Sheshbazzar

What maths? please explain.

fatpie42

You need to study some classics. There's even a Disney movie ffs!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heracles

Okay, where the hell are you getting all this stuff? The story describes a man who has the power to kill an entire army with a jaw bone, but loses this strength simply when he loses his hair. How on earth is this not 'magic'?

Within the midrash Samson is described as being able to lift mountains and cover enormous distances (from Zorah to Eshtaol) in one stride. Within the book in Bible he is described as pulling a lion in half with his bear hands.

None of this really seems to describe someone suffering from Polio. Nor do his actions seem like what you'd expect by someone whose hair acts as a psychological motivator.


Excuse me. Are you saying that the Battle of Thermopylae (which, let's not forget, even taking the account of Herodotus to be accurate, involved 7000 men at the point where they were taking advantage of the technique you just suggested) is comparable to one man in a narrow gauge with a jawbone as their only weapon?

You know what is really plausible? Marital infidelity. So, I suppose that means we ought to accept the many affairs of Zeus as historical events too?

Sheshbazzar

I'm sure that I'd enjoy the movie, if I have opportunity I'll certainly watch it.

But here I'd really like to draw out a little of IamJoseph's -personal- store of knowledge of "its excellence in maths".

My name "Sheshbazzar", is clue, (even a mathematical one) that I myself, am quite the Loo Loo in these matters.
If you read my earliest posts in this forum you will see what I mean.

IamJoseph

It was not an entire army but a pose sent to capture samson [not only prone to magic], who first gave himself up voluntarilly. The hair can be a psychological impact by inculcationing. What you are saying is, if certain factors appear unrealistic, the entire story of Samson is totally fiction - and what I say is, there are more than sufficient historical & contemporary factors in that writings to deny that.

If you quote the Medrash, then you should know this is a book not of history, but is based on alegory and symbolism only. It denotes a feeling rather than a fact.

Yes, Samson was born handicapped, which is subtly embedded in the source book.

Yes, why not? There are no numbers included in the story, except that a strong man who defied capture before, prevailed over a large number of soldiers via securing himself in a narrow gauze which did not allow many to pass at one time.

While there are inexplicable miraces listed in the five books of Moses, it does not render all its historicity negated; the same applies with the book of kings: almost monthly, there are archeological relics proving various verses and passages of those writings, with museums housing these relics. I know of no other writings bearing the same measure of validity. Certain this is not the case for early Greek and Roman writings, which are far easier to evidence f they were not based on total Zeus, Hercules and divine empreror myths: these are varied in kind than degree from the Hebrew writings, notwithstanding the latter's greater anciency.

All of the figures in the book of Kings [upto 3,100 years ago] are proven via factual science; this book alligns fully with the book of Judges it followed by 250 years. We go by what's provable, not by unprovable miracles. I cannot prove that the sea parted - but I can evidence that the israelites were in Egypt 210 years and that they departed and embedded themselves in Canaan; the former does not dent the latter.

Lord Emsworth

How about the English idiom "out of whole cloth?"

(made up) out of whole cloth
to be completely invented The whole article was a fairy tale, made up out of whole cloth.

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/out+of+whole+cloth

semiopen

Rabbi Tvi Freeman, of Chabad.org wrote about this subject which you responded to with your unique, if incomprehensible, speech theory. Rabbi Freeman would never write anything not approved by the Rebbe.

http://www.chabad.org/library/articl...e-Universe.htm

People have a right to their beliefs, some people might be offended by calling respected, widely held, and empirically tested theories deities.

It is possible that God created the world ten years ago and gave us all memories to make us think it is older. In that respect, creationism cannot positively be called a myth.

Amaleq13

As promised, the evolution tangent has been split out and shipped off to E/C where it belongs. The new thread may be continued at Evolution of speech confusion.

Enjoy.

IamJoseph

My premise is wholly in accord wth that article. My response in the post was driected only to the term 'myth' [creation myth] applies to Chabbad.

semiopen

myth (a traditional story accepted as history; serves to explain the world view of a people)

Myths aren't negative, one might even say evolution is a myth.

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get me.

fatpie42

That is pure mythology. There is no way that you can point to that story and call it plausible. An army holding its own in a narrow gauge against a larger army makes sense. One man? Not a chance. If several members of the army die, the battle goes on. If the one man dies, it is all over.

It's not the miracles that concern me. It is the style of the story. It's not just that the events that happen to Samson are implausible, it's that he himself is described in a way which is entirely implausible.

Naturally that doesn't mean that he couldn't be real. Herakles might also be based upon a real person. The problem is that the story gives us little indication as to what is truth and what is fiction. It's interesting that you should mention the 'books of Moses', since Moses too suffers from a similar problem. Was he really born from a Jewish mother or was he an Egyptian who helped the Jews escape and was claimed as one of their own afterwards? Did the event really happen in Egypt or is it based on an older story and updated to a more familiar scenario? The story of the plagues, once again, has the hallmarks of mythology so we can no more pose "manna from heaven" in the desert to be historical than we can the Augean stables in the story of Herakles.

Who considers these relics to validate the stories of the Tenakh? Evangelical Christian archaeologists who want to prove a literal Biblical account or Israeli archaeologists asserting their claim to identity over that of the Palestinians?

Elijah is proven by science? You are having a laugh. This is a ridiculous conversation.