Freethought & Rationalism Archive

mountainman · 03-27-2007, 09:37 PM

Septuagint

spin · 03-27-2007, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Septuagint

And when were the texts collected together into one unity??? Don't tell me: you wouldn't know.

Steve Weiss · 03-27-2007, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

In other words, you are asserting that if a book contains some statements which are not true, it is reasonable to deduce that none of the statements in it are true. This is not good logic. As it happens, the Jewish Scriptures do contain some references to individuals whose existence is historically corroborated, but even if this were not so your argument would still be logically invalid.

Even pathological liars may often tell a truth. That does not mean that one believes them because on occasion a truth may slip out. You also make an unsupported claim about the authenticity of some parts of the Jewish scriptures. Care to name a few? Ever hear of the "Boy who cried wolf" story? It illustrates my point. You major in minors. If story after story is fantastic fiction in a book, the bible if you like, it remains fiction even if a few real names and places are incidentally thrown in for flavoring. The proper category would be historical fiction. A Wilber Smith novel has far more credibility than the bible on any scale of truthfulness.

J-D · 03-27-2007, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Septuagint

'translated in stages between the 3rd to 1st century BC'

I don't think I'd call that 'hundreds of years BC'.

Steve Weiss · 03-27-2007, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Septuagint

How about Masoretic Text?

Steve Weiss · 03-27-2007, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

'translated in stages between the 3rd to 1st century BC'

I don't think I'd call that 'hundreds of years BC'.

Appears to be at least hundreds of years by my count for parts of it.

J-D · 03-27-2007, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Weiss

Even pathological liars may often tell a truth. That does not mean that one believes them because on occasion a truth may slip out. You also make an unsupported claim about the authenticity of some parts of the Jewish scriptures. Care to name a few?

What I said, to be precise, was that 'the Jewish Scriptures do contain some references to individuals whose existence is historically corroborated'. Yes, I am happy to name a few: Omri, Jehu, Mesha, Jehoiachin, Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Cyrus.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Weiss

Ever hear of the "Boy who cried wolf" story? It illustrates my point. You major in minors. If story after story is fantastic fiction in a book, the bible if you like, it remains fiction even if a few real names and places are incidentally thrown in for flavoring. The proper category would be historical fiction. A Wilber Smith novel has far more credibility than the bible on any scale of truthfulness.

The folk-story of Dick Whittington is a fiction. But Dick Whittington was a real person.

J-D · 03-27-2007, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Weiss

Appears to be at least hundreds of years by my count for parts of it.

Yes, but the assertion made (by mountainman) was about the collection as an entity, not about parts of it.

Steve Weiss · 03-28-2007, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

What I said, to be precise, was that 'the Jewish Scriptures do contain some references to individuals whose existence is historically corroborated'. Yes, I am happy to name a few: Omri, Jehu, Mesha, Jehoiachin, Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Cyrus.The folk-story of Dick Whittington is a fiction. But Dick Whittington was a real person.

And how does the mention of real people validate miraculous stories? The point that I was attempting to make was that the bible is historical fiction. Real people play fictional roles. I can't make it any clearer than that.

Take a re-look at "Forest Gump." The movie shows Gump meeting with Presidents on film, and we know that that is a fiction, so that is meant for a laugh. The authors of the bible, on the other hand, try to deceive and mislead us into believing that their make-believe is the real deal. Not so. It's lies, fraud, and manipulation. No one is laughing, but many are dead because of this propaganda.

Chris Weimer · 03-28-2007, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Weiss

And how does the mention of real people validate miraculous stories? The point that I was attempting to make was that the bible is historical fiction. Real people play fictional roles. I can't make it any clearer than that.

Historical fiction is a modern genre.

Quote:

The authors of the bible, on the other hand, try to deceive and mislead us into believing that their make-believe is the real deal. Not so. It's lies, fraud, and manipulation. No one is laughing, but many are dead because of this propaganda.

Can you prove this assertion? What makes the Bible any different from other religious texts? Why do you think the Bible is "lies, fraud, and manipulation" and not merely another ancient religious viewpoint?

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

03-27-2007, 09:37 PM	#201
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	Septuagint

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.