Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Smullyan-esque · 01-06-2007, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdd344

hatsoff,
I would reject the notion that any person can start with 'nothing.'

There are two positions:

1. God does not exist
2.God does exist

I hold number two. Plenty hold number one. No one is truly objective.

Nope. There are at least 5 positions:

1. I am certain that God does not exist.
2. I am pretty sure that God does not exist, but I have doubts.
3. I have no idea whether God exists or does not exist.
4. I am pretty sure that God exists, but I have my doubts.
5. I am certain that God exists.

In yet another area, you display a fundamental lack of imagination.

mdd344 · 01-06-2007, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron

Here's another glaring biblical failure in archaeology:

there is zero evidence for any Hebrews in Egypt (i.e., the time of Moses, the Exodus, etc.). If there were 2.5 million Hebrews serving as slaves, allegedly freed, wandering in Sinai for 40 years, there ought to be some evidence.

Nope. From Finkelstein and Silberman, The Bible Unearthed:

Sauron,
How much excavation is going on in those places, overall? And are you really arguing from silence on this? I.e. 'because nothing has been found it doesn't exist'?

mdd344 · 01-06-2007, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatsoff

You'll have to enlighten me, but what do you mean by "predicted the Church"? Are you saying that the author of Daniel predicted the eventual rise of Christianity? If so, can you please explain how? Because you're apparently making some kind of mistake if you believe that, and if you lay out your reasoning I can probably show you where.

hatsoff,
I assure you I am not making any mistake whatsoever, not one bit. Daniel 2 does predict the church, and tells when it will be established. Not only that, but Dan. 7:13-14 tells what will/did happen to Christ when He asscended.

If you look at my original post on Daniel I have a section on the kingdom. It explains what I mean, complete with NT references that confirm it.

Coleslaw · 01-06-2007, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor

Here's a fun test, let's guess how many logical fallacies mdd34 has relied upon in this single thread (loved the recent No True Scotsman, strawmen grow like 'shrooms, and appeal to (non)authorities are omnipresent). I'll place the over-and-under at 20.

Your answer key can be found here:

http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/toc.htm

Your site left out
tu quoque
and I've seen a lot of that.

Sauron · 01-06-2007, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdd344

Sauron,
How much excavation is going on in those places, overall? And are you really arguing from silence on this? I.e. 'because nothing has been found it doesn't exist'?

Excavations have been going on there for years. Finkelstein & Silberman, pages 62-63:

Quote:

Some archaeological traces of their generation-long wandering in the Sinai should be apparent. However, except for the Egyptian forts along the northern coast, not a single campsite or sign of occupation from the time of Ramesses II and his immediate predecessors and successors has ever been identified in Sinai. And it has not been for a lack of trying. Repeated archaeological surveys in all regions of the peninsula , including the mountainous area around the traditional site of Mount Sinai, near Saint Catherine's Monastery, have yielded only negative evidence: not even a single sherd, no structure, not a single house, no trace of an ancient encampment. One may argue that a relatively small band of wandering Israelites cannot be expected to leave material remains behind. But modern archaeological techniques are quite capable of tracing even the very meager remains of hunter-gatherers and pastoral nomads all over the world. Indeed, the archaeological record from the Sinai peninsula discloses evidence for pastoral activity in such eras as the third millennium BCE and the Hellenistic and Byzantine periods. There is simply no such evidence at the supposed time of the Exodus in the thirteenth century BCE.

You're talking about 600,000 men. Including women, families, children, etc. the ordinary figure used is 2.5 million people. That's five times the population of metropolitan Seattle. Camped out in a relatively confined area (Kadesh-Barnea) for 38 years. Yet no evidence of it. No bones, no caprolites, no pottery shards, no lost jewelry, no weapons, no household items or animal husbandry items - nothing.

hatsoff · 01-06-2007, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdd344

hatsoff,
I assure you I am not making any mistake whatsoever, not one bit. Daniel 2 does predict the church, and tells when it will be established. Not only that, but Dan. 7:13-14 tells what will/did happen to Christ when He asscended.

If you look at my original post on Daniel I have a section on the kingdom. It explains what I mean, complete with NT references that confirm it.

I just re-read Daniel 2 and it certainly does not mention Christianity. As for Daniel 7:13-14, there is no convincing evidence that Jesus actually ascended, and even if he did the Daniel passage would not apply (Daniel's "son of man" was coming, not going).

mdd344 · 01-06-2007, 06:15 PM

hatsoff,
The view in Dan. 7 is from Heaven's perspective. Not earth's.

Daniel does mention the church. It is the small stone cut out of the mountain. It would be the kingdom that would last forever. What do you think that was if not the church?

mdd344 · 01-06-2007, 06:20 PM

Sauron,
You are arguing from silence aren't you? Do you have any thing of that nature that is not from silence?

Isn't it the case that had you lived years and years ago there are many things you would say were not accurate---but then later were found?

That is not a valid argument.

Coleslaw · 01-06-2007, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdd344

hatsoff,
The view in Dan. 7 is from Heaven's perspective. Not earth's.

Daniel does mention the church. It is the small stone cut out of the mountain. It would be the kingdom that would last forever. What do you think that was if not the church?

According to this post
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showpost.php...&postcount=213
which you continue to ignore, it was the black stone of the Kaaba. I won't say I agree, but it does make more sense than your interpretation.

hatsoff · 01-06-2007, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdd344

hatsoff,
The view in Dan. 7 is from Heaven's perspective. Not earth's.

That is incorrect. The events of Daniel 7 all take place on this planet. You can tell because of its references to a "kingdom...that will rise from the earth" (Da 7:17).

Quote:

Daniel does mention the church. It is the small stone cut out of the mountain. It would be the kingdom that would last forever. What do you think that was if not the church?

It talks about a fictional kingdom that will last forever, not an actual religion that was founded in the 40s AD. The two are not the same.

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

01-06-2007, 06:15 PM	#327
mdd344 Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Arkansas Posts: 402	hatsoff, The view in Dan. 7 is from Heaven's perspective. Not earth's. Daniel does mention the church. It is the small stone cut out of the mountain. It would be the kingdom that would last forever. What do you think that was if not the church?

01-06-2007, 06:20 PM	#328
mdd344 Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Arkansas Posts: 402	Sauron, You are arguing from silence aren't you? Do you have any thing of that nature that is not from silence? Isn't it the case that had you lived years and years ago there are many things you would say were not accurate---but then later were found? That is not a valid argument.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.