FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page A short primer on the dating of Daniel (for arnoldo)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 10 of 91 « First 89 10 11122060 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-24-2008, 03:44 PM   #91
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 804
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
This quote does tend to discredit Wilson, does it not? But then he was writing in 1917, before archeologists and geologists had discredited vast parts of the Bible.
Geologists discredited the bible already in the early 1800s...

Edit: Sorry, forgot myself and didn't read the following pages
Species8472 is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 05:22 PM   #92
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Latin America
Posts: 4,066
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
. . . no United Kingdom of David and Solomon. .
There is archaelogical proof which states otherwise.

http://www.bib-arch.org/Mazar.pdf
arnoldo is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 05:38 PM   #93
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 804
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic View Post
. . . no United Kingdom of David and Solomon. .
There is archaelogical proof which states otherwise.

http://www.bib-arch.org/Mazar.pdf
If you researched that a bit further you'd notice that nothing is conclusively proven here...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/05/in...=1&oref=slogin
Species8472 is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 05:46 PM   #94
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Latin America
Posts: 4,066
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post

There is archaelogical proof which states otherwise.

http://www.bib-arch.org/Mazar.pdf
If you researched that a bit further you'd notice that nothing is conclusively proven here...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/05/in...=1&oref=slogin
Thank you for providing that source!
arnoldo is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 05:55 PM   #95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 804
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472 View Post

If you researched that a bit further you'd notice that nothing is conclusively proven here...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/05/in...=1&oref=slogin
Thank you for providing that source!
Google is only one click away you know...
Species8472 is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:02 PM   #96
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post

There is archaelogical proof which states otherwise.

http://www.bib-arch.org/Mazar.pdf
If you researched that a bit further you'd notice that nothing is conclusively proven here...

King David's Palace Is Found, Archaeologist Says
You will find threads on this alleged find, which has no proven link to King David or Solomon. Check this recent one: First Temple Seal found in Jerusalem - and this link

and

David's Palace

This archeological work is financed by an Israeli neo-conservative institute, which is looking for links to the past.
Toto is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 08:46 PM   #97
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Latin America
Posts: 4,066
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post
Professor Wilson wrote, "I have come to the conviction that no man knows enough to attack the veracity of the Old Testament. Every time when anyone has been able to get together enough documentary 'proofs' to undertake an investigation, the biblical facts in the original text have victoriously met the test" (quoted in R. Pache, The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture (or via: amazon.co.uk)).
This quote does tend to discredit Wilson, does it not? But then he was writing in 1917, before archeologists and geologists had discredited vast parts of the Bible.
No, historical records are greater than so called archeological or geological records. Sorry, Ancient Israel is not another "Atlantis." Israel existed thousands of years ago and exists this very moment.
arnoldo is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 08:54 PM   #98
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The temple of Isis at Memphis
Posts: 1,484
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post

This quote does tend to discredit Wilson, does it not? But then he was writing in 1917, before archeologists and geologists had discredited vast parts of the Bible.
No, historical records are greater than so called archeological or geological records.
No, they aren't. Where did you get that silly idea?

Historical records can be wrong. They can also be the product of liars or propaganda.

Quote:
Sorry, Ancient Israel is not another "Atlantis." Israel existed thousands of years ago and exists this very moment.
You still haven't proven that the modern state of Israel has any relation to fulfilled prophecy. Gonna give that a try? Or still running from it? :rolling:
Sheshonq is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 10:22 PM   #99
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Latin America
Posts: 4,066
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshonq View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post
:rolling:
No, historical records are greater than so called archeological or geological records.
No, they aren't. Where did you get that silly idea?

Historical records can be wrong. They can also be the product of liars or propaganda.
So how can you rely on your historical records to prove that bible prophecy was false? :rolling:
arnoldo is offline  
Old 01-24-2008, 10:25 PM   #100
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 1,962
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnoldo View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheshonq View Post
No, they aren't. Where did you get that silly idea?

Historical records can be wrong. They can also be the product of liars or propaganda.
So how can you rely on your historical records to prove that bible prophecy was false? :rolling:
When they confirm each other, when people neutral or hostile to the events/people/facts in question report them, when they match archaeological evidence, etc.
makerowner is offline  
 
Page 10 of 91 « First 89 10 11122060 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:24 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.