled with the spirit and begin proclaiming the glories of David and Solomon to us, that would be evanegelizng...

'...Your personal insults (hysteria?) do nothing for your argument except to demonstrate the intolerance and bigotry of your branch of secularism. Is there such a thing as a secular Ku Klux Klan burning something on religious people's front yards?..'

Totally uncalled for and IMO a TOU violation. The forum has generally been pretty even handed to you. The op is about evidence fo Exodus, which you are unable to provide at least in any coherent way.

You have not refuted the basic objections based on logistcs alone.

That above is a typical angry kind of end game theist response when we collectively reuse to accept

1. Hand waving and generalizations for specific arguments.

2. A reliance on claiming directly or indirectly the bible by definition is truth. I win a-priori because the bible is true and god is real.

3. Inability to directly answer questions and refute objetions. I asked a number o times what is your belief in Exodus and why. Your reponse is asking what do I think about something else.

I suggest you take a little time and work up a coherent argument to support Exodus rather than calling us Nazis. I think calling people Nazis may be one of the TOU updates.

Baesd on the Exodus numbers, time span, and area what is your reponse to objections based on reosurces like food, sanitation, and water?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-29-2013, 07:29 AM	#293
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Your personal insults (hysteria?) do nothing for your argument except to demonstrate the intolerance and bigotry of your branch of secularism. Is there such a thing as a secular Ku Klux Klan burning something on religious people's front yards? PS. I am no more anti-archaeology than I am against architects. They are engaged in a technology. What I might disagree with are interpretations, though I understand if you accept archaeological interpretation as your religion.

05-29-2013, 08:27 AM	#296
Sarpedon Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Minnesota, the least controversial state in the le Posts: 8,446	Read my post again. There is ONE ancient source for the Hyksos: Manetho. There is NO archaelogical evidence to support a massive invasion of Egypt from Asia at that time. I do not deny the possibility of Asiatic immigration at that time, nor that some immigrants may have ended up in charge of one or more of the petty delta kingdoms at that time. Since I won't believe in Exodus because there's one legendary source and no evidence, I can't logically believe in a Hyksos invasion, can I? Duvduv pointed this out. The whole Hyksos thing has been overplayed because of its possible connection to the Exodus anyway. Once the Exodus passed into myth, people stopped giving a rats ass about the Hyksos, so there's not much present scholarship.

05-29-2013, 09:23 AM	#297
Adam Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Dixon CA Posts: 1,150	Sources, please. And define the word "massive" as you use it here. Are you admitting that there is massive evidence for leaving Egypt, which is the point at issue. Or is your view based on the fallacy, "Absence of evidence is evidence of absence", modified here to be, "Absence of much current scholarship on the Hyksos is evidence there were no Hyksos and that all prior scholarship about the Hyksos is bogus." What about Manfred Bietak's archaeological digs?

05-29-2013, 10:18 AM	#300
steve_bnk Contributor Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,602	duvduv Evangelizing is using a thread to promote a personal faih while not entering into debate, testifying to your faith is another word for it. A Christian repeatedly saying Jesus saved him or Jesus is lord in response to questions would be evangelizing. It happens. A thread gets hijacked. I don't see you as evangelizing, at leas not to any major degree. .If you get filled with the spirit and begin proclaiming the glories of David and Solomon to us, that would be evanegelizng... '...Your personal insults (hysteria?) do nothing for your argument except to demonstrate the intolerance and bigotry of your branch of secularism. Is there such a thing as a secular Ku Klux Klan burning something on religious people's front yards?..' Totally uncalled for and IMO a TOU violation. The forum has generally been pretty even handed to you. The op is about evidence fo Exodus, which you are unable to provide at least in any coherent way. You have not refuted the basic objections based on logistcs alone. That above is a typical angry kind of end game theist response when we collectively reuse to accept 1. Hand waving and generalizations for specific arguments. 2. A reliance on claiming directly or indirectly the bible by definition is truth. I win a-priori because the bible is true and god is real. 3. Inability to directly answer questions and refute objetions. I asked a number o times what is your belief in Exodus and why. Your reponse is asking what do I think about something else. I suggest you take a little time and work up a coherent argument to support Exodus rather than calling us Nazis. I think calling people Nazis may be one of the TOU updates. Baesd on the Exodus numbers, time span, and area what is your reponse to objections based on reosurces like food, sanitation, and water?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.