Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Diogenes the Cynic · 02-19-2012, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

it's not what I think he said manetho was used by the pagans to show the ignoble origins of the jews

So what? We still know that Manetho was wrong.

stephan huller · 02-19-2012, 05:20 PM

In*science*it is impossible to*prove anything. Science deals with likelihood. there are many more examples of manetho being vindicated or upheld.

Sheshbazzar · 02-19-2012, 05:21 PM

Who kidnapped the real Stephan Huller? Where did that Stephan Huller go who just yesterday was filling up entire pages with long quotations from ancient sources and making all of those astute and insightful observations?
I think this one liner guy is an imposter. I want the real Stepan Huller returned to us.

stephan huller · 02-19-2012, 05:29 PM

Manetho's information connecting the exodus to the hyskos wasnt limited to a single literary source. His testiony was based on multiple and varied types of sources

outhouse · 02-19-2012, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Manetho's information connecting the exodus wasnt limited to a single literary source. His testiony was based on multiple and varied types of sources

ya and what? only 900 years after people started slowly migrating to Israel

Sheshbazzar · 02-19-2012, 05:44 PM

I would still like to know the mystery of exactly what source on Manetho Stepan Huller is putting his confidence in.
Who knows, maybe if I knew I might even be persuaded myself -or maybe not.

Diogenes the Cynic · 02-19-2012, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Manetho's information connecting the exodus to the hyskos wasnt limited to a single literary source. His testiony was based on multiple and varied types of sources

None of them historically accurate.

Johnny Skeptic · 02-19-2012, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I wonder just what the unbiased scientific criteria or laws actually are for determining what is considered a "myth" and what is not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Are you including the global flood theory, creationism, and the young earth theory?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Well, given the fact that God does not operate within our limitations of time and space there is no way you can empirically prove these things at all.

If a God exists, I am not aware of any evidence that he sometimes operates outside of the laws of physics, both known, and unknown. For example, if Jesus walked on water, perhaps millions of advanced aliens can do the same thing simply because they have learned to use their minds far more than humans have. If a God wanted to cause a global to occur, what makes you think that he could not achieve that by operating within the laws of physics, both known and unknown, and that observable, testable evidence would not be available for geologists to verify?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

As far as the Flood is concerned, midrashim and commentaries explain that the flood only occurred where there was human habitation. And since we count the age of the world from the creation of Man, everything before that is beyond our perception in as much as the very act of creation is beyond our concepts of time and space.

Of course there are many things we do not understand and make judgments about. The theories about the movements of the planets in our solar system cannot be empirically proven because we have not been able to be far enough in space to see the relationship between two bodies.

But personally of course I have bigger worries in life, and I do enjoy 2participating in these dicussions.

If a global flood did not occur, and creationism is false, and the earth is old, a lot of evidence from geology, biology, and physics is what would be expected. For example, according to one poll, 99.86% of experts accept naturalistic or theistic evolution. If God operated outside of the laws of physics, both known, and unknown, regarding those three issues, I doubt that he would leave lots of scientific evidence that mimics what would have happened if a global flood did not occur, and creationism is false, and the earth is old.

Simply stated, if a global flood did not occur, how would geological evidence be different from what it is now? In the opinions of the vast majority of geologists, not at all.

Are you willing to concede that it is plausible that a global flood did not occur, that creationism is false (that does not include theistic evolution), that the earth is old, and that the Bible contains some interpolations? If so, are you also willing to concede that it is plausible that the Ten Plagues did not occur? If the Ten Plagues did occur, wouldn't they have been among the biggest news stories in the world by far in all of history up until that time?

If you are mostly at this forum merely out of academic curiosity, that is fine.

Duvduv · 02-19-2012, 07:32 PM

I don't know what geology would say one way or the other but miraculous events such as creation that occurred outside our concepts of time and space could not be verified.
How would they even evaluate a time dilation or a wrinkle in time.
Heck, without specific technology you couldn't even detect radio waves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I wonder just what the unbiased scientific criteria or laws actually are for determining what is considered a "myth" and what is not.

If a God exists, I am not aware of any evidence that he sometimes operates outside of the laws of physics, both known, and unknown. For example, if Jesus walked on water, perhaps millions of advanced aliens can do the same thing simply because they have learned to use their minds far more than humans have. If a God wanted to cause a global to occur, what makes you think that he could not achieve that by operating within the laws of physics, both known and unknown, and that observable, testable evidence would not be available for geologists to verify?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

As far as the Flood is concerned, midrashim and commentaries explain that the flood only occurred where there was human habitation. And since we count the age of the world from the creation of Man, everything before that is beyond our perception in as much as the very act of creation is beyond our concepts of time and space.

Of course there are many things we do not understand and make judgments about. The theories about the movements of the planets in our solar system cannot be empirically proven because we have not been able to be far enough in space to see the relationship between two bodies.

But personally of course I have bigger worries in life, and I do enjoy 2participating in these dicussions.

If a global flood did not occur, and creationism is false, and the earth is old, a lot of evidence from geology, biology, and physics is what would be expected. For example, according to one poll, 99.86% of experts accept naturalistic or theistic evolution. If God operated outside of the laws of physics, both known, and unknown, regarding those three issues, I doubt that he would leave lots of scientific evidence that mimics what would have happened if a global flood did not occur, and creationism is false, and the earth is old.

Simply stated, if a global flood did not occur, how would geological evidence be different from what it is now? In the opinions of the vast majority of geologists, not at all.

Are you willing to concede that it is plausible that a global flood did not occur, that creationism is false (that does not include theistic evolution), that the earth is old, and that the Bible contains some interpolations? If so, are you also willing to concede that it is plausible that the Ten Plagues did not occur? If the Ten Plagues did occur, wouldn't they have been among the biggest news stories in the world by far in all of history up until that time?

If you are mostly at this forum merely out of academic curiosity, that is fine.

Johnny Skeptic · 02-19-2012, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I don't know what geology would say one way or the other.......

What geology says is important regarding the global flood theory since if a global flood did not occur, lots of geological evidence is exactly what most geologists expect it would be. In addition, if the earth is old, lots of evidence from physics is exactly what most physicists expect it would be. Further, if creationism is false, lots of biological is exactly what most biologists expect it would be.

In other words, if a global flood did not occur, and the earth is old, and creationism is false, what would most experts expect to find? Obviously, exactly what they have found. Are you suggesting that the scientific evidence would be the same whether or not a global flood occurred, whether or not the earth is old, and whether or not creationism is true?

Regarding your mention of creation, since I am an agnostic, not an atheist, I do not argue for or against the existence of God, but I do argue against biblical literalism. If a God did create the universe, neither you nor any other human could possibly know beyond a reasonable doubt whether or not he did so according to the known, and unknown laws of physics.

Anyway, atheists are only a very small percentage of non-Christians since the vast majority of non-Christians believe in God(s).

How do you propose that people should evaluate whether or not the Ten Plagues, and the Exodus probably occurred?

Are you a fan of Christian apologetics, or do you accept the Bible mainly, or primarily, by faith? Consider the following:

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Christian apologetics (from Greek ἀπολογία, "speaking in defense") is a field of Christian theology that aims to present a rational basis for the Christian faith, defend the faith against objections, and expose the perceived flaws of other world views. Christian apologetics has taken many forms over the centuries, starting with Paul the Apostle, including writers such as Origen and Augustine of Hippo, and continuing currently with the modern Christian community through the efforts of many authors in various Christian traditions such as G.K.Chesterton and C. S. Lewis. Apologists have based their defense of Christianity on historical evidence, philosophical arguments, scientific investigation, and arguments from other disciplines. "Christian polemic" is a term used for apologetics which primarily criticizes or attacks other belief systems.

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

02-19-2012, 05:20 PM	#162
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Inscienceit is impossible to*prove anything. Science deals with likelihood. there are many more examples of manetho being vindicated or upheld.

02-19-2012, 05:21 PM	#163
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Who kidnapped the real Stephan Huller? Where did that Stephan Huller go who just yesterday was filling up entire pages with long quotations from ancient sources and making all of those astute and insightful observations? I think this one liner guy is an imposter. I want the real Stepan Huller returned to us.

02-19-2012, 05:29 PM	#164
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Manetho's information connecting the exodus to the hyskos wasnt limited to a single literary source. His testiony was based on multiple and varied types of sources

02-19-2012, 05:44 PM	#166
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	I would still like to know the mystery of exactly what source on Manetho Stepan Huller is putting his confidence in. Who knows, maybe if I knew I might even be persuaded myself -or maybe not.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.