32: Godless

[BrianAlt]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

Why would you even buy that part of the story? There's simply no reliable evidence for such a claim. I can see how the story has been repeated as true so many times that it's difficult to shake it off but try and find non biblical eventide that he existed.

It's possible he's an amalgamation of many people that lived at the time. I wasn't saying he did or did not exist. I was conceding the point to advance the argument. I really have no reason to believe he did not exist. But his existence (or non-existence for that matter) don't matter to me any more than anyone else at the time. That was my point.

I'm a Jew, if that matters at all in any of this.

I don't think there's evidence of a Middle Eastern flood of this magnitude.

I believe there is evidence of such a flood. But the surface area of the flood doesn't really matter. What matters is, the people that this happened to fully believed that it was "the entire world". Even if it was a space smaller than New York City.

Northern New Jersey had a terrible flood a few years ago when the Passaic River overflowed it's banks. If all I knew existed in the world was Northern New Jersey (God forbid, yes, I know), I would believe the entire world flooded.

[MichaelApproved]

Originally Posted by BrianAlt

It's possible he's an amalgamation of many people that lived at the time. I wasn't saying he did or did not exist. I was conceding the point to advance the argument. I really have no reason to believe he did not exist. But his existence (or non-existence for that matter) don't matter to me any more than anyone else at the time. That was my point.

I see what you're saying but why concede an unsubstantiated point at all? It makes it seem like some of the Bible is based on reality, when it's not. By exposing the core beliefs of a story as false, it makes it easier to expose the other claims.

Originally Posted by BrianAlt

I believe there is evidence of such a flood. But the surface area of the flood doesn't really matter. What matters is, the people that this happened to fully believed that it was "the entire world". Even if it was a space smaller than New York City.

Northern New Jersey had a terrible flood a few years ago when the Passaic River overflowed it's banks. If all I knew existed in the world was Northern New Jersey (God forbid, yes, I know), I would believe the entire world flooded.

Something like a flood doesn't have to be left up to belief, it's easy enough to prove and it's never been proven. There was no flood of biblical proportions, ever.

Again, I see what you're saying about how it could seem like the entire world flooded but nothing like that ever even happened. It is a completely made up fairy tale.

[stulagu]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

It's not glib to ask for evidence and challenge unsubstantiated claims.

Why aren't Jewish historical texts considered reliable? Because it was a religion as well as a heritage? So are half of the hyrogliphs in Egypt, and pretty much all of the writings in history since the religious were the educated. Hell, most music up until this last century as well as art are all religious, that doesn't debunk their historical value.

I'm not going to sit and spend time referencing links and quotes for you. I have found a website that goes over some of the non Biblical references to Jesus and Christianity and you can take it as you'd like. I'm not going to dig into my history books to find quotes that you can search for yourself.

Pacifiers May Stunt Boys’ Emotional Development | Parenting - Yahoo! Shine

A couple of recent books are listed here... Craig A. Evans: The Archaeological Evidence For Jesus (PHOTOS)

The Bible can very much be used as an historical reference, the ILLIAD is used as an historical reference. The writings in the Bible can be carbon dated and traced back to the times they are talking about...I'm talking mostly about the NT...they talk about the times and lives of the people, and when you find writings that reference those events it is easily used as a reference whether you believe in it or not.

Cleopatra is NOT referred to in reliable history books at all. She was found in one statue, on a couple of pieces of stone, in one or two manuscripts, and on a coin. Talented archeologists have spent their lives shaping her history and putting little pieces of a puzzle together to figure out who she is. Her conquerers tried to wipe her exsistence off the planet, they almost did. Yet, she is widely known and respected in her place of history.

It is glib to say things like "jews didn't build the pyramids" and make it sound like all Jewish and Christian religions believe that. You just throw that out there and some will believe you. It sounds like if you were taught that in Hebrew school it was a national pride thing and had nothing to do with religion. I have never met a Christian that was taught the Jews built the pyramids, though I guess most people think of the pyramids when they think of Egypt...but anyone with an ounce of historical knowledge will know that didn't happen. The pyramids were a mystery to even the Biblical pharaohs.

In the show you dismiss every thought if it happens to be religious in nature, even when a professed non Christian brings it up.

How do you feel about Eastern science? It has been proven to work, many times over scientific Western science. There have been times where completely unexpected and unprovable things happen, some choose to credit that to a miracle, some choose to just say "there is no explination"...but the way you argue would completely devalue any mention of this unexplained thing happening and would dismiss it as never even exsisting.

I hear the same aggression and arrogance in your voice as I hear in right wing Christians defending their faith. This was not a neutral discussion on your part.

[stulagu]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

Again, I see what you're saying about how it could seem like the entire world flooded but nothing like that ever even happened. It is a completely made up fairy tale.

But it HAS been proven that a large flood occured in Mesopatamia around the correct time the Bible references. If all you know is a small plot of land in the middle east...like Brian said, there is the start of your tale of a flood.

If you're saying the Bible is a group of stories passed down over the generations and have turned into cautionary tales that is one thing, you are refusing to see even another option for this and insisting it was entirely made up and poppycock.

[MichaelApproved]

Originally Posted by stulagu

Why aren't Jewish historical texts considered reliable? Because it was a religion as well as a heritage?

Yes, because it's religion. Religious books are not reliable historical accounts. Consider religious books other than the Bible. Are all those reliable texts too?

Originally Posted by stulagu

So are half of the hyrogliphs in Egypt, and pretty much all of the writings in history since the religious were the educated. Hell, most music up until this last century as well as art are all religious, that doesn't debunk their historical value.

You're mixing things up. Just because someone is religious doesn't mean that what they write is fiction. It's specifically religious text that is a work of fiction. I don't dismiss everything that a religious person writes.

Originally Posted by stulagu

I'm not going to sit and spend time referencing links and quotes for you.

You're making big claims, you should back them up to improve your argument.

Originally Posted by stulagu

I have found a website that goes over some of the non Biblical references to Jesus and Christianity and you can take it as you'd like. I'm not going to dig into my history books to find quotes that you can search for yourself.

So you make wild claims and it's my job to research them for you?

Originally Posted by stulagu

Pacifiers May Stunt Boys’ Emotional Development | Parenting - Yahoo! Shine

What's this for?

Originally Posted by stulagu

A couple of recent books are listed here... Craig A. Evans: The Archaeological Evidence For Jesus (PHOTOS)

The article you quoted does not cite evidence that Jesus did exist. It talks about cities, buildings and circumstances mentioned in the Bible but that doesn't make the story true any more than mentioning the American Civil War makes Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter a real story.

As I said earlier, it's a fictional fairy tale that takes place thousands of years ago. You could find cities that are referenced but that doesn't mean the story is true.

Originally Posted by stulagu

The Bible can very much be used as an historical reference, the ILLIAD is used as an historical reference.

Please cite how the Iliad is used as an historical reference so we can get an accurate reference to how you think they compare.

Originally Posted by stulagu

The writings in the Bible can be carbon dated and traced back to the times they are talking about...I'm talking mostly about the NT...they talk about the times and lives of the people, and when you find writings that reference those events it is easily used as a reference whether you believe in it or not.

Just because something is written during a specific time doesn't make it true. Consider any novel that uses modern times as a backdrop. Does the fact that they're writing about current times make it a true story?

Originally Posted by stulagu

Cleopatra is NOT referred to in reliable history books at all.

I was quoting you saying that she WAS referred to in reliable history books. So now she isn't referred to in reliable history book? Your previous quote is below:

Originally Posted by stulagu

To put in context, Cleopatra only has a few references to herself from reliable historican sources...yet we know she existed.

So, which is it? Was Cleopatra referred to in reliable history books or not?

Originally Posted by stulagu

In the show you dismiss every thought if it happens to be religious in nature, even when a professed non Christian brings it up.

It doesn't matter who brings up the reference to the religious fiction, ultimately the work they're referring to is fiction.

I could keep going but I'd just be repeating myself. There's enough here for people to make a decision with.

[MichaelApproved]

Originally Posted by stulagu

But it HAS been proven that a large flood occured in Mesopatamia around the correct time the Bible references.

Where has this been proven?

Originally Posted by stulagu

If you're saying the Bible is a group of stories passed down over the generations and have turned into cautionary tales that is one thing, you are refusing to see even another option for this and insisting it was entirely made up and poppycock.

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the Bible purports to be true stories that are completely made up. Over time those stories have been picked apart and some people choose to adapt to that reality by calling them cautionary tales. I am not one of those people. The book was entirely made up and is poppycock.

[stulagu]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

I could keep going but I'd just be repeating myself. There's enough here for people to make a decision with.

Seriously Michael, you're claims are just as big and just as unprovable. PROVE there is no god. We are in a back and forth "I know you are but what am I". I'm not even in any way trying to tell you you're wrong...I'm trying to get you to see that there are other ways to look at this subject and other ways to treat people that believe things that you may not agree with. Your counter argument is to simply say, "no". With that attitude, who is going to listen to you and genuinely try to figure things out for themselves?

You don't get to just dismiss things because you believe so firmly in them. You are believing in unbelief just as fervently as the other side you obviously disdain.

I said that Cleopatra was referred to as a reliable historical being. Not that she was in any history books. She is referred to in HISTORY. In history in general, as in the past.

Just like Pliny the younger mentioning a Christos and just like Nero talking about The Christians. Obviously this group stemmed from something, and it happened a LONG time ago. Jesus' name in its many forms (as Jewish names can be including translations) is mentioned and the article does talk about that. You obviously just skimmed the article, because it does talk about specifics.

The fact alone that people called themselves Christians and that the group was big enough to cause problems in the Roman empire shows that they were an organized group and named after this man. This wasn't some willy nilly group of books found hundreds of years later that a goup of people decided to believe.

And the writings are verifiable and historically used as references. Like I said, just like the Illiad. People take portions of these books and look at the syntax of the time, the culture and heritage of the time, the message that the books were trying to get across and the purpose of their writings.

It is amazing to me that you negate your own heritage and culture simply because the cultural Jews are also religous. The OT gives the Hebrews such a vibrant life and history that not many other cultures have.

[stulagu]

Originally Posted by MichaelApproved

Where has this been proven?



I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the Bible purports to be true stories that are completely made up. Over time those stories have been picked apart and some people choose to adapt to that reality by calling them cautionary tales. I am not one of those people. The book was entirely made up and is poppycock.

Just from two minutes of google searching, here is an article about proof of a worldwide flood. Of course it can be nitpicked, but this is the kind of general thing most Christians are told if they start investigating the Biblical stories. Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood

The general Mesopotamia flood that gets referred to comes from Ur and Kish, two cities that show much evidence of large floods, I think it even rerouted the Euphraties river. This is just general archelogical fact. People have used this flood as an explination to Noah's flood being just local but told as a story that turned it into a global flood.

Proof of the black sea flood...this is actually an article debunking Noah's world wide flood and the black sea flood is just common fact...but you can read all the facts if you want. The Black Sea flood

"In short, it is impossible to verify the actual events recorded in the Biblical account of the flood. On the other hand, much of the Bible, in particular the historical books of the old testament, are as accurate historical documents as any that we have from antiquity and are in fact more accurate than many of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, or Greek histories. These Biblical records can be and are used as are other ancient documents in archeological work. For the most part, historical events described took place and the peoples cited really existed. This is not to say that names of all peoples and places mentioned can be identified today, or that every event as reported in the historical books happened exactly as stated. There are conflicts between present archeological evidence and historical reports that may result from a lack of information on our part or from misunderstandings or mistakes by the ancient writers. " The Smithsonian's Statement on the Bible

[stulagu]

To be perfectly clear

"To put in context, Cleopatra only has a few references to herself from reliable historican sources...yet we know she existed."

does not mean that Cleopatra was written in ancient history books. References are archelogical evidence not necessarily written word. Historical sources mean what I mentioned before, her face on coins, on walls in the Egyptians version of written word, etc.

My point was that she is a well respected and regarded historical figure. A small amount of evidence plus common sense allows her to be established as such. There is about the same amount of circumstantial evidence for a particular man that is Jesus...but you choose to not look at it that way because you want so hard to disprove he exsists. You could make the same argument for Cleopatra. You could make the same argument for many MANY ancient historical figures as history was written by the winners, not the losers of battle, so the losers were often just wiped away.

[MichaelApproved]

Now I think you're just messing with me. You use the word proof twice in countering claims. Here are two quotes from the same post you made, just a couple of paragraphs apart (emphasis mine).

Originally Posted by stulagu

Just from two minutes of google searching, here is an article about proof of a worldwide flood. Of course it can be nitpicked, but this is the kind of general thing most Christians are told if they start investigating the Biblical stories. Scientific Evidence for a Worldwide Flood

Originally Posted by stulagu

Proof of the black sea flood...this is actually an article debunking Noah's world wide flood and the black sea flood is just common fact...but you can read all the facts if you want. The Black Sea flood

First you say that there's proof of a world wide flood then you say that a world wide flood has been debunked. Perhaps you have a different definition of proof than I do?

If we're going to continue this debate, please spend more than 2 minutes of Google searching because what you found is a joke. I spent a little time reading and researching the author and found that the author of that first article is a joke. He's the same guy who wrote that dinosaur bones are not millions of years old.

The internet is full of junk science like that. Please respect me and other readers of this thread. Don't waste our time with silly sources like that.

If you'd like read a well researched historical investigation from a respected author, check out Proving History: Bayes's Theorem and the Quest for the Historical Jesus by Richard Carrier.