Freethought & Rationalism Archive

gregor · 01-18-2008, 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

. . . there's none so blind as those that [close their eyes in prayer and thereby intepret data] . . .

There, fixed it for you.

reniaa · 01-18-2008, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

To be honest pagan symbol usage are quite in keeping with biblical history, from the Exodus we know that egyptian symbols/idols where taken along and used after it by the people who fled with moses and if you read the story of King Solomon who built the jerusalem temple, the bible is quite clear that he got seduced away from God into pagan worship by wives from other nations towards the end of his reign. The bible never hides the fact that the israelites then the jews get effected quite easily by the worship of nations around them. It often calls them a hard-hearted people.

The corroboration is important because skeptics often say "Oh the big people are mentioned etc because the writers know about them so weave a story around them" but this is again an average family doing their daily life the names mentioned correctly in the bible and now archaeological evidence backing it up. Pointing to the writer having intimate knowledge of place time and people. /sigh! there's none so blind as those that refuse to see!

So no one else ever held the name except the one contained in the OT? it isn't ever used for anything else so it HAS to be the one in the scriptures? Actually there are none so blind as those who jump to unsupported conclusions. all this "proves" is that the name may of been used and existed in the ancient world.

This is a very weak arguement, it's like if in a 1000 years time someone finds a political document mentioning tony blair and we know from a political book he was a prime minister and saying the two aren't related, there's loads of people named blair at this time etc, it's splitting hairs even for a skeptic, but something i'm used too from people hell bent on proving their viewpoint come what may...

reniaa · 01-18-2008, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

. . . there's none so blind as those that [close their eyes in prayer and thereby intepret data] . . .

There, fixed it for you.

at least people can read my original point without your deceiving add-on that you can't change! This is an actual artifact we could go see and touch that mentions a name in the bible we could go read and compare, how more real than that does it get?

In the end skeptics are believers in the unseen just as much as theists/christians you still haven't got an answer for how life began if God isn't part of the equation! give me some answer for that other than erm "Big bang" and I may give you guys more credibility too.

Jack the Bodiless · 01-18-2008, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

So no one else ever held the name except the one contained in the OT? it isn't ever used for anything else so it HAS to be the one in the scriptures? Actually there are none so blind as those who jump to unsupported conclusions. all this "proves" is that the name may of been used and existed in the ancient world.

This is a very weak arguement, it's like if in a 1000 years time someone finds a political document mentioning tony blair and we know from a political book he was a prime minister and saying the two aren't related, there's loads of people named blair at this time etc, it's splitting hairs even for a skeptic, but something i'm used too from people hell bent on proving their viewpoint come what may...

reniaa, you seem to have missed the part where it was pointed out that the name was written the wrong way round for a seal. And also that it was the holy symbol of the wrong god...

To use your analogy, this is like proving the existence of the Christian Tony Blair by finding a Jew called Rialb Ynot.

Malachi151 · 01-18-2008, 06:55 AM

There are tons of artifacts that have names on them that are the same as names in the Bible. There are hundreds of artifacts with the name Jesus on them. There are artifacts with the names Abraham, Isaac, David, Isaiah, etc., etc., etc. I don't know this statistic, but I wouldn't be surprised if we have some artifact possessing the name of almost every name in the Bible.

These are just names after all. I don't think that anyone ever claimed that the ancient Jews fabricated all of the names in their stories....

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor

There, fixed it for you.

at least people can read my original point without your deceiving add-on that you can't change! This is an actual artifact we could go see and touch that mentions a name in the bible we could go read and compare, how more real than that does it get?

In the end skeptics are believers in the unseen just as much as theists/christians you still haven't got an answer for how life began if God isn't part of the equation! give me some answer for that other than erm "Big bang" and I may give you guys more credibility too.

reniaa · 01-18-2008, 07:13 AM

Quote:

There are tons of artifacts that have names on them that are the same as names in the Bible. There are hundreds of artifacts with the name Jesus on them. There are artifacts with the names Abraham, Isaac, David, Isaiah, etc., etc., etc. I don't know this statistic, but I wouldn't be surprised if we have some artifact possessing the name of almost every name in the Bible.

These are just names after all. I don't think that anyone ever claimed that the ancient Jews fabricated all of the names in their stories....

in a response from the link mentioning the mirror image issue...

Quote:

“The seal doesn’t ‘confirm’ anything in the Bible…”

That’s an interesting statement. Here we have a seal with excellent provenance dating to a period described in the Bible, with an inscription that can be read forward or backward to produce names mentioned in the same period described in the Bible, & yet you say it doesn’t confirm anything. And I agree with you 100%; but aren’t you the same person who believes that atheistic biologists have confirmed the process of biological Evolution confirming the origin of all species from inanimate elements, even though there is no known mechanism for the origin of new genetic information?

By the way, for those questioning the reading of the Shin as being a sort of odd, overlapping double-V construction, this same form is present on the S2DW type seal dated a couple centuries earlier (here’s a provenanced specimen; here’s an unprovenanced one with better focus on the Shin).

http://www.heardworld.com/higgaion/?p=896

nothing is cut and dried or definate but from what I read the positives for it outweigh the negatives. this still doesn't take from the fact it's a real find with hebrew names on it in the right area to find it and from the right time period.

yalla · 01-18-2008, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by WVIncagold

So no one else ever held the name except the one contained in the OT? it isn't ever used for anything else so it HAS to be the one in the scriptures? Actually there are none so blind as those who jump to unsupported conclusions. all this "proves" is that the name may of been used and existed in the ancient world.

This is a very weak arguement, it's like if in a 1000 years time someone finds a political document mentioning tony blair and we know from a political book he was a prime minister and saying the two aren't related, there's loads of people named blair at this time etc, it's splitting hairs even for a skeptic, but something i'm used too from people hell bent on proving their viewpoint come what may...

Well you have placed 2 limitations on the range of possibilities, 2 names 'Tony 'and 'Blair' and stipulating a political document.
So to test your theory I googled "Blair", just the family name, and from just the first page of results I got a range including these that could be political in some way:
1.THE Tony Blair @Wiki
2.Blog by Tim Blair
3.Blair electorate in Australia
4.Reference to a singer Blair
5.Clan Blair Society.
6.Webpage for a uni fella in Australia.

That's from about a dozen entries.

I didn't check any of the other 56,000,00 results.

Doesn't suppose your desire does it?

Oh and if you follow the links you would discover that the name should probably be "Smith" anyway.

reniaa · 01-18-2008, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yalla

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

This is a very weak arguement, it's like if in a 1000 years time someone finds a political document mentioning tony blair and we know from a political book he was a prime minister and saying the two aren't related, there's loads of people named blair at this time etc, it's splitting hairs even for a skeptic, but something i'm used too from people hell bent on proving their viewpoint come what may...

Well you have placed 2 limitations on the range of possibilities, 2 names 'Tony 'and 'Blair' and stipulating a political document.
So to test your theory I googled "Blair", just the family name, and from just the first page of results I got a range including these that could be political in some way:
1.THE Tony Blair @Wiki
2.Blog by Tim Blair
3.Blair electorate in Australia
4.Reference to a singer Blair
5.Clan Blair Society.
6.Webpage for a uni fella in Australia.

That's from about a dozen entries.

I didn't check any of the other 56,000,00 results.

Doesn't suppose your desire does it?

Oh and if you follow the links you would discover that the name should probably be "Smith" anyway.

yes but even with google you can limit parametres in the seal case you can do time, period, area, and temple to make the search smaller and to compare the billions of people on web to the much smaller number from that time is being a bit deceptive too. you have to deal a little with percentages of populations with these examples.

yalla · 01-18-2008, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

Quote:

Originally Posted by yalla

Well you have placed 2 limitations on the range of possibilities, 2 names 'Tony 'and 'Blair' and stipulating a political document.
So to test your theory I googled "Blair", just the family name, and from just the first page of results I got a range including these that could be political in some way:
1.THE Tony Blair @Wiki
2.Blog by Tim Blair
3.Blair electorate in Australia
4.Reference to a singer Blair
5.Clan Blair Society.
6.Webpage for a uni fella in Australia.

That's from about a dozen entries.

I didn't check any of the other 56,000,00 results.

Doesn't suppose your desire does it?

Oh and if you follow the links you would discover that the name should probably be "Smith" anyway.

yes but even with google you can limit parametres in the seal case you can do time, period, area, and temple to make the search smaller and to compare the billions of people on web to the much smaller number from that time is being a bit deceptive too. you have to deal a little with percentages of populations with these examples.

OK, off you go, do a google search for 1927-2007 [or similar], UK and the continent [cos the seal may have been imported from Babylon], some field of activity, say religion, and a current fairly common name [note that the name on the seal is probably not the one Eilat Mazar says it is] say Wilson or Brown or Briggs whatever and you do the search and see what you come up with.
Test it.

figuer · 01-18-2008, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reniaa

... this still doesn't take from the fact it's a real find with hebrew names on it in the right area to find it and from the right time period.

But do you understand that there is no relevant historical controversy pertaining to there being Hebrews in that area in that time period?? Thus what the seal would corroborate (if the interpretation is correct) is not something that the skeptics are arguing against.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.