Ted Hoffman

Imanuel Kant asked:
What does this mean to you?
It means IF (and oh what a big IF), we are to think of the Trojan War, which is a myth, as historical, then Troy VII will be a good candidate for consideration as the the fortress/city of King Priam.

[ August 16, 2002: Message edited by: Intensity ]</p>

Kantian

I am sorry, but perhaps you miss the point i was trying to illustrate here, and that i could have done a better job myself in illustrating my point and render it a fully-fleshed case.

There are elements of truth in Homer's Illiad and the Odyssey, that he refered to actual locations that did exist in the past (greek cities, locations, archaeological ruins) but the issue here is modern interpretation of those rhapsodies as a mythology.

Homer spun his tale in a religious context, that he recited his poem to believers. As time passed on, and the ancient Greek religion died out, or more appropriately, became a mythology, the seeds of truth (whatever the story was originally about) became buried under fresh layers of fiction, leading to its current label as a "myth."

There is a line of inferences being made here, and the assumption that there was an original story that became art (rhaposody), served as a religious tool (propaganda), then legendary (distillation of lore into other cultures, i.e. Rome), and now myth (modern science).

As you can see, the very same chain-of-reasoning i proffer is currently happening to Christianity as well as Judaism. What was assumed to be the Truth is now under question (Earl Doherty, Jesus Mythers, lack of corroborating evidence of the Exodus, etc) and that sort of skepticism can only lead to equating Judeo-Christianity on equal footing with Greek Mythology.

Your reasons that the bible uses actual places does not count against Greek mythology, if we are talking about Aesop, Hesiod, and Homer. It is true that the majority Greek mythologies lacked such "strong enmeshment," but the fact remains tha there were no historians back then, and there are actual places as well as actual people who are cited in their works.

On the mythology category, would you call the inference that since a religion today has not officially become a mythology, it must contain truths that the older one that no longer is in currency lacks justified?

The Olympian dieties mentioned in the Greek poets' works should not be analogous to the "biblical characters" you ingeniously limit yourself to. Why didn't you account for Yahveh, Beelzebub, Baal, or Moloch as well? Why isn't "biblical characters" more analogous to "greek characters" that were human, i.e. Achillies or Hercules?


Since your listed reasons fails to present a convincing case (to me, at least) the reason for lacking a belief in God remains analogous to the reason for lacking a belief in a discarded mythic figure.

Now, if there were elements of truth that Homer was talking about an event that gathered the might of the Greek city-states into a unified army that waged war against a proud citadel, then it stands to reason that the assumption that the city of Troy existed is as good as those in the Hebrew narrative you cited in contrast to Greek mythology.

What counts for one also counts for the other.

Vorkosigan

<a href="http://www.indiana.edu/~classics/aegean/R27.html" target="_blank">Archaeology suggests Troy VII A not destroyed by Myceneans</a>

<a href="http://tenaya.cs.dartmouth.edu/history/bronze_age/lessons/27.html" target="_blank">This site suggests that the whole thing is myth-construction</a>

Clearly, the issue is complex, and the Troy myth is, well, myth.

Vorkosigan

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Vorkosigan ]</p>

Kantian

Do you read your links? Both links are the same article. They conclude on an agnostic note: The writer of that article seems to come down on neither side of the dispute. But thank you for these links. I will read them slowly tomorrow.

Ted Hoffman

Kant,
Special pleading is all over your arguments. I am a great Earl Doherty reader, so dont bother to tell us what he says.
You simply have no evidence that there was anything historical about the stories of Apollo and Zeus.

Just let it go.

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Intensity ]</p>

RogerLeeCooke

That's right, it *is* only a story. But there is a huge gallery of gods formerly worshipped: Apollo, Marduk, Isis, Osiris, Quetzcoatl, and on and on. The only reason they were worshipped by most people is that most people were conditioned by social pressure to do so, just as most people are conditioned by their family and friends to believe in the currently worshipped Gods.

The fact that the Old Testament mixes real history with its theology proves nothing. Fiction is still fiction. I doubt that you believe in a person named Auric Goldfinger, even though his creator, Ian Fleming, got the geography of Fort Knox correct.

Vorkosigan

Actually, I did read them, but at widely separated times. I got the second one from an old thread on the same topic. But thanks for the heads up that they are same. LOL.

Kantian

Ah, the <a href="http://info-pollution.com/fallfall.htm" target="_blank">fallacy fallacy</a>. I do not see how i am begging the question. Of course, sweeping generalizations are easy to make, but making veiled insults while kicking up a dust cloud in a furious retreat has been perfected by Richard Nixon: any relation?

I believe you are avoiding my post because you lack either the ability or the motivation to adequately answer it by calling it a phony fallacy, but i will give you the benefit of doubt.

Which wasn't my point. Please re-read my post, before you begin choking on copious amount of straw. None are so blind, as those who choose not to see...

Now that is a fallacious argument, and you most certainly do not speak for everyone here. Why cannot I mention Earl Doherty's name? Are you a priest of the first church of Earl Doherty who feels his authority on such matters is being questioned?

Believe me when i say that i am in no way questioning your knowledge of Doherty when I made a reference to his name in order to demonstrate the typical pattern of how a mythology is formed, and nothing more.

I sincerely was hoping for a honest debate on your attempt to discredit the standard atheist argument, "my disbelief in God X is equivalent to your disbelief in God Y", and an analysis of your counterargument (especially those premises you listed at the top of the page), and the reasons why the warrant for the premises supporting the conclusions is insufficient.

Do you or do you not want a discussion with me about your counterargument?

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Immanuel Kant ]</p>

Jobar

A-hem.

Gentlemen, this is not the proper place to carry on this particular dispute. It is far off the original topic, too.

If you want to continue this discussion, please start a thread in BC&A forum.

mfaber

First, just because some of the places and people are real does not validate the extraordinary claims made in the Bible (miracles, God, Jesus, etc.). However I will pick on you about the Isrealites/Egypt historicality claim... There is no proof for this one: (Jobar's admonition, nothwithstanding, I just can't resist this one!)

Moses never existed, the Jews were never slaves of the Egyptians, Exodus didn't happen.....

First of all the story of Moses looks like the story of King Sargon.
The Pentatueuch:not Wholly Moses/Legend of Sargon
<a href="http://www.strbrasil.com.br/English/Atheos/pentateuch.htm" target="_blank">http://www.strbrasil.com.br/English/Atheos/pentateuch.htm</a>
The Story of Exodus or Just Another Christian Bullwinkle's Fractured Fairy Tale?
First of all, the Bible gives contradictory dates for Exodus. Calculating the date from Solomons reign and his construction of the Temple in I Kings gives a date for Exodus of 1447 BCE. However, if one uses the chronology of Judges we have a period of 610-650 years between the Exodus (1577 - 1617 BCE) and the building of the temple. This obviously does not square with the 480 years(Exodus 1447 BCE) given in I Kings 6:1.

Dates as calculated from but do it yourself, don't take my word)
1. Anderson, A Critical Introduction to the Old Testament
2. Fox, The Unauthorized Version

The Biblical "History" Contradicts the Archeological Record (just a few of the many contradictions that should make one doubt the veracity of the Exodus story) (This is ONLY a sample)

1) Exodus. 1:11 specifically mentions the Israelites being used as slave labor to build the city of Raamses. But, the first Pharaoh named Raamses came to the throne in 1320 BCE. Egyptian records state Raamses II, who ruled 1279-1213 BCE built the city of Raamses. How is this possible when the Isrealites were supposed to have left at least 170 years beforehand (using the 1447 BCE Exodus date, the most commonly accepted one)?

2) The Exodus writer gives no name of any Pharaoh at the alleged time of Joseph or Moses. The Exodus author’s avoidance of king/pharaoh names suggests the objective is something less then an accounting of datable, historical fact. A very strange omission....

3) There is absolutely no mention of Joseph, the 7-year famine, the plagues, the Israelites, or the drowning of Pharoah's (which one?) army in any Egyptian records covering the time that they were alleged to have been there. I don'think the Egyptians would have missed catatrophes like the Nile turning to blood, burning hail, the death of the first, the parting of the Red Sea, the drowning of Pharoah's (who?) army, etc.

4) An upright stone slab, the Merneptah stele dated 1207 BCE,is the first mention of "Israel" found in Egypt. It outlines Raamses II’ son, Pharaoh Merneptah’s campaign into Canaan in which a people named "Israel" got their booties kicked big time. Apart from this single military encounter which in itself contradicts the Wilderness account, it seems unbelievable that 2,000,000+ Israelites could be unknown to an erudite people who seem to take note of all circumstances in their sphere of influence.

5) The Exodus writer is ignorant of the Egyptian forts in northern Sinai or the Egyptian strongholds in Canaan, especially in the 15th to 13th century BCE when Egypt became the dominant power of Middle East. The Israelites would have had to pass by at least one of these forts, yet there is no mention of such a thing by the Egyptians, who were positively anal when it came to records keeping. (I really think it would be hard to miss 2 million people!).

6) Exodus alleges that there were upwards of 2,000,000 people wandering in the "wilderness" for 40 years. However, despite decades decades of searching the sites listed in the Bible, NOT
one single, solitary, artifact has turned up! Examples:

• a)Repeated surveys at Kadesh-Barnea where Israel spent 38 of its 40 years have not provided the slightest evidence of an Israelite encampment.
• b)Two decades of intensive excavations at Tel Arad (Numbers 21:1-3) where Israel allegedly did battle with King Arad has provided no Late Bronze Age (1550-1150 BCE....Exodus date =1447 BCE) remains.
• c) Tel Hesbon, the site of Hesbon (Numbers 21:21-35) where Israel allegedly did battle with the king of the Amorites provides no Bronze Age remains.

Christians try to explain away this complete and total absence of archeological data by saying that it isn't realistic to expect that archaeologists could find 3,500 year old artifacts. However, this excuse doesn't wash when satellite imagery and ground-penetrating radar have found the most meager remains of hunter-gather societies and pastoral nomads all over the world!!!

Archaeology and history from:
3) Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology of the Near East
4) I. Finklestein, PhD & N. Silberman, PhD, The Bible Unearthed

Verdict: Just another fairy tale from the many that riddle the Bible. Not my idea of "history". But even if the Israelites were enslaved by the Egyptians, how would proof of their enslavement be PROOF for the existence of God? You need to distinguish between proof of ordinary events (rise and fall of empires, historical events, DOCUMENTED lives of true historical persons, etc) versus the extraordinary evidence that would be needed to prove the existence of things with absolutely no precedence in nature (miracles of the Bible, God, etc).

Really?? What about the Homer's Iliad? Many of the places listed in this book were real, including Troy. For a long time people thought that Troy was a myth, . For centuries, Troy was considered a myth, but in 1870, with Homer's Iliad as his guide, Heinrich Schliemann went hunting for ancient Troy, and found it. Are we now to also assume that the Greek gods and their supernatural deeds are also real because the place was a fact? (According to your example we should.)

Oh the benefits of historical myopia!!! Greek mythology is only "mythology" because the ruling mythos of most historians is Christianity ("history" is the province of the "victors", i. e., Christians) One cult displacing another cult... what a big surprise!(NOT). BTW, Romans considered the early Christians to be "atheists" (the didn't believe in the Roman pantheon) and that Christians "hated" humanity (because of certain puritanical doctrines..all the bit about hating sex, not participating in Roman holidays, the view of humanity as inherently "evil and sinful"....I agree with the Romans on that one for the most part!).

Which ones and how are the relevant as evidence for accepting the extraordinary claims made in the Bible (the existence of God, miracles, Jesus-Son of God, etc). Again, evidence of historical persons don't lend one iota of credence to the extraordinary claims package. This just makes the bible historical FICTION!

In other words, how is the evidence of real persons and places in the Bible EVIDENCE FOR GOD or any of the other incredible claims made there? In other words, how does proof of ordinary claims qualify as proof of extraordinary claims like the existence of invisible, uncommunative, but omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, immortal beings aka God?