Is God Imaginary?

Religion => Religion => Topic started by: eyeshaveit on July 22, 2022, 10:40:48 AM

Title: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 22, 2022, 10:40:48 AM
Now the whole earth had one language and the same words. And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. And they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly." And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar. Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth." And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. And the Lord said, "Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another's speech." So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth. - Genesis 11.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 22, 2022, 10:41:23 AM
The majority of earth's peoples, those who know the story of "The Tower of Babel" most often dismiss it as a child's story or as a myth buried in time. It is easy to present the Babel scenario as how the elephant got his trunk or how the turtle got his shell and twist it into why people have so many languages. Human speech is certainly floats on the surface of the story, but what else is going on between the lines or submerged under the text? Consider clothing.

In antiquity clothing was more difficult than food to obtain and care for. Even in the first century AD a person's clothing had significant value. You could use your cloak as surety for a loan. Jesus' clothing, stripped off of him at Golgotha, was bartered for by Roman soldiers to be later sold. The spinning of fiber and wool into threads and the weaving these into cloth and then sewing it into garments was time consuming and expensive. Today one can easily own hundreds of pieces of clothing, but in biblical times the average person could count the number of clothes they owned on their fingers and have some left over. The biblical account has Jesus possessing five pieces of clothing, possibly a turban, a shawl with tassels, a belt, a tunic and his sandals.

That is easy to understand but what does it all have to do with the Tower of Babel account? Just this -- spinning and weaving and the making of cloth must have been known by those people who built the tower. And when they were dispersed into all their separate languages and groups, they took this knowledge with them. The arts of spinning and weaving were not later invented by hundreds and thousands of disparate groups of peoples -- that would be much too much of a coincidence.

This thread is easily hijacked and sidetracked, so please start a new thread if you wish to push beyond the presuppositions of the topic which are:

1 - Earth's people were of one language and knew how to spin and weave before

2 - They were summarily scattered into a multitude of language families and groups but

3 - They took their crafts of spinning and weaving with them as they moved about and filled the earth.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 22, 2022, 12:06:59 PM
Well, most of mankind can trace its origins to that small group of about 8000 survivors in Africa of a mass extinction event 70k years ago.

So, yes, they were all generally homogenous in language, customs, skills and attire.

These people also likely dispersed and then evolved their languages depending on their environments - cold regions would have a very different requirement as to tropical for example and so the terminology will also be different - but not too much since we share the same speech mechanics - mouth/tongue/teeth etc...in other words there's a limit to the variance due to our shared features. And core words would likely be shared among these dispersed groups like ma, pa, me, that, food, eat, etc...because the original group was essentially just 1.

So, of course we would have language groups where you can see how related two groups are by their language similarities like English, Dutch, German. Latin based, austronesian, etc...

Same thing for clothing. The clothes fit the environment and so same regions would likely share types of clothing.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Dexter on July 22, 2022, 12:13:19 PM
Genesis should have mentioned the change in levels of pigmentation and facial structure that occurred at the same time. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Meat on July 22, 2022, 01:46:25 PM
A myth I'd say but likely based on a real structure about two stories tall. Embellishments are as old as humans themselves. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 22, 2022, 08:36:03 PM
The biblical account is a myth, a campfire story explaining the diversity of languages.

If we are talking about the Etemenanki ziggurat in Babylon, that was built sometime after c.1300 BCE, much too late to account for all the languages. Weaving in the region seems to have begun in Egypt c.3400 BCE, again much too late to be associated with the diversity of lsnguages.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on July 22, 2022, 09:17:03 PM
What's interesting is, why, as a myth, this is biblically important? Seems like ancient anger at globalization. (We wouldn't want the whole world using the metric system.)   ||whistling||
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on July 24, 2022, 01:35:49 AM
"The approximate time of such building may be drawn from the following information: Peleg lived from 2269 to 2030 B.C.E. His name meant "Division," for "in his days the earth [that is, "earth's population"] was divided"; Jehovah "scattered them from there over all the surface of the earth." (Ge 10:25; 11:9) A text of Sharkalisharri, king of Agade (Accad) in patriarchal times, mentions his restoring a temple-tower at Babylon, implying that such a structure existed prior to his reign." (Insight on the Scriptures)
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 24, 2022, 04:40:14 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on July 24, 2022, 01:35:49 AM"The approximate time of such building may be drawn from the following information: Peleg lived from 2269 to 2030 B.C.E. His name meant "Division," for "in his days the earth [that is, "earth's population"] was divided"; Jehovah "scattered them from there over all the surface of the earth." (Ge 10:25; 11:9) A text of Sharkalisharri, king of Agade (Accad) in patriarchal times, mentions his restoring a temple-tower at Babylon, implying that such a structure existed prior to his reign." (Insight on the Scriptures)

That's still less than 5000 years. Quite a short time for the evolution and development of all these vastly different language groups. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 08:08:25 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 24, 2022, 04:40:14 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on July 24, 2022, 01:35:49 AM"The approximate time of such building may be drawn from the following information: Peleg lived from 2269 to 2030 B.C.E. His name meant "Division," for "in his days the earth [that is, "earth's population"] was divided"; Jehovah "scattered them from there over all the surface of the earth." (Ge 10:25; 11:9) A text of Sharkalisharri, king of Agade (Accad) in patriarchal times, mentions his restoring a temple-tower at Babylon, implying that such a structure existed prior to his reign." (Insight on the Scriptures)

That's still less than 5000 years. Quite a short time for the evolution and development of all these vastly different language groups.

It wasn't a short time -- according to the biblical account it was instantaneous -- snap your fingers fast.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 24, 2022, 09:19:12 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 08:08:25 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 24, 2022, 04:40:14 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on July 24, 2022, 01:35:49 AM"The approximate time of such building may be drawn from the following information: Peleg lived from 2269 to 2030 B.C.E. His name meant "Division," for "in his days the earth [that is, "earth's population"] was divided"; Jehovah "scattered them from there over all the surface of the earth." (Ge 10:25; 11:9) A text of Sharkalisharri, king of Agade (Accad) in patriarchal times, mentions his restoring a temple-tower at Babylon, implying that such a structure existed prior to his reign." (Insight on the Scriptures)

That's still less than 5000 years. Quite a short time for the evolution and development of all these vastly different language groups.

It wasn't a short time -- according to the biblical account it was instantaneous -- snap your fingers fast.

Maybe. But it seems jst is referencing some info regarding an actual tower as well as an actual timeframe. 

So, if we're talking real dates, then it seemed logical to see how that fits in with our current understanding of how languages evolve in reality. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 11:00:55 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 24, 2022, 09:19:12 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 08:08:25 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 24, 2022, 04:40:14 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on July 24, 2022, 01:35:49 AM"The approximate time of such building may be drawn from the following information: Peleg lived from 2269 to 2030 B.C.E. His name meant "Division," for "in his days the earth [that is, "earth's population"] was divided"; Jehovah "scattered them from there over all the surface of the earth." (Ge 10:25; 11:9) A text of Sharkalisharri, king of Agade (Accad) in patriarchal times, mentions his restoring a temple-tower at Babylon, implying that such a structure existed prior to his reign." (Insight on the Scriptures)

That's still less than 5000 years. Quite a short time for the evolution and development of all these vastly different language groups.

It wasn't a short time -- according to the biblical account it was instantaneous -- snap your fingers fast.

Maybe. But it seems jst is referencing some info regarding an actual tower as well as an actual timeframe.

So, if we're talking real dates, then it seemed logical to see how that fits in with our current understanding of how languages evolve in reality.

Oh, there was an actual Tower of Babel (probably a ziggurat) as referenced by the first post in this thread. One can leave out the TOB and imagine that language just 'naturally' evolved, but then consider that there are about 7,000 languages spoken on earth. And according to Wikipedia there are about 400 independent language families. So, it would seem quite reasonable for most of us to wonder how indeed these thousands of languages all evolved so quickly if the biblical account is just a myth?

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Dexter on July 24, 2022, 11:39:11 AM
and the language groups that didn't have spinning and weaving forgot that skill because they didn't need it.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 24, 2022, 01:07:24 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 11:00:55 AMSo, it would seem quite reasonable for most of us to wonder how indeed these thousands of languages all evolved so quickly if the biblical account is just a myth?



i dont see a need to consider jewish mythology a serious solution to the question.

humans have had hundreds of thousands of years to evolve language. not 5000. consider the dialects that have arisen just within the americas in the last 250 years, such as creoles and nicaraguan sign language. or slangs. humans have a propensity for flexible language that creates and destroys them quickly. nobody in my family speaks chickasaw anymore, for example.

you began with this request"

QuoteThis thread is easily hijacked and sidetracked, so please start a new thread if you wish to push beyond the presuppositions of the topic which are:

1 - Earth's people were of one language and knew how to spin and weave before

2 - They were summarily scattered into a multitude of language families and groups but

3 - They took their crafts of spinning and weaving with them as they moved about and filled the earth.

 i dont see any reason to suppose that any of these pre-suppositions are likely, so there isn't anything more for me to contribute.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on July 24, 2022, 01:12:45 PM
Eyes, are you a 6000 yearist?  I  work with people (engineer technicians) that think the earth  is 6000 years old, but God does things (us grand canyon) to make it seem billions of years old.   ||think||
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 24, 2022, 01:22:42 PM
Quote from: Shnozzola on July 24, 2022, 01:12:45 PMEyes, are you a 6000 yearist?  I  work with people (engineer technicians) that think the earth  is 6000 years old, but God does things (us grand canyon) to make it seem billions of years old.  ||think||

. . . may i make another comment, schnozz?

it is a tenent of judeo-christian creationism that the earth was created in a form similar to what we see today. as created, there were flowing rivers, eroding mountains, sediments, soils, and so on. noticing that the grand canyon has the appearance of great age doesnt mean that it is of great age, anymore than the existence of the ancient-appearing meandering river bed of the euprhates river contradict the story of its creation in genesis 2:14. it just means that the canyon was created in a dynamic form, with the river already flowing through steep banks composed of diffeent formations stacked on top of one another.

creationism is not falsifiable by observing the appearance of great age in anything. there s no reason to sppose that god created the earth with all the clocks set to 12:00:00:00.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on July 24, 2022, 01:36:29 PM
^^  Oh I realize a God could do anything,  so referring to the grand canyon as "showing age" is the best I could do. So deep flowing rivers could be as possible as anything with an instantaneous creator.  (It all could be recreated every 10 seconds matrix-like) While some folks think 6000 years based on biblical time lines, other conservatives that once believed that, now say, the earth must be billions of years old.  So we see every belief under the sun.  🙂

Edit:  while many of us are amazed by the Webb telescope, I'm sure there are groups that think the universe ends at our solar system (or closer) and all the new astronomy scenes are God toying with us, much as groups that think Trump was right about winning the election.  😉
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 24, 2022, 01:44:09 PM
yes. creationism is a religious belief, but it is completely consistent with what we see in nature. uniformitarianism in geology (and later biology) is a much later idea than creationism, only going back to hutton in the 18th century.

same with radiometric dating, uranium/thorium ratios, and other isotopes. who says that all the atomic clocks have to start at zero? or fossils.

either model explains the data, but the assumptions are different. people neglect this on both sides of the question. there's a mocking term for the idea called "last thurssdayism," but the people who mock it just show they dont think very hard.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on July 24, 2022, 02:15:09 PM
Quote.....creationism is a religious belief, but it is completely consistent with what we see in nature.

I think, considering the human body, everything in nature is based on the individual living cell.  And viruses (even less than a cell, just some DNA instructions) cohabitating in those living cells (which also started from organic chemistry combinations) over eons, led very slowly to organs, organelles, body biological systems etc.  (Hey, if you want to take seriously thinking there has never been any creators, you have to consider what then actually could have happened, which to me is much more interesting than a magical "poof"  - instantaneous creation) 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 24, 2022, 02:42:34 PM
yes. i see no external evidence for divine creation that would make it likelier than not.

the assertion that yahweh created the universe rests on no more evidence than the assertion that it was made by oberon, king of the fairies.

all that we know is that the universe exists and works in certain ways.  invoking myths and legends poses more questions than it answers.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 24, 2022, 04:53:04 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 24, 2022, 02:42:34 PMyes. i see no external evidence for divine creation that would make it likelier than not.

the assertion that yahweh created the universe rests on no more evidence than the assertion that it was made by oberon, king of the fairies.

all that we know is that the universe exists and works in certain ways.  invoking myths and legends poses more questions than it answers.

Do you have some special relationship with Oberon? You talk about him a lot.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 24, 2022, 05:01:40 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 11:00:55 AM••••
Oh, there was an actual Tower of Babel (probably a ziggurat) as referenced by the first post in this thread. One can leave out the TOB and imagine that language just 'naturally' evolved, but then consider that there are about 7,000 languages spoken on earth. And according to Wikipedia there are about 400 independent language families. So, it would seem quite reasonable for most of us to wonder how indeed these thousands of languages all evolved so quickly if the biblical account is just a myth?

Written language is at least 5,000 years old and developed in several places in the world prior to the writing of the Bible. Spoken language is presumably even older and was spoken in the Americas thousands of years before the biblical accounts were written. All this is known.

I really do not understand the point of this conversation.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 24, 2022, 05:04:40 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 24, 2022, 04:53:04 PMDo you have some special relationship with Oberon? You talk about him a lot.

lol

oberon is a useful shortcut to counter the arguments i read here about how something is reasonable or even likely because it has not been disproven.

i am often presented with the argument here that because something is possible (not having been disproven), that it is the best/most reasonable/circumstantial explanation for something.

i use oberon-ex-machina as an analogy to the arguments i hear that clam unproven things as explanations for real phenomena.

for example, this one

Spoiler
Quote from: Francis on July 21, 2022, 06:13:41 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 20, 2022, 09:45:20 PMits similar to the hindu conception of the turtles holding up the earyh. each turtle requires anothrr below it to hold it up, and anothe above it to support. turtles, all the way down, all the way up. no beginning, no end.

the particles can be of any size. like kiahanie said, calculus makes that intrlligible

"Turtles all the way down" is an expression of the problem of infinite regress. (which is also the problem if time was infinite).   But if God exists (as in the God of Abraham), then there is no infinite regress, and it would be God that is holding up all the turtles and who also stops the problem of an infinite regress.

Put that with the other pieces of circumstantial evidences for God's existence... and a very strong and compelling case for theism can be made.  But of course, people don't have to believe what they don't want to, no matter how strong  a circumstantial case is.  Just ask any jury.

Hope you are well
[close]

in ^^this example, an argument is made that proposing a hypothesis that the god of abraham holds up the turtles constitutes evidence that he is actually doing so. this is, of course, non-sensical, because any number of other explanations can be put forward without proof. in the example above with the turtles, the unproven god of abraham is suggested as a likely explantion for their support, which is then re-labelled as "circumstantial evidence," substituting for "hypothesis." and my counter-argument is that i can substitute the unproven oberon, king of the fairies, for the god of abraham, in every instance of reasoning like this with completely equivalent validity.

besides, i like shakespeare.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 01:57:50 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 11:00:55 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 24, 2022, 09:19:12 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 08:08:25 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 24, 2022, 04:40:14 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on July 24, 2022, 01:35:49 AM"The approximate time of such building may be drawn from the following information: Peleg lived from 2269 to 2030 B.C.E. His name meant "Division," for "in his days the earth [that is, "earth's population"] was divided"; Jehovah "scattered them from there over all the surface of the earth." (Ge 10:25; 11:9) A text of Sharkalisharri, king of Agade (Accad) in patriarchal times, mentions his restoring a temple-tower at Babylon, implying that such a structure existed prior to his reign." (Insight on the Scriptures)

That's still less than 5000 years. Quite a short time for the evolution and development of all these vastly different language groups.

It wasn't a short time -- according to the biblical account it was instantaneous -- snap your fingers fast.

Maybe. But it seems jst is referencing some info regarding an actual tower as well as an actual timeframe.

So, if we're talking real dates, then it seemed logical to see how that fits in with our current understanding of how languages evolve in reality.

Oh, there was an actual Tower of Babel (probably a ziggurat) as referenced by the first post in this thread. One can leave out the TOB and imagine that language just 'naturally' evolved, but then consider that there are about 7,000 languages spoken on earth. And according to Wikipedia there are about 400 independent language families. So, it would seem quite reasonable for most of us to wonder how indeed these thousands of languages all evolved so quickly if the biblical account is just a myth?



This iteration of humans have been around for 200 thousand years and being that a global reset occurred 70 thousand years ago, we may say that modern languages emerged from that period. 

Tens of thousands of years is quite a lot of time for languages to branch out, evolve into thousands of iterations.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on July 25, 2022, 04:44:22 AM
What evidence for language besides written down, pre-cuneiform? anything?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 06:10:07 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 25, 2022, 04:44:22 AMWhat evidence for language besides written down, pre-cuneiform? anything?

Cuneiform is about 3200bc.

Jiahu symbols in china was dated around 6000bc. 

Neolithic europe has some examples at about 5000 bc.

There are a lot and likely countless unknown languages it's just that we have few surviving examples but generally, I don't think it logical to assume that modern man only learned to speak and write about 5000 years ago. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 06:10:40 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 24, 2022, 05:01:40 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 24, 2022, 11:00:55 AM••••
Oh, there was an actual Tower of Babel (probably a ziggurat) as referenced by the first post in this thread. One can leave out the TOB and imagine that language just 'naturally' evolved, but then consider that there are about 7,000 languages spoken on earth. And according to Wikipedia there are about 400 independent language families. So, it would seem quite reasonable for most of us to wonder how indeed these thousands of languages all evolved so quickly if the biblical account is just a myth?

Written language is at least 5,000 years old and developed in several places in the world prior to the writing of the Bible. Spoken language is presumably even older and was spoken in the Americas thousands of years before the biblical accounts were written. All this is known.

I really do not understand the point of this conversation.

If I lived nearby I'd come and hold your hand and whisper in your ear truths you need to hear. The things that seem to separate us are:

Belief in the biblical account as written.

Belief in the biblical account of man's creation.

(And you can't keep IGI alive by not understanding points made. You have to do better than that ... much better)
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 06:23:15 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 01:57:50 AMTens of thousands of years is quite a lot of time for languages to branch out, evolve into thousands of iterations.

Giving you, for a moment, the thousands of years needed why would evolve or devolve into 400 plus distinct families? In lay terms English changing into Japanese beggars belief ... 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on July 25, 2022, 06:23:40 AM
Jiahu symbols: "...most doubt that the markings represent systematic writing..." (i.e. language)
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:04:57 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 06:23:15 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 01:57:50 AMTens of thousands of years is quite a lot of time for languages to branch out, evolve into thousands of iterations.

Giving you, for a moment, the thousands of years needed why would evolve or devolve into 400 plus distinct families? In lay terms English changing into Japanese beggars belief ... 


English did not "change into" japanese. English and japanese are from different language branches. But again it is likely those branches once joined at a certain point in the ancient past again because of our shared ancestry. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:06:38 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 25, 2022, 06:23:40 AMJiahu symbols: "...most doubt that the markings represent systematic writing..." (i.e. language)

Has it been proven to not be a system of writing? If not, then the theory stands that it very well could be a system of writing with some stylistic similarities to modern chinese writing.

https://buckinghamhsiao.wordpress.com/tag/jiahu-symbols/
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AM
At any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:07:53 PM
Quote from: maritime on July 25, 2022, 04:44:22 AMWhat evidence for language besides written down, pre-cuneiform? anything?

Seriously?

Homer is one direct evidence. He was writing at the dawn of Greek's literary heritage, writing a poetic history compiled from stories a couple-three centuries earlier that had people speaking language to each other.

Here is some resource for understanding the development of language(s).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistics
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:29:21 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 06:23:15 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 01:57:50 AMTens of thousands of years is quite a lot of time for languages to branch out, evolve into thousands of iterations.

Giving you, for a moment, the thousands of years needed why would evolve or devolve into 400 plus distinct families? In lay terms English changing into Japanese beggars belief ... 

True. It does beggar belief. Why would you even think that was suggested?

The simplest explanation for multiple languages is geographical separation and linguistic drift. It does not take long. Look at all the indigenous languages in the Americas that developed in just 12,000-25,000 years.

Here is some resource for understanding the development of language(s).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistics
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:41:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:04:57 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 06:23:15 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 01:57:50 AMTens of thousands of years is quite a lot of time for languages to branch out, evolve into thousands of iterations.

Giving you, for a moment, the thousands of years needed why would evolve or devolve into 400 plus distinct families? In lay terms English changing into Japanese beggars belief ... 


English did not "change into" japanese. English and japanese are from different language branches. But again it is likely those branches once joined at a certain point in the ancient past again because of our shared ancestry.

Maybe.

Some current thinking suggests that homo sap sap did not evolve in a single location, but by f**king its way through central Africa, blending various homo genetic types. Perhaps a thousand or so homo saps left eastern Africa probably in small groups with the same or similar languages.

When they left for Asia and Europe they left the African speakers behind and began developing new languages in Asia then Europe then the Americas. The last common ancestor of English and Japanese is probably older than the Great Sapiens Migration.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:45:34 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:29:21 PMTrue. It does beggar belief. Why would you even think that was suggested?

The simplest explanation for multiple languages is geographical separation and linguistic drift. It does not take long. Look at all the indigenous languages in the Americas that developed in just 12,000-25,000 years.

See post #35
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:53:21 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:41:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:04:57 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 06:23:15 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 01:57:50 AMTens of thousands of years is quite a lot of time for languages to branch out, evolve into thousands of iterations.

Giving you, for a moment, the thousands of years needed why would evolve or devolve into 400 plus distinct families? In lay terms English changing into Japanese beggars belief ... 


English did not "change into" japanese. English and japanese are from different language branches. But again it is likely those branches once joined at a certain point in the ancient past again because of our shared ancestry.

Maybe.

Some current thinking suggests that homo sap sap did not evolve in a single location, but by f**king its way through central Africa, blending various homo genetic types. Perhaps a thousand or so homo saps left eastern Africa probably in small groups with the same or similar languages.

The current DNA studies in my portfolio (YouTube - Answers in Genesis) indicate an Adam and Eve beginning.


Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:41:41 PMWhen they left for Asia and Europe they left the African speakers behind and began developing new languages in Asia then Europe then the Americas. The last common ancestor of English and Japanese is probably older than the Great Sapiens Migration.

The changing of words or adding new words is easily seen and understood, but things like moving verbs around beggars belief. Example:

English - Where is the soap?

Japanese - Soap where?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, the Bible does not say. That was Bishop Ussher's count. I suspect the biblical accounts omitted a few eons, very likely those between Eden and Noah. Ussher's count is not relevant to dating anything.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:06:48 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:45:34 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:29:21 PMTrue. It does beggar belief. Why would you even think that was suggested?

The simplest explanation for multiple languages is geographical separation and linguistic drift. It does not take long. Look at all the indigenous languages in the Americas that developed in just 12,000-25,000 years.

See post #35

Post #35 is mine. Are we out of sync again? or did I miss my point?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:09:40 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:53:21 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:41:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:04:57 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 06:23:15 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 01:57:50 AMTens of thousands of years is quite a lot of time for languages to branch out, evolve into thousands of iterations.

Giving you, for a moment, the thousands of years needed why would evolve or devolve into 400 plus distinct families? In lay terms English changing into Japanese beggars belief ... 


English did not "change into" japanese. English and japanese are from different language branches. But again it is likely those branches once joined at a certain point in the ancient past again because of our shared ancestry.

Maybe.

Some current thinking suggests that homo sap sap did not evolve in a single location, but by f**king its way through central Africa, blending various homo genetic types. Perhaps a thousand or so homo saps left eastern Africa probably in small groups with the same or similar languages.

The current DNA studies in my portfolio (YouTube - Answers in Genesis) indicate an Adam and Eve beginning.


Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:41:41 PMWhen they left for Asia and Europe they left the African speakers behind and began developing new languages in Asia then Europe then the Americas. The last common ancestor of English and Japanese is probably older than the Great Sapiens Migration.

The changing of words or adding new words is easily seen and understood, but things like moving verbs around beggars belief. Example:

English - Where is the soap?

Japanese - Soap where?

I do not regard YouTube as a qualified source in technical subjects.

word substitution? For grammar and lexicon please read the wiki articles:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistics
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 12:48:46 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Why accept that estimate vs the scientifically accepted 4 billion estimate based on modern dating methods?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 01:44:34 AM
QuoteSome current thinking suggests that homo sap sap did not evolve in a single location, but by f**king its way through central Africa, blending various homo genetic types.


China is sort of pushing this narrative that not only did man evolve independently in different regions, they also evolved primarily from china along side africa. 

Well of course they'd say that. Wouldn't be surprised if they eventually claim to find chinese artifacts on the moon or mars lol

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 03:58:04 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 01:44:34 AM
QuoteSome current thinking suggests that homo sap sap did not evolve in a single location, but by f**king its way through central Africa, blending various homo genetic types.


China is sort of pushing this narrative that not only did man evolve independently in different regions, they also evolved primarily from china along side africa.

Well of course they'd say that. Wouldn't be surprised if they eventually claim to find chinese artifacts on the moon or mars lol

They do not say humans evolved in separate places. They suggest humans evolved collaboratively, mixing human genes from several places as they wandered around Africa visiting relatives.  Seems we were nearly always a highly mobile species.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 04:22:21 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 03:58:04 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 01:44:34 AM
QuoteSome current thinking suggests that homo sap sap did not evolve in a single location, but by f**king its way through central Africa, blending various homo genetic types.


China is sort of pushing this narrative that not only did man evolve independently in different regions, they also evolved primarily from china along side africa.

Well of course they'd say that. Wouldn't be surprised if they eventually claim to find chinese artifacts on the moon or mars lol

They do not say humans evolved in separate places. They suggest humans evolved collaboratively, mixing human genes from several places as they wandered around Africa visiting relatives.  Seems we were nearly always a highly mobile species.

Oh I must've read wrong then.

I thought I read that china was saying they came from homo erectus (peking man), which was then advanced with the introduction of the Denisovans, who then went back to africa for some reason to intermingle.

Anyway, lots of gaps to fill.

Seems to me tho that its possible those sap saps from africa 70k years ago simply diluted the regional bloodlines.

In other words, it's very possible that by the time african sap sap dispersed, the regions already had their established language.

There still is an unaccounted 130k year gap afterall.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on July 26, 2022, 06:34:18 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 25, 2022, 04:44:22 AMWhat evidence for language besides written down, pre-cuneiform? anything?

^Not the best question ||unsure||
What evidence is there for language, pre-cuneiform (which was recorded, a recording). What are we basing our knowledge of language and language differences on, in other words.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 07:23:45 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 26, 2022, 06:34:18 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 25, 2022, 04:44:22 AMWhat evidence for language besides written down, pre-cuneiform? anything?

^Not the best question ||unsure||
What evidence is there for language, pre-cuneiform (which was recorded, a recording). What are we basing our knowledge of language and language differences on, in other words.

Kiahanie posted a couple links about that.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 08:51:35 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, the Bible does not say. That was Bishop Ussher's count. I suspect the biblical accounts omitted a few eons, very likely those between Eden and Noah. Ussher's count is not relevant to dating anything.

Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, the Bible does not say. That was Bishop Ussher's count. I suspect the biblical accounts omitted a few eons, very likely those between Eden and Noah. Ussher's count is not relevant to dating anything.

1 - No mention of Bishop Usher in my posts.

2 - But Bishop Usher's count was only slightly off.

3 - Your suspicions about "omitted sons" are just that, "suspicions" and suspect in themselves.

4 - One can use the death notices in Genesis to date the Earth's age at about 6,000 candles on the cake. 

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 08:55:44 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:06:48 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:45:34 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:29:21 PMTrue. It does beggar belief. Why would you even think that was suggested?

The simplest explanation for multiple languages is geographical separation and linguistic drift. It does not take long. Look at all the indigenous languages in the Americas that developed in just 12,000-25,000 years.

See post #35

Post #35 is mine. Are we out of sync again? or did I miss my point?

Post 35 is mine on this monitor and it reads

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:06:46 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:09:40 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:53:21 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:41:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:04:57 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 06:23:15 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 01:57:50 AMTens of thousands of years is quite a lot of time for languages to branch out, evolve into thousands of iterations.

Giving you, for a moment, the thousands of years needed why would evolve or devolve into 400 plus distinct families? In lay terms English changing into Japanese beggars belief ... 


English did not "change into" japanese. English and japanese are from different language branches. But again it is likely those branches once joined at a certain point in the ancient past again because of our shared ancestry.

Maybe.

Some current thinking suggests that homo sap sap did not evolve in a single location, but by f**king its way through central Africa, blending various homo genetic types. Perhaps a thousand or so homo saps left eastern Africa probably in small groups with the same or similar languages.

The current DNA studies in my portfolio (YouTube - Answers in Genesis) indicate an Adam and Eve beginning.


Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:41:41 PMWhen they left for Asia and Europe they left the African speakers behind and began developing new languages in Asia then Europe then the Americas. The last common ancestor of English and Japanese is probably older than the Great Sapiens Migration.

The changing of words or adding new words is easily seen and understood, but things like moving verbs around beggars belief. Example:

English - Where is the soap?

Japanese - Soap where?

I do not regard YouTube as a qualified source in technical subjects.

The science staff on Answers in Genesis is more than well vetted, qualified and skilled.


Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:09:40 PMword substitution? For grammar and lexicon please read the wiki articles:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistics

Theories all to support a dying sacred cow.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 12:48:46 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Why accept that estimate vs the scientifically accepted 4 billion estimate based on modern dating methods?

Modern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern". But the Holy Bible is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 09:53:32 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 12:48:46 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Why accept that estimate vs the scientifically accepted 4 billion estimate based on modern dating methods?

Modern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern". But the Holy Bible is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow

They may be in flux but not 4 billion years in flux.

At most, dating methods would be 50 million years off.

What seems to be far more in flux are the bible interpretations based on the tens of thousands of christian sects you can find worldwide.

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 10:21:19 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 09:53:32 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 12:48:46 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Why accept that estimate vs the scientifically accepted 4 billion estimate based on modern dating methods?

Modern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern". But the Holy Bible is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow

They may be in flux but not 4 billion years in flux.

At most, dating methods would be 50 million years off.

What seems to be far more in flux are the bible interpretations based on the tens of thousands of christian sects you can find worldwide.




If there is a God (and there is) and the Holy Bible is his word (and it is) then much of science is at best utter nonsense and at worst total BS
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 26, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AMModern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern".


^^^this is not true.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 10:21:19 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 09:53:32 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 12:48:46 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Why accept that estimate vs the scientifically accepted 4 billion estimate based on modern dating methods?

Modern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern". But the Holy Bible is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow

They may be in flux but not 4 billion years in flux.

At most, dating methods would be 50 million years off.

What seems to be far more in flux are the bible interpretations based on the tens of thousands of christian sects you can find worldwide.




If there is a God (and there is) and the Holy Bible is his word (and it is) then much of science is at best utter nonsense and at worst total BS

First question: Is there a god?

Second question if the answer to the first is "yes:" Which god?

Third: What exactly does it want?

Can't jump to 2 without answering beyond doubt question #1. Likewise Can't jump to 3 without answering beyond doubt #2. 

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 05:03:31 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 08:55:44 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:06:48 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:45:34 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:29:21 PMTrue. It does beggar belief. Why would you even think that was suggested?

The simplest explanation for multiple languages is geographical separation and linguistic drift. It does not take long. Look at all the indigenous languages in the Americas that developed in just 12,000-25,000 years.

See post #35

Post #35 is mine. Are we out of sync again? or did I miss my point?

Post 35 is mine on this monitor and it reads

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

The sequencing is unsynced. I will try to fix it.

The Bible is not a reliable guide in scientific matters. Bishop Ussher is not an historian. Are you a young earth creationist?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 05:24:00 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AM••••
Modern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern".

New technologies supplement -not replace- older technologies and add higher resolution and increased depth of field. Unsure why you see this as a negative.

Quote from: eyeshaveitBut the Holy Bible is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow

Agreed. That is one problem with using it as a scientific reference.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 06:56:54 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 05:03:31 PMThe sequencing is unsynced. I will try to fix it.
••••

Everybody's thread sequence numbers should now agree with everyone else's.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 07:14:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 08:51:35 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, the Bible does not say. That was Bishop Ussher's count. I suspect the biblical accounts omitted a few eons, very likely those between Eden and Noah. Ussher's count is not relevant to dating anything.

Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, the Bible does not say. That was Bishop Ussher's count. I suspect the biblical accounts omitted a few eons, very likely those between Eden and Noah. Ussher's count is not relevant to dating anything.

1 - No mention of Bishop Usher in my posts.

2 - But Bishop Usher's count was only slightly off.

3 - Your suspicions about "omitted sons" are just that, "suspicions" and suspect in themselves.

4 - One can use the death notices in Genesis to date the Earth's age at about 6,000 candles on the cake. 

Your cake is short some 4,500,000,000 candles.

Tolkien had his own chronology for Middle Earth. You are welcome to your own Early Iron Age chronology, but there is no reason for the rest of us to acknowledge that as anything but a rhetorical device.

Do you get Iron Age medical care? Or do you go to one of those "modern" "MDs" that have new fangled things like Xrays and steel scalpels?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:04:08 PM
.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:06:25 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PMThe Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, it doesn't.  The Bible uses the Hebrew word YOM... and although "yom" is commonly rendered as day in ENGLISH translations, the word "yom" can be and is often used in different ways to refer to different time spans in the Bible.

But since we can't go back and interview the writer of Genesis and ask them what they meant when they used the word "yom"... (as it is used in Genesis)...  then we don't want to make the mistake of reading INTO the Hebrew text the very thing we want to prove from the outset.

Since the word "yom" in Heberw can mean great spans of time... and since science shows the earth to be over 4 billions of years old... then there is no contradiction whatsoever between the earth being old and what the original Hebrew text says.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 10:14:34 PM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:06:25 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PMThe Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, it doesn't.  The Bible uses the Hebrew word YOM... and although "yom" is commonly rendered as day in ENGLISH translations, the word "yom" can be and is often used in different ways to refer to different time spans in the Bible.

But since we can't go back and interview the writer of Genesis and ask them what they meant when they used the word "yom"... (as it is used in Genesis)...  then we don't want to make the mistake of reading INTO the Hebrew text the very thing we want to prove from the outset.

Since the word "yom" in Heberw can mean great spans of time... and since science shows the earth to be over 4 billions of years old... then there is no contradiction whatsoever between the earth being old and what the original Hebrew text says.

Good info.

But if "yom" can simply mean era or age or some span of time, then both yours and eyes' interpretations can be correct...
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 26, 2022, 11:05:20 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 10:14:34 PM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:06:25 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PMThe Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, it doesn't.  The Bible uses the Hebrew word YOM... and although "yom" is commonly rendered as day in ENGLISH translations, the word "yom" can be and is often used in different ways to refer to different time spans in the Bible.

But since we can't go back and interview the writer of Genesis and ask them what they meant when they used the word "yom"... (as it is used in Genesis)...  then we don't want to make the mistake of reading INTO the Hebrew text the very thing we want to prove from the outset.

Since the word "yom" in Heberw can mean great spans of time... and since science shows the earth to be over 4 billions of years old... then there is no contradiction whatsoever between the earth being old and what the original Hebrew text says.

Good info.

But if "yom" can simply mean era or age or some span of time, then both yours and eyes' interpretations can be correct...

How is that logically possible?  A young earth and an old earth can't be equally true.  (the law of non-contradiction in logic)
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 27, 2022, 12:22:02 AM
no

but a young earth model can explain the scientific data as well as an old earth model.

in fact, that is the reality.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on July 27, 2022, 04:23:38 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:06:25 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PMThe Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Actually, it doesn't.  The Bible uses the Hebrew word YOM... and although "yom" is commonly rendered as day in ENGLISH translations, the word "yom" can be and is often used in different ways to refer to different time spans in the Bible.

But since we can't go back and interview the writer of Genesis and ask them what they meant when they used the word "yom"... (as it is used in Genesis)...  then we don't want to make the mistake of reading INTO the Hebrew text the very thing we want to prove from the outset.

Since the word "yom" in Heberw can mean great spans of time... and since science shows the earth to be over 4 billions of years old... then there is no contradiction whatsoever between the earth being old and what the original Hebrew text says.
Yes, for example, Genesis 2:4 uses "yom" (day) to describe all the creative days as one "day".

Not only that but Gen 1:1 is the only verse about the creation of the earth.  The rest of the account (the seven creative days) is about the preparation of the already existing earth.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on July 27, 2022, 04:48:46 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 26, 2022, 06:34:18 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 25, 2022, 04:44:22 AMWhat evidence for language besides written down, pre-cuneiform? anything?

^Not the best question ||unsure||
What evidence is there for language, pre-cuneiform (which was recorded, a recording). What are we basing our knowledge of language and language differences on, in other words.

^I'll try again.
There are verbal expressions (language) communicated in legible writing.
Cuneiform is the oldest legible writing. What evidence for expression (language) given no other recording, pre-cuneiform. Homer is not pre-cuneiform. Speculation is expansive, mind boggling timeframe is granted and accepted, by transitory brains.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:48:14 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 26, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AMModern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern".


^^^this is not true.

^^^this is not true.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:50:22 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 26, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AMModern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern".


^^^this is not true.

^^^this is not true.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:52:56 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 10:59:38 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 10:21:19 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 09:53:32 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 12:48:46 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:44:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 25, 2022, 07:39:02 AMAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/07/health/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossils-found/index.html

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

Why accept that estimate vs the scientifically accepted 4 billion estimate based on modern dating methods?

Modern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern". But the Holy Bible is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow

They may be in flux but not 4 billion years in flux.

At most, dating methods would be 50 million years off.

What seems to be far more in flux are the bible interpretations based on the tens of thousands of christian sects you can find worldwide.




If there is a God (and there is) and the Holy Bible is his word (and it is) then much of science is at best utter nonsense and at worst total BS

First question: Is there a god?

Second question if the answer to the first is "yes:" Which god?

Third: What exactly does it want?

Can't jump to 2 without answering beyond doubt question #1. Likewise Can't jump to 3 without answering beyond doubt #2.


Quote from: 8livesleft on July 26, 2022, 10:59:38 AMFirst question: Is there a god?

Second question if the answer to the first is "yes:" Which god?

Third: What exactly does it want?

Can't jump to 2 without answering beyond doubt question #1. Likewise Can't jump to 3 without answering beyond doubt #2. 

Yes

Yahweh

Worship / Glory / Thanks
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:57:06 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 05:03:31 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 08:55:44 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 06:06:48 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 25, 2022, 05:45:34 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 25, 2022, 05:29:21 PMTrue. It does beggar belief. Why would you even think that was suggested?

The simplest explanation for multiple languages is geographical separation and linguistic drift. It does not take long. Look at all the indigenous languages in the Americas that developed in just 12,000-25,000 years.

See post #35

Post #35 is mine. Are we out of sync again? or did I miss my point?

Post 35 is mine on this monitor and it reads

The Holy Bible indicates that our planet Earth is about 6,000 years old give or take ...

The sequencing is unsynced. I will try to fix it.

The Bible is not a reliable guide in scientific matters.

^^^this is not true.

Quote from: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 05:03:31 PMBishop Ussher is not an historian.

So?


Quote from: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 05:03:31 PMAre you a young earth creationist?

The 6,000 year old Earth and its inhabitants were/are obviously created
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:01:56 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 05:24:00 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AM••••
Modern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern".

New technologies supplement -not replace- older technologies and add higher resolution and increased depth of field. Unsure why you see this as a negative.

It depends on where you stand in the stream of time. Most of what we call truth in science today will be called a pack of lies by straight-talkers in coming years

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:04:23 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 07:14:56 PMDo you get Iron Age medical care?

No because I stand in a different place in the stream of time
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:07:00 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:06:25 PMsince the earth [is] over 4 billions of years old

^^^this is not true.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:08:18 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 11:05:20 PM(the law of non-contradiction in logic

Life can't create itself
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:10:49 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 27, 2022, 04:48:46 AMWhat evidence for expression (language) given no other recording, pre-cuneiform.

Cave paintings in France and Spain for instance
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 27, 2022, 10:19:23 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:48:14 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 26, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AMModern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern".


^^^this is not true.

^^^this is not true.

eyes, please forgive me for not welcoming you back to the forum immediately. your point of view make useful contributions to the conversation here.

regarding your recent post, you know a great deal of scripture, but you are incorrect regarding radiometric dating. knowledge of one does not ensure knowledge of the other.

young earth creationism does not contradict radiometric dating, yet most --all-- creationists prefer to tilt at the windmill of isotope science, rather than pointing out the non-contradiction.

since you assert knowledge of something i know to be in error, i invite you to explain in your own words why radiometric dating is incorrect. my education and professional background is in physical geology and palaeontology, and i welcome the opportunity to refresh my knowledge of current techniques in isotope geochemistry..
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 27, 2022, 03:26:32 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:07:00 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:06:25 PMsince the earth [is] over 4 billions of years old

^^^this is not true.

Eyes, i'm not your enemy.  I'm a born again Christian  who loves God with all of his heart soul and mind and has accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior. (because of the evidence and the witness of the Holy Spirit)

Just because we may have a difference of an opinion on certain peripheral subjects, doesn't mean we are not brothers in Christ.

No people group on this earth are monolithic.  None.

So... in response to your above statement... I could just as easily reply the same way you did to me... with: " ^^^this is not true".    Just like you did with Kevin, etc.

Instead, I will ask how do you know that  the earth is not over 4 billions of years old (or at least not far older than just a few thousand years)?   If your only response is to bring up Genesis and interpret the Hebrew word "yom" in those passages as meaning a literal 24hr day, then I think you are mistaken about that Hebrew word "yom".

If you disagree, I'm more than willing to listen to your arguments and rational.

God Bless you
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 27, 2022, 03:31:14 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:08:18 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 11:05:20 PM(the law of non-contradiction in logic

Life can't create itself
I agree, but what does that have to do with the law of non-contradiction in logic or with anything else I wrote?  I'm a theist. I think life, among other things, is a good piece of circumstantial evidence that points to God's existence.

God Bless you
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 27, 2022, 03:32:13 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 27, 2022, 12:22:02 AMno

but a young earth model can explain the scientific data as well as an old earth model.

in fact, that is the reality.
What scientific data points to a young earth model? And what age range are you using when you speak of a "young earth'?

Hope you are doing well
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 27, 2022, 05:15:31 PM
no data.

but the 6000 year jewish model is internally consistent, and is not contradicted by science.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 05:24:58 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 27, 2022, 10:19:23 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:48:14 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 26, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AMModern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern".


^^^this is not true.

^^^this is not true.

eyes, please forgive me for not welcoming you back to the forum immediately. your point of view make useful contributions to the conversation here.

I have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven.


Quote from: kevin on July 27, 2022, 10:19:23 AMregarding your recent post, you know a great deal of scripture, but you are incorrect regarding radiometric dating.

I did not expound on radiometric dating. What I wrote was,

"Modern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern"."

I've seen the so-called scientific dating of the Earth switch back and forth in the millions of years (and more) range. There are so many things that make "modern" dating a joke -- the salt content of the ocean comes to mind as does the position of the moon in space, but there are many more things and you can look them up. The Internet is your friend ...



Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: Francis on July 27, 2022, 03:26:32 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:07:00 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:06:25 PMsince the earth [is] over 4 billions of years old

^^^this is not true.

Eyes, i'm not your enemy.  I'm a born again Christian  who loves God with all of his heart soul and mind and has accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior. (because of the evidence and the witness of the Holy Spirit)

Just because we may have a difference of an opinion on certain peripheral subjects, doesn't mean we are not brothers in Christ.

No people group on this earth are monolithic.  None.

So... in response to your above statement... I could just as easily reply the same way you did to me... with: " ^^^this is not true".    Just like you did with Kevin, etc.

Instead, I will ask how do you know that  the earth is not over 4 billions of years old (or at least not far older than just a few thousand years)?   If your only response is to bring up Genesis and interpret the Hebrew word "yom" in those passages as meaning a literal 24hr day, then I think you are mistaken about that Hebrew word "yom".

If you disagree, I'm more than willing to listen to your arguments and rational.

God Bless you



Francis ... we just have a difference of opinion which does not affect the salvation of eithr one of us ... God bless ...
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 27, 2022, 05:34:13 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 27, 2022, 05:15:31 PMno data.

but the 6000 year jewish model is internally consistent, and is not contradicted by science.

I'm not following. 

How can a 6000 year model for the age of the earth be consistent with... or not contradict a Billion year age model (current scientific calculations)... or even a 20-400 million year model (first proposed by physicist William Thomson in 1862)... which even then, is not long enough according to Darwin?

Secondly, what do you mean "internally consistent"? 

I'm not talking about something being "internally consistent", but about what is outside of the model by which a model  (any model) can be tested as being either consistent or inconsistent with known science.

Can't a theory be "internally consistent" and yet still be wrong?

Hope you are doing well
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 27, 2022, 05:36:19 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 05:29:10 PM
Quote from: Francis on July 27, 2022, 03:26:32 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:07:00 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 26, 2022, 10:06:25 PMsince the earth [is] over 4 billions of years old

^^^this is not true.

Eyes, i'm not your enemy.  I'm a born again Christian  who loves God with all of his heart soul and mind and has accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior. (because of the evidence and the witness of the Holy Spirit)

Just because we may have a difference of an opinion on certain peripheral subjects, doesn't mean we are not brothers in Christ.

No people group on this earth are monolithic.  None.

So... in response to your above statement... I could just as easily reply the same way you did to me... with: " ^^^this is not true".    Just like you did with Kevin, etc.

Instead, I will ask how do you know that  the earth is not over 4 billions of years old (or at least not far older than just a few thousand years)?  If your only response is to bring up Genesis and interpret the Hebrew word "yom" in those passages as meaning a literal 24hr day, then I think you are mistaken about that Hebrew word "yom".

If you disagree, I'm more than willing to listen to your arguments and rational.

God Bless you



Francis ... we just have a difference of opinion which does not affect the salvation of eithr one of us ... God bless ...

That's what I said.  Glad we can agree.  But I would like to know why you think that the earth is not a lot older than a few thousand years old?  And do you agree that the Hebrew word "yom" doesn't have to mean a 24 hr day?  And if so, why do you think it means a 24hr day in Genesis?

God Bless you and your family
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 27, 2022, 05:40:36 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 05:24:58 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 27, 2022, 10:19:23 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:48:14 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 26, 2022, 10:29:22 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 26, 2022, 09:12:07 AMModern scientific dating methods are in flux and never sitting still they change all the time -- that's why you call the latest of these, "modern".


^^^this is not true.

^^^this is not true.

eyes, please forgive me for not welcoming you back to the forum immediately. your point of view make useful contributions to the conversation here.

I have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven.

Eyes, in the name of Jesus, I rebuke the doctor's reports.  The God we serve is a God of miracles.  You will live to see Christmas this year... and next year.

God Bless you.  Praying for you.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 27, 2022, 07:51:22 PM
Quote from: maritime on July 27, 2022, 04:48:46 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 26, 2022, 06:34:18 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 25, 2022, 04:44:22 AMWhat evidence for language besides written down, pre-cuneiform? anything?

^Not the best question ||unsure||
What evidence is there for language, pre-cuneiform (which was recorded, a recording). What are we basing our knowledge of language and language differences on, in other words.

^I'll try again.
There are verbal expressions (language) communicated in legible writing.
Cuneiform is the oldest legible writing. What evidence for expression (language) given no other recording, pre-cuneiform. Homer is not pre-cuneiform. Speculation is expansive, mind boggling timeframe is granted and accepted, by transitory brains.

I know of no direct evidence that speech preceded writing. There is considerable indirect evidence and reasoning to support speech's priority. I know of no evidence-based speculation that spoken language did not precede written language. pre-literate homo sap has had both the vocal ability and the braincase are to control speech for a very long time.

If you like, we can discuss the indirect evidence and reasoning.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 27, 2022, 08:00:46 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:57:06 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 26, 2022, 05:03:31 PM••••
Are you a young earth creationist?

The 6,000 year old Earth and its inhabitants were/are obviously created

OK. I will stop saying silly things at you.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 27, 2022, 08:04:52 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 07:10:49 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 27, 2022, 04:48:46 AMWhat evidence for expression (language) given no other recording, pre-cuneiform.

Cave paintings in France and Spain for instance

Cave paintings and pictorial art in general are not regarded as "language."
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 27, 2022, 10:42:33 PM

Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 06:48:14 AMI have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven.



i am sincerely sorry to hear that. thank you for choosing to spend some of your limited time here.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on July 28, 2022, 06:36:15 AM
8livesleft
QuoteAt any rate, I completely disagree with the notion that ALL human language originated from just 5000 years ago, when humans have been around for 200 thousand years.

Are we saying nobody spoke or wrote a single word for 195 thousand years????

I stand corrected...295 thousand years.
...

No, not saying nobody spoke. Asking what evidence for speaking. Stark appearance, legible writing, given 195/295K years (as you report above).

Anyways...

https://buckinghamhsiao.wordpress.com/2016/04/30/archaic-scripts/#more-251
Quote"As part of my research into asemic words..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asemic
Asemia: a communication disorder
Asemic writing: Asemic writing is a wordless open semantic form of writing. ...
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 28, 2022, 08:02:45 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on July 27, 2022, 08:04:52 PMCave paintings and pictorial art in general are not regarded as "language."

Cave paintings were freedom of speech
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Mark on July 28, 2022, 10:26:49 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 05:24:58 PMI have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven.
Where in the bible does it say there's no internet in Heaven?   :-)
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 28, 2022, 02:57:33 PM
Quote from: Mark on July 28, 2022, 10:26:49 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 05:24:58 PMI have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven.
Where in the bible does it say there's no internet in Heaven?  :-)

Luke 16:26 for one
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 28, 2022, 04:51:43 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 28, 2022, 02:57:33 PM
Quote from: Mark on July 28, 2022, 10:26:49 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 27, 2022, 05:24:58 PMI have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven.
Where in the bible does it say there's no internet in Heaven?  :-)

Luke 16:26 for one

I for one am glad of that. Social media is the devil's own invention.

I am sorry you will not be with us long, Eyes. We could use another competent Christian since meAgain is on leave.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Teaspoon Shallow on July 28, 2022, 10:18:08 PM
Eyeshaveit:  "I have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven."

I am deeply saddened to learn about this today.  I am glad I had the opportunity to converse with you over the years and hope you and your family have support during this difficult period.  
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 29, 2022, 01:15:47 AM
QuoteNo, not saying nobody spoke. Asking what evidence for speaking. Stark appearance, legible writing, given 195/295K years (as you report above).

So far, the earliest systemic form of writing is proposed to be 6-8000 years back.

The main issue is that writing is very difficult to preserve. The few surviving systems we have are from carvings, stone/clay tablets and those are extremely hard to come by. 


Quotehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asemic
Asemia: a communication disorder
Asemic writing: Asemic writing is a wordless open semantic form of writing. ..

Thing with Asemic writing is that we can compare it to current standard writing methods. 

The ancient systems don't fall into the same category since we simply don't have a frame of reference from the same time.

However, we can distinguish between asemia and systemic writing based on patterns, repetition, contextual use. Asemia is easy to replicate now with our pens and paper, ancient people didn't have that, they'd have to carve/paint - which takes a lot of work and is generally not worth doing or wasting time on. And writing was likely reserved for specific people and places and so, not just anyone can carve/paint wherever/whenever. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Teaspoon Shallow on July 29, 2022, 01:51:00 AM
Australian first people rock art has been dated over 17,000 years and some communicate stories.  

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-56164484

There is insufficient evidence to conclude the Tower of Babel is anything more than a story created by humans.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 29, 2022, 08:24:49 AM
Quote from: Teaspoon Shallow on July 28, 2022, 10:18:08 PMEyeshaveit:  "I have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven."

I am deeply saddened to learn about this today.  I am glad I had the opportunity to converse with you over the years and hope you and your family have support during this difficult period. 

Just speaking for myself: it's really not at all difficult. God has provided me with more than I need -- I have an excess. And I'm upbeat, I'm joyful and looking forward to meeting my Lord and Savior.



Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Teaspoon Shallow on July 29, 2022, 08:34:58 AM
I am pleased to hear that Eyes.  The multiple times I thought I was going I did not feel fear but a peace too.  I did not think I was going to see any spirit being though.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 29, 2022, 12:08:43 PM
i dont have any fear of death, personally, althiugh i would prefer a simple one, out of consideration for my family. currently, i exist as a conscious entity, and after i die i have no evidence that i wont simply cease to have that existence.

and death is always close. i am sitting on the side of the road at the moment, having lost a front wheel bearing and tire in busy rush hour traffic. i was going 5 mph. i weigh 76,000 pouns and have been driving at 70 mph all morning. had the bearing failed at that speed the results would have been catastrophic.

i addition, i contracted covid early this week. i am immunized, but had i not been the results of that could have been unfortunate as well.

death is always near, simply by virtue of being alive. i appear to have dodged the bullet twice this week.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 29, 2022, 12:59:07 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 29, 2022, 08:24:49 AM
Quote from: Teaspoon Shallow on July 28, 2022, 10:18:08 PMEyeshaveit:  "I have to forgive you, Kevin, I'm a Christian. And I'm not back here for long -- the docs say I won't live to see Christmas this year and there's no internet in Heaven."

I am deeply saddened to learn about this today.  I am glad I had the opportunity to converse with you over the years and hope you and your family have support during this difficult period. 

Just speaking for myself: it's really not at all difficult. God has provided me with more than I need -- I have an excess. And I'm upbeat, I'm joyful and looking forward to meeting my Lord and Savior.





I hope for your continued positivity of spirit and peace of mind no matter how things go. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on July 29, 2022, 04:14:00 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 29, 2022, 01:15:47 AM
QuoteNo, not saying nobody spoke. Asking what evidence for speaking. Stark appearance, legible writing, given 195/295K years (as you report above).

The main issue is that writing is very difficult to preserve. The few surviving systems we have are from carvings, stone/clay tablets and those are extremely hard to come by.

^Not so.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 29, 2022, 07:30:34 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 29, 2022, 12:08:43 PMi dont have any fear of death, personally, althiugh i would prefer a simple one, out of consideration for my family. currently, i exist as a conscious entity, and after i die i have no evidence that i wont simply cease to have that existence.

and death is always close. i am sitting on the side of the road at the moment, having lost a front wheel bearing and tire in busy rush hour traffic. i was going 5 mph. i weigh 76,000 pouns and have been driving at 70 mph all morning. had the bearing failed at that speed the results would have been catastrophic.

i addition, i contracted covid early this week. i am immunized, but had i not been the results of that could have been unfortunate as well.

death is always near, simply by virtue of being alive. i appear to have dodged the bullet twice this week.

Very glad that you are still with us.  
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 29, 2022, 08:55:31 PM
almost wasnt. when the tow truck driver lifted thw tractor the wheel fell off. i had been driving with nothing holding the wheel on
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 29, 2022, 09:17:48 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 29, 2022, 08:55:31 PMalmost wasnt. when the tow truck driver lifted thw tractor the wheel fell off. i had been driving with nothing holding the wheel on
Damn.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 01:44:40 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 29, 2022, 04:14:00 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 29, 2022, 01:15:47 AM
QuoteNo, not saying nobody spoke. Asking what evidence for speaking. Stark appearance, legible writing, given 195/295K years (as you report above).

The main issue is that writing is very difficult to preserve. The few surviving systems we have are from carvings, stone/clay tablets and those are extremely hard to come by.

^Not so.

Really? How do you suppose we came to discover those ancient systems of Sumer/egypt/china? 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PM
Quote from: Francis on July 27, 2022, 05:34:13 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 27, 2022, 05:15:31 PMno data.

but the 6000 year jewish model is internally consistent, and is not contradicted by science.

I'm not following. 

How can a 6000 year model for the age of the earth be consistent with... or not contradict a Billion year age model (current scientific calculations)... or even a 20-400 million year model (first proposed by physicist William Thomson in 1862)... which even then, is not long enough according to Darwin?

Secondly, what do you mean "internally consistent"? 

I'm not talking about something being "internally consistent", but about what is outside of the model by which a model  (any model) can be tested as being either consistent or inconsistent with known science.

Can't a theory be "internally consistent" and yet still be wrong?

Hope you are doing well


the short answer is that scripture describes an earth created with a dynamic initial condition and initial composition, a world created with all the processes we observe today in action.

for example, eden was created with active rivers, including the euphrates. what is a river? a perfectly round puddle of chemically pure water splashed on a flat and featureless bed of some pure mineral?

no. a river is a dynamic process in action- a body of flowing chemical saturated water building and relocating a bed consisting of graded particles made up of the matetials upstream. the euphrates is a meandering river-- 6000 years is not enough time to build a mature meander belt from a puddle of pure water splashed onto a flat mineral surface.

so the euphrates had to be created in much the same form that we see now, a river, like scripture says, flowing, flooding, eroding, depositing, with a heavy traction load of dand and pebbles in the bed and a variety of suspended particles in the water.

likewise for soil-- the plants had to be growing on something in the new earth. did they have to wait centuries for soil to be built by erosion and decaying organic matter to appear? no. the earth was created with that process in full swing. soil was part of the created land, because that is what land is.

what about gems? did the precious stones mentioned in genesis have to wait for tectonics to push plates together and compress the crust into gem-making metamorphic belts? no. genesis says there were gems, so there had to be mountains, and the gemstones were there already, because gemstones are one thing mountains are made of.

what about the isotope ratios people use to date the earth as very old? people who dont think about genesis carefully try to cast doubt on the calculations. but radioactive isotopes are ordinary parts of igneous rocks, like gemstones in schists, and genesis specifically says that mountains were part of the initial created earth. so the radioactive isotopes had to be created at some existing ratios along with the rocks that made up the mountains, because thats what mountains are. the rstios wrrent zero, they were created at some figure when the mountsins were created.

the calculations that people make from isotopes that lead to an old earth dont contradict genesis any more than the ancient meander belt of the euphrates river does.

scripture says that the earth was created. rivers; soil, mountains, gemstones, and isotopic ratios are all part of that 6000 year old creation.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 30, 2022, 04:24:52 PM
"And to Adam he said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

The Eden that Adam and Eve dwelt in was a vastly different place than anything we can imagine. Life there was more than just a lack of thorns and thistles. Eden's year-round diet consisted of freshly picked fruits. And the climate and textures of both soil and ground cover were conducive to comfortable living and sleeping sans clothing. It was peaceful in Eden. Life wasn't aimless, Adam and Eve had duties -- their work was inspected and rewarded.     
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 30, 2022, 04:55:28 PM
Quote from: Francis on July 27, 2022, 05:34:13 PMCan't a theory be "internally consistent" and yet still be wrong?


yes. it certainly can be wrong. but young earth theory cannot be proven wrong, it can merely be proven to be inconsistent with the modern theory of unformtarianism.

young earth is not a scientific theory. in spite of the apologists who attempt to discuss it in those terms, young earth is religious mythology in search of support, rather than facts that lead to a conclusion. that is exactly the reverse of how genuine science operates. as a religious belief, young earth is fine. so is the hindu concept of the cyclic ages of the universe, or the australian dream time, or the muspelheim and niflheim of the pagan norse. every religion has a perfectly satisfactory explanation for how the universe began according to its teachings. none are testable as science, because thats not what science is.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 30, 2022, 11:16:24 PM
THIS IS IN REPLY TO POST #106 FROM KEVIN.

Kevin, how are you?

Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMthe short answer is that scripture describes an earth created with a dynamic initial condition and initial composition, a world created with all the processes we observe today in action.


The short answer is that I think you are confusing me with someone else in here. And I think you are reading into the scripture what you want to see.

Even then, if you were speaking to me, i'm very confused about what your point is.  For example you said: "the euphrates is a meandering river-- 6000 years is not enough time to build a mature meander belt from a puddle of pure water splashed onto a flat mineral surface".

I AGREE!  That is why I don't believe that Genesis is talking about all this happening within 6000 years or days.  That is why I'm not a young earther.  The science tells us that it took millions of years for these things to develop.  And the word "yom" in Genesis shows that there is no contradiction between Genesis and science.

And that is why I'm confused by your post and what your point is.

But I know you are a bright fellow, and so maybe I'm just not understanding your words/sentences.




Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMfor example, eden was created with active rivers, including the euphrates. what is a river? a perfectly round puddle of chemically pure water splashed on a flat and featureless bed of some pure mineral?

no. a river is a dynamic process in action- a body of flowing chemical saturated water building and relocating a bed consisting of graded particles made up of the matetials upstream. the euphrates is a meandering river-- 6000 years is not enough time to build a mature meander belt from a puddle of pure water splashed onto a flat mineral surface.

so the euphrates had to be created in much the same form that we see now, a river, like scripture says, flowing, flooding, eroding, depositing, with a heavy traction load of dand and pebbles in the bed and a variety of suspended particles in the water.

Still very confused by your post. You're speaking to an old earther, not to a young earther. I agree that if Genesis took only a few days...or even 6,000 years, then the young earther has no other recourse but to believe that the things Genesis talks about, had to be created in much the same form that we see now.

But science says differently, it contradicts young earthers.  And the word "yom" in Genesis shows that there is no contradiction between Genesis and science since "yom" doesn't have to be a 24hr day, nor a day equaling a few thousand of years. Yom can mean a very long time.





Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMlikewise for soil-- the plants had to be growing on something in the new earth. did they have to wait centuries for soil to be built by erosion and decaying organic matter to appear? no. the earth was created with that process in full swing. soil was part of the created land, because that is what land is.

Why couldn't plants have to wait centuries for soil to be built by erosion and decaying organic matter to appear?  How do you know the earth was created with that process in full swing? The text doesn't tell us how long the process actually was. And the science says that the plants DID have to wait centuries for soil to be built by erosion and decaying organic matter to appear before they can start growing.

That's the point.

This is what I mean when I say I think you are reading into the text, the very thing you want to see.



Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMwhat about gems? did the precious stones mentioned in genesis have to wait for tectonics to push plates together and compress the crust into gem-making metamorphic belts? no. genesis says the mountains were created, as mountains, so the gemstones were there already, because gemstones are one thing mountains are made of..

Genesis doesn't say how long it took for mountains to be created.  So why couldn't the gems have to wait for tectonics to push plates together and compress the crust into gem-making metamorphic belts?  YOM doesn't have to mean only a 24hr day, nor only a 1,000 year old days.

If I say I created a painting, that doesn't say how long it took me. But people understand that a painting could have taken a couple of hours, or years.  If I say I wrote a book, that doesn't say how long it took me. But people understand that a book could have taken a few days, or years.  If I say the Romans built a coliseum, that doesn't say how long it took the Romans to built it, but people understand that it took years to built, and was not built in a matter of days.

Science says that the things we see being created in Genesis, took millions of years. And there is nothing in the Genesis language that contradicts science.

That's the point.




Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMwhat about the isotope ratios people use to date the earth as very old? people who dont think about genesis carefully try to cast doubt on the calculations..

I don't cast doubt on the calculations.


Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMbut radioactive isotopes are ordinary parts of igneous rocks, like gemstones in schists, and genesis specifically says that mountains were part of the initial created earth.

Genesis doesn't say how long it took for the mountains to develop, nor any other part of the "creation days" in Genesis.

Indeed, the initial created earth was without form, and void. And Genesis doesn't tell us how long it took for the created earth to finally have dry land appear in verse 9.

Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMso the radioactive isotopes had to be created at some existing ratios along with the rocks that made up the mountains, because thats what mountains are. the rstios wrrent zero, they were created at some figure when the mountsins were created.

I agree with science... and I think Genesis does as well because there is nothing in the language of Genesis that contradicts science.



Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMthe calculations that people make from isotopes that lead to an old earth dont contradict genesis any more than the ancient meander belt of the euphrates river contradicts genesis

????  But earlier you said: "the euphrates is a meandering river-- 6000 years is not enough time to build a mature meander belt from a puddle of pure water splashed onto a flat mineral surface".

Genesis is either talking about a young earth, or an old earth.  Both can't be true without violationg the law of non-contradiction.

That is why I'm very very very confused about what you are trying to say.



Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMscripture says that the earth was created. rivers; soil, mountains, gemstones, and isotopic ratios are all part of that 6000 year old creation.

Scriptures don't say whether the process took 6,000 years... or millions of years.

That is the point.



Some other points to consider:

1) "Today, many Jewish people accept the theory of evolution and do not see it as incompatible with traditional Judaism, reflecting the emphasis of prominent rabbis such as the Vilna Gaon and Maimonides on the ethical rather than factual significance of scripture".
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution]

2) "Most modern rabbis believe that the world is older than 6,000 years... Rabbis who have this view base their conclusions on verses in the Talmud or in the midrash.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution#Classical_rabbinic_teachings]

3) "a literalist reading of the Book of Genesis is rare in Judaism".
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution#Classical_rabbinic_teachings]

4) "In the late 1880s, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, an influential leader in the early opposition to non-Orthodox forms of Judaism, wrote that while he did not endorse the idea of common descent (that all life developed from one common organism), even if science ever did prove the factuality of Evolution, it would not pose a threat to Orthodox Judaism's beliefs. He posited that belief in evolution could instead cause one to be more reverent of God by understanding His wonders (a master plan for the universe)."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution#Classical_rabbinic_teachings]


I could keep on going, but the point is clear that among most rabbis and Jewish people... even the orthodox, there is no contradiction at all between Genesis and a very old earth... even an earth that is much much much much older than only 6,000 years old.

Hope you are well

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 30, 2022, 11:35:07 PM
Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 04:55:28 PM
Quote from: Francis on July 27, 2022, 05:34:13 PMCan't a theory be "internally consistent" and yet still be wrong?


yes. it certainly can be wrong. but young earth theory cannot be proven wrong, it can merely be proven to be inconsistent with the modern theory of unformtarianism.

young earth is not a scientific theory. in spite of the apologists who attempt to discuss it in those terms, young earth is religious mythology in search of support, rather than facts that lead to a conclusion. that is exactly the reverse of how genuine science operates. as a religious belief, young earth is fine. so is the hindu concept of the cyclic ages of the universe, or the australian dream time, or the muspelheim and niflheim of the pagan norse. every religion has a perfectly satisfactory explanation for how the universe began according to its teachings. none are testable as science, because thats not what science is.

I think you are confusing me with someone else.

I'm not a young earther.  Never have been.  There is nothing in Genesis (in the creation story) which contradicts an old earth or with science or with the opinions of Genesis among most Jews and rabbis... even the orthodox... that the earth is far far far far older than 6,000 years old.


Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 04:55:28 PMyoung earth is not a scientific theory. in spite of the apologists who attempt to discuss it in those terms, young earth is religious mythology in search of support, rather than facts that lead to a conclusion. that is exactly the reverse of how genuine science operates. as a religious belief, young earth is fine. so is the hindu concept of the cyclic ages of the universe, or the australian dream time, or the muspelheim and niflheim of the pagan norse. every religion has a perfectly satisfactory explanation for how the universe began according to its teachings. none are testable as science, because thats not what science is.

I agree with everything you said.  That is why I think you are confusing me with someone else.

Hope you are well
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 11:49:30 PM
Something goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 31, 2022, 12:05:26 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 30, 2022, 11:16:24 PMTHIS IS IN REPLY TO POST #106 FROM KEVIN.

Kevin, how are you?


sick with covid, but recovering. thank you.

Quote
Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMthe short answer is that scripture describes an earth created with a dynamic initial condition and initial composition, a world created with all the processes we observe today in action.


The short answer is that I think you are confusing me with someone else in here. And I think you are reading into the scripture what you want to see.

Even then, if you were speaking to me, i'm very confused about what your point is.  For example you said: "the euphrates is a meandering river-- 6000 years is not enough time to build a mature meander belt from a puddle of pure water splashed onto a flat mineral surface".

I AGREE!  That is why I don't believe that Genesis is talking about all this happening within 6000 years or days.  That is why I'm not a young earther.  The science tells us that it took millions of years for these things to develop.  And the word "yom" in Genesis shows that there is no contradiction between Genesis and science.

And that is why I'm confused by your post and what your point is.


you asked me how it worked. i dont believe it either.

QuoteBut I know you are a bright fellow, and so maybe I'm just not understanding your words/sentences.


Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMfor example, eden was created with active rivers, including the euphrates. what is a river? a perfectly round puddle of chemically pure water splashed on a flat and featureless bed of some pure mineral?

no. a river is a dynamic process in action- a body of flowing chemical saturated water building and relocating a bed consisting of graded particles made up of the matetials upstream. the euphrates is a meandering river-- 6000 years is not enough time to build a mature meander belt from a puddle of pure water splashed onto a flat mineral surface.

so the euphrates had to be created in much the same form that we see now, a river, like scripture says, flowing, flooding, eroding, depositing, with a heavy traction load of dand and pebbles in the bed and a variety of suspended particles in the water.

Still very confused by your post. You're speaking to an old earther, not to a young earther. I agree that if Genesis took only a few days...or even 6,000 years, then the young earther has no other recourse but to believe that the things Genesis talks about, had to be created in much the same form that we see now.

But science says differently, it contradicts young earthers.  And the word "yom" in Genesis shows that there is no contradiction between Genesis and science since "yom" doesn't have to be a 24hr day, nor a day equaling a few thousand of years. Yom can mean a very long time.


science canot contradict young earthers, francis. my whole post is an an explanation of why that is true.


Quote
Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMlikewise for soil-- the plants had to be growing on something in the new earth. did they have to wait centuries for soil to be built by erosion and decaying organic matter to appear? no. the earth was created with that process in full swing. soil was part of the created land, because that is what land is.

Why couldn't plants have to wait centuries for soil to be built by erosion and decaying organic matter to appear?  How do you know the earth was created with that process in full swing? The text doesn't tell us how long the process actually was. And the science says that the plants DID have to wait centuries for soil to be built by erosion and decaying organic matter to appear before they can start growing.

That's the point.

youre quoting science, francis. im quoting scripture.

QuoteThis is what I mean when I say I think you are reading into the text, the very thing you want to see.



Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMwhat about gems? did the precious stones mentioned in genesis have to wait for tectonics to push plates together and compress the crust into gem-making metamorphic belts? no. genesis says the mountains were created, as mountains, so the gemstones were there already, because gemstones are one thing mountains are made of..
[wuote]

Genesis doesn't say how long it took for mountains to be created.  So why couldn't the gems have to wait for tectonics to push plates together and compress the crust into gem-making metamorphic belts?  YOM doesn't have to mean only a 24hr day, nor only a 1,000 year old days.

what crust, francis? the earths crust is a mixture of pre-existing granite and diorite batholiths, rhyolites and andesite lavas, accreted metamorphic and igneous rocks on continental shields, gabbros and basalts on the ocean flloors, chemical and clastic sediments above and below sea level, and subducting zones alongside trenches where it all is being recycled. there was no crust unless we re looking at an earth 4.65 billion years old. but YE theory doesnt need that.  are you saying that the old earth was created in some other way?

QuoteIf I say I created a painting, that doesn't say how long it took me. But people understand that a painting could have taken a couple of hours, or years.  If I say I wrote a book, that doesn't say how long it took me. But people understand that a book could have taken a few days, or years.  If I say the Romans built a coliseum, that doesn't say how long it took the Romans to built it, but people understand that it took years to built, and was not built in a matter of days.

it sounds to me as if you accept everything about the scientific theory of earth history except the lack of a need for any god, francis. thats fine, but its not YE theory.

i prefer the plain reading of scripture. im not trying to reconcile scripture with science- i dont think that is possible. but your position is one possibility.

QuoteScience says that the things we see being created in Genesis, took millions of years. And there is nothing in the Genesis language that contradicts science.

That's the point.

you ll have to take that up with young earthers, francis. they will disagree with you, and i have just shown how their theory can overcome any scientific criticism. most of them dont understand this, though, and waste their time trying to disprove science instead. which they make a poor showing of.

Quote
Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMwhat about the isotope ratios people use to date the earth as very old? people who dont think about genesis carefully try to cast doubt on the calculations..

I don't cast doubt on the calculations.

but you asked how YE and science can be reconciled, so i told you.


Quote
Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMbut radioactive isotopes are ordinary parts of igneous rocks, like gemstones in schists, and genesis specifically says that mountains were part of the initial created earth.

Genesis doesn't say how long it took for the mountains to develop, not any other part of the "creation days" in Genesis.

Indeed, the initial created earth was without form, and void. And Genesis doesn't tell us how long it took for the created earth to finally have dry land appear in verse 9.

Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMso the radioactive isotopes had to be created at some existing ratios along with the rocks that made up the mountains, because thats what mountains are. the rstios wrrent zero, they were created at some figure when the mountsins were created.

I agree with science... and I think Genesis does as well because there is nothing in the language of Genesis that contradicts science.

i agree. genesis cannot be falsified.


Quote
Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMthe calculations that people make from isotopes that lead to an old earth dont contradict genesis any more than the ancient meander belt of the euphrates river contradicts genesis

????  But earlier you said: "the euphrates is a meandering river-- 6000 years is not enough time to build a mature meander belt from a puddle of pure water splashed onto a flat mineral surface".

Genesis is either talking about a young earth, or an old earth.  Both can't be true without violationg the law of non-contradiction.

That is why I'm very very very confused about what you are trying to say.

read my point about the river again. a meander belt takes tens of thousands of years to develop, and 6000 years is insufficient. but we have the euphrates, as it is. therefore the euphrates was created as a meandering river, with levees, graded bedding, point bars, oxbows, and so on, not formed by nature but by creation. the alternative is, what?

a featureless plain of granite with a huge circular puddle that eventually trickled in one random direction long enough to build a gradient? what was the primaeval substrate? granite? limestone? sand? all those require prior erosion and depostion  for millenia to form, in a world climate that never rained.

Quote
Quote from: kevin on July 30, 2022, 01:34:42 PMscripture says that the earth was created. rivers; soil, mountains, gemstones, and isotopic ratios are all part of that 6000 year old creation.

Scriptures don't say whether the process took 6,000 years... or millions of years.

That is the point.



Some other points to consider:

1) "Today, many Jewish people accept the theory of evolution and do not see it as incompatible with traditional Judaism, reflecting the emphasis of prominent rabbis such as the Vilna Gaon and Maimonides on the ethical rather than factual significance of scripture".
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution]

2) "Most modern rabbis believe that the world is older than 6,000 years... Rabbis who have this view base their conclusions on verses in the Talmud or in the midrash.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution#Classical_rabbinic_teachings]

3) "a literalist reading of the Book of Genesis is rare in Judaism".
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution#Classical_rabbinic_teachings]

4) "In the late 1880s, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, an influential leader in the early opposition to non-Orthodox forms of Judaism, wrote that while he did not endorse the idea of common descent (that all life developed from one common organism), even if science ever did prove the factuality of Evolution, it would not pose a threat to Orthodox Judaism's beliefs. He posited that belief in evolution could instead cause one to be more reverent of God by understanding His wonders (a master plan for the universe)."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_evolution#Classical_rabbinic_teachings]


I could keep on going, but the point is clear that among most rabbis and Jewish people... even the orthodox, there is no contradiction at all between Genesis and a very old earth... even an earth that is much much much much older than only 6,000 years old.

Hope you are well



young earth theory is not jewish, francis.

my post points out that YE theory cannot be disproven by science, not that anybody should believe it.

i consider it poorly-informed and poorly-defended nonsense, but it is nonsense that holds together internally as well as any other religous belief.

my blood oxygen has gone from 94 to 98, so im on the mend.

stay away from covid.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 31, 2022, 12:11:44 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/jrJafzVl.jpg)
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 31, 2022, 12:16:25 AM
Quotemy blood oxygen has gone from 94 to 98, so im on the mend.

stay away from covid.


Ya covid sux especially how easily it gets around. Glad you're getting better.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on July 31, 2022, 12:22:14 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 31, 2022, 12:05:26 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 31, 2022, 12:05:26 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 30, 2022, 11:16:24 PMTHIS IS IN REPLY TO POST #106 FROM KEVIN.

Kevin, how are you?


sick with covid, but recovering. thank you.

my blood oxygen has gone from 94 to 98, so im on the mend.

stay away from covid.


Glad you are  recovering!!! 

I had covid once, and I was not immunized at the time.  My doctor told me later, (he wouldn't tell me at time of my diagnosis).. after I had finally  recovered... that he didn't think I was going to live through it because I had so much going against me... my age, being a male, and because of my prior health conditions, etc.

I was so sick.  Incredible.  But luckily I didn't have to go to the hospital and be put on oxygen, etc.  As for my blood oxygen at the time, it was down to 92.

I lost some good friends... people who were healthier than me at the time they got covid.  Still can't figure it all out.

After I  recovered, the doctor said my getting covid acted as an immunization shot so I didn't need to get a shot.  But enough time has elapsed, and so I think I will get the shot.  Which one do you  recommend?

As for the rest of your post, I will respond later, Have to get back home.

Take care
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on July 31, 2022, 12:28:10 AM
Francis 
    From everything seen, Moderna is the best currently,  with Pfizer not far behind.  Johnson and Johnson not quite as good, with small chance if bloodclots.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 31, 2022, 12:36:53 AM
Quote from: Shnozzola on July 31, 2022, 12:28:10 AMFrancis
    From everything seen, Moderna is the best currently,  with Pfizer not far behind.  Johnson and Johnson not quite as good, with small chance if bloodclots.

We took pfizer. Hear moderna is a bit more potent tho.

Heard the bloodclot issue with astra zenica too...but quite remote or so they said
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on July 31, 2022, 12:42:07 AM
Yeah ^^^, We had 2 pfizers also, then heard enough about moderna to get that as a booster.  Thinking in a couple months when the booster has BA5 added, we will get another moderna.   ||smiley||
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 31, 2022, 12:53:58 AM
First vaccines here were from china. All those people who got those had to get a whole new course because of low antibodies. So they had to get 3 more on top of the first 2...

China has a big hole to climb out of if they stick to their weak @ss meds.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on July 31, 2022, 01:12:11 AM
QuoteFirst vaccines here were from china. All those people who got those had to get a whole new course because of low antibodies. So they had to get 3 more on top of the first 2...

China has a big hole to climb out of if they stick to their weak @ss meds.

Yeah 8, the world and its political nationalistic power hunger warmongering and hatred is so sickening and tiring.  We have impossibly long to go until everyone stops the nonsense and shares what works with everyone.  Dream on socialistic shnoz. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 31, 2022, 01:47:58 AM
Quote from: Shnozzola on July 31, 2022, 01:12:11 AM
QuoteFirst vaccines here were from china. All those people who got those had to get a whole new course because of low antibodies. So they had to get 3 more on top of the first 2...

China has a big hole to climb out of if they stick to their weak @ss meds.

Yeah 8, the world and its political nationalistic power hunger warmongering and hatred is so sickening and tiring.  We have impossibly long to go until everyone stops the nonsense and shares what works with everyone.  Dream on socialistic shnoz.

Right

It's been so tough for so many people who haven't gotten on with their lives for 2 freakin years. 

The numbers are there already. It shouldn't be about politics or pride anymore...

I can't imagine how it is for the chinese people who not only were fed poor meds, they're also being made to pay for their govts mistake with the toughest lockdown policy on earth. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on July 31, 2022, 01:51:02 AM
china has always had a totalitarian government.

for 3000 years.

its nothing new.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 31, 2022, 02:08:28 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 31, 2022, 01:51:02 AMchina has always had a totalitarian government.

for 3000 years.

its nothing new.

Yeah. This is just the latest in a long list of bs their people have to put up with. All 1.4 billion of them. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on July 31, 2022, 07:54:23 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 11:49:30 PMSomething goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example.

Tis often said that truth is stranger than fiction.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on July 31, 2022, 08:28:14 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on July 31, 2022, 07:54:23 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 11:49:30 PMSomething goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example.

Tis often said that truth is stranger than fiction.

Well it's different if we can observe the weirdness today vs something people wrote about that happened at just one certain point in time. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on July 31, 2022, 03:35:54 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 11:49:30 PMSomething goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example.

For instance...?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on July 31, 2022, 07:11:21 PM
Quote from: maritime on July 31, 2022, 03:35:54 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 11:49:30 PMSomething goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example.

For instance...?

Quote from: wikipedisMethuselah 969
Jared 962
Noah 950
Adam 930
Seth 912
Kenan 910
Enos 905
Mahalalel 895
Lamech 777
Shem 600
Eber 464
Cainan 460
Arpachshad 438
Salah 433
Enoch 365
Peleg 239
Reu 239
Serug 230
Job 210?
Terah 205
Isaac 180
Abraham 175
Nahor 148

And the list goes on.....
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 12:11:49 AM
Genesis was not written in 21st century English, so logic and the discipline of translation studies, suggests that we should be asking what do the words mean in the language and culture in which they were written?  Sounds fair and reasonable, doesn't it?

Indeed, we've had discussions in here about how words and languages in Hebrew don't always translate into the same meaning in English words. Here is just a short list.  (a) FAITH was one word we've discussed.  (b) SLAVERY was another word.  (c) YOM or day was another word.  (d) God's jealousy is another words  (e) The slaughter of all the Canaanites was obviously a common hyperbole military language used even in the ancient near Eastern cultures surrounding Israel, to mean winning a war and was not literal.  Even the Jews didn't take it as being literal.

And that's just a short list. 

Here are just a couple of more things to consider, out of many other considerations... when we read Genesis:

1)... I cited in my other post, the fact that "a literalist reading of the Book of Genesis is rare in Judaism".  So why should we take 8livesleft statement seriously when he said: "They have rulers living hundreds of years for example"?


2)... Other cultures did the same thing for their own kings.  For example, we have the "Sumerian King List", which is not Jewish or Hebrew... but an entirely different culture (as I understand)... about their own kings reigning for impossible number of years... like Alulim who ruled for 28,000 years. 

This seems to be obvious hyperbole language, as we've seen being used in ancient near Eastern cultures at that time.


3)... The documents of the different versions of Genesis that are still in existence today (extant)... have huge differences in time spans between Adam's creation and Noah's flood... like between the Masoretic versions and the Greek or Septuagint versions for example.

4)... How do we know that the names listed in Kiahanie's list are literal individuals? I think it is more reasonable and plausible that the names are referring to entire families, races, or tribes. Why can't for example, some of the names be simply no more than names of an exceptional individual within that group... that are then given to represent certain families or races or tribes, etc?



Anyway, I just offer the above partial list of things to consider when we read 8livesleft's ridicule: Something goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example.'

Before we poke fun at and/or ridicule how another person or society or country speaks, I invite you to read https://expresswriters.com/34-craziest-words-english/

Take care
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 01, 2022, 12:45:09 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 31, 2022, 12:22:14 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 31, 2022, 12:05:26 AM
Quote from: kevin on July 31, 2022, 12:05:26 AM
Quote from: Francis on July 30, 2022, 11:16:24 PMTHIS IS IN REPLY TO POST #106 FROM KEVIN.

Kevin, how are you?


sick with covid, but recovering. thank you.

my blood oxygen has gone from 94 to 98, so im on the mend.

stay away from covid.


Glad you are  recovering!!! 

I had covid once, and I was not immunized at the time.  My doctor told me later, (he wouldn't tell me at time of my diagnosis).. after I had finally  recovered... that he didn't think I was going to live through it because I had so much going against me... my age, being a male, and because of my prior health conditions, etc.

I was so sick.  Incredible.  But luckily I didn't have to go to the hospital and be put on oxygen, etc.  As for my blood oxygen at the time, it was down to 92.

I lost some good friends... people who were healthier than me at the time they got covid.  Still can't figure it all out.

After I  recovered, the doctor said my getting covid acted as an immunization shot so I didn't need to get a shot.  But enough time has elapsed, and so I think I will get the shot.  Which one do you  recommend?

As for the rest of your post, I will respond later, Have to get back home.

Take care

people here still dont believe it. my boss doesnt think its anything more than a cold, in spite of his wife getting t twice. when i told one of our drivers to stay back because i was infectious, he just shook his head and ignred what i said. go figure.

get any shot you can, of ny kind. moderna's is the one that has been most trouble-free that i knopw o, but merely getting inoculated is the key. whatever is available, then get boosted after a while. dont wait for some promised better variety later one. do what you can now.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 12:46:13 AM
Quote4)... How do we know that the names listed in Kiahanie's list are literal individuals? I think it is more reasonable and plausible that the names are referring to entire families, races, or tribes. Why can't for example, some of the names be simply no more than names of an exceptional individual within that group... that are then given to represent certain families or races or tribes, etc?


This is reasonable or something  like how royal families or even popes take on their predecessor's names, except they probably didn't do the numbers thing like the modern families: Henry VIII etc...

So it could be multiple generations of people taking on the name.

It's also possible that instead of leaving that time gap blank, they simply put it under the rulership of the predecessor. I can imagine record keeping wasn'tvery good and simply improved over time since the lifespans seemingly decreased gradually.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 01, 2022, 12:50:55 AM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 12:11:49 AM3)... The documents of the different versions of Genesis that are still in existence today (extant)... have huge differences in time spans between Adam's creation and Noah's flood... like between the Masoretic versions and the Greek or Septuagint versions for example.


i didnt knw this. do you have any references?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 01:20:23 AM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 12:50:55 AM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 12:11:49 AM3)... The documents of the different versions of Genesis that are still in existence today (extant)... have huge differences in time spans between Adam's creation and Noah's flood... like between the Masoretic versions and the Greek or Septuagint versions for example.


i didnt knw this. do you have any references?

It's from a book: "John D. Davis, A Dictionary of the Bible, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1962)".   But I will see if I can find the equivalent material online for you.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on August 01, 2022, 04:31:43 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 31, 2022, 03:35:54 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 11:49:30 PMSomething goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example.

For instance...?

8livesleft referred to rulers - to my mind that would be kings.
Kiahanie's list is part of an account of a family line.
Is it goofy? 8livesleft thinks so.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 04:35:11 AM
Quote from: maritime on August 01, 2022, 04:31:43 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 31, 2022, 03:35:54 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 11:49:30 PMSomething goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example.

For instance...?

8livesleft referred to rulers - to my mind that would be kings.
Kiahanie's list is part of an account of a family line.
Is it goofy? 8livesleft thinks so.

Rulers or leaders or just people. Doesn't matter. It's their age that I find goofy.

Even the sumerian account is goofy. 20,000 years really?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on August 01, 2022, 04:39:23 AM
QuoteI can imagine record keeping wasn't very good and simply improved over time since the lifespans seemingly decreased gradually.

I think you're wrong to imagine intellectual weakness.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 04:53:17 AM
Quote from: maritime on August 01, 2022, 04:39:23 AM
QuoteI can imagine record keeping wasn't very good and simply improved over time since the lifespans seemingly decreased gradually.

I think you're wrong to imagine intellectual weakness.

Where in that statement did I mention anything about "intellectual weakness?"
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on August 01, 2022, 05:24:35 AM
"Record keeping wasn't very good."
Goofy was how you put it also.
Intellectually weak, I gather, from your statement here and other references you make to knowledge from the past that is not up to today's (read, your) standards. As if true understanding is a now thing and not a then thing.

QuoteSynonyms & Antonyms for goofy
Synonyms
birdbrained, ditzy (or ditsy), dizzy, featherbrained, flighty, frivolous, frothy, futile, giddy, harebrained, light-headed, light-minded, puerile, scatterbrained, silly, yeasty

Antonyms
earnest, serious, serious-minded, sober, unfrivolous
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 08:36:10 AM
Quote from: maritime on August 01, 2022, 05:24:35 AM"Record keeping wasn't very good."
Goofy was how you put it also.
Intellectually weak, I gather, from your statement here and other references you make to knowledge from the past that is not up to today's (read, your) standards. As if true understanding is a now thing and not a then thing.

QuoteSynonyms & Antonyms for goofy
Synonyms
birdbrained, ditzy (or ditsy), dizzy, featherbrained, flighty, frivolous, frothy, futile, giddy, harebrained, light-headed, light-minded, puerile, scatterbrained, silly, yeasty

Antonyms
earnest, serious, serious-minded, sober, unfrivolous

So, again, not necessarily meaning "intellectually weak."

Poor records keeping could be due to any non mentally related issue like losing records because of war like what happened here, for example...

Anyway, on the dating or time ranges. On the one hand you have everything being made in 6 days, or some sorta interpretation for 6000 years, then add near centuries old humans, the whole 40 days, 40 years thing etc... with no real basis for any of those things.

Seems like a literary device to come up with a vague system for the passage of time. Anything goes = goofy.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on August 01, 2022, 11:11:36 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 08:36:10 AM
Quote from: maritime on August 01, 2022, 05:24:35 AM"Record keeping wasn't very good."
Goofy was how you put it also.
Intellectually weak, I gather, from your statement here and other references you make to knowledge from the past that is not up to today's (read, your) standards. As if true understanding is a now thing and not a then thing.

QuoteSynonyms & Antonyms for goofy
Synonyms
birdbrained, ditzy (or ditsy), dizzy, featherbrained, flighty, frivolous, frothy, futile, giddy, harebrained, light-headed, light-minded, puerile, scatterbrained, silly, yeasty

Antonyms
earnest, serious, serious-minded, sober, unfrivolous

So, again, not necessarily meaning "intellectually weak."

Poor records keeping could be due to any non mentally related issue like losing records because of war like what happened here, for example...

Anyway, on the dating or time ranges. On the one hand you have everything being made in 6 days, or some sorta interpretation for 6000 years, then add near centuries old humans, the whole 40 days, 40 years thing etc... with no real basis for any of those things.

Either the God of the Bible created the Heavens and Earth or he didn't. If he did so astronomers tell us that there are 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars (and counting) out there. All those stars and the utter vastness of space and things like dark matter and yet we would quibble with God and demand to know how he created space, time, matter and life in just six 24-hour days? And the how and why of the Garden of Eden account of perfection and degradation resulting in gradually lower life spans -- with God finally setting a cutoff limit -- this too is quibble bait?. 

Puny man! Frail as his breath! - Isaiah 2.

Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years. - Genesis 6.

And if there is another creator or creation process how are these more the things of settled science than the biblical 6 days of creation, etc.? Of course they are no such thing -- in reality they are propaganda devices constructed to repudiate God. 

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 11:57:27 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 01, 2022, 11:11:36 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 08:36:10 AM
Quote from: maritime on August 01, 2022, 05:24:35 AM"Record keeping wasn't very good."
Goofy was how you put it also.
Intellectually weak, I gather, from your statement here and other references you make to knowledge from the past that is not up to today's (read, your) standards. As if true understanding is a now thing and not a then thing.

QuoteSynonyms & Antonyms for goofy
Synonyms
birdbrained, ditzy (or ditsy), dizzy, featherbrained, flighty, frivolous, frothy, futile, giddy, harebrained, light-headed, light-minded, puerile, scatterbrained, silly, yeasty

Antonyms
earnest, serious, serious-minded, sober, unfrivolous

So, again, not necessarily meaning "intellectually weak."

Poor records keeping could be due to any non mentally related issue like losing records because of war like what happened here, for example...

Anyway, on the dating or time ranges. On the one hand you have everything being made in 6 days, or some sorta interpretation for 6000 years, then add near centuries old humans, the whole 40 days, 40 years thing etc... with no real basis for any of those things.

Either the God of the Bible created the Heavens and Earth or he didn't. If he did so astronomers tell us that there are 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 billion stars (and counting) out there. All those stars and the utter vastness of space and things like dark matter and yet we would quibble with God and demand to know how he created space, time, matter and life in just six 24-hour days? And the how and why of the Garden of Eden account of perfection and degradation resulting in gradually lower life spans -- with God finally setting a cutoff limit -- this too is quibble bait?. 

Puny man! Frail as his breath! - Isaiah 2.

Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years. - Genesis 6.

And if there is another creator or creation process how are these more the things of settled science than the biblical 6 days of creation, etc.? Of course they are no such thing -- in reality they are propaganda devices constructed to repudiate God. 



God didn't write the bible. People did. It's clear that, being supernatural and supposedly beyond objective/verifiable reality, that god cannot be experienced by conventional means and so I question the writers who allege all manner of things that have never been experienced today.



Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 02:13:02 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 04:35:11 AM
Quote from: maritime on August 01, 2022, 04:31:43 AM
Quote from: maritime on July 31, 2022, 03:35:54 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on July 30, 2022, 11:49:30 PMSomething goofy about biblical timeframes. They have rulers living hundreds of years for example.

For instance...?

8livesleft referred to rulers - to my mind that would be kings.
Kiahanie's list is part of an account of a family line.
Is it goofy? 8livesleft thinks so.

Rulers or leaders or just people. Doesn't matter. It's their age that I find goofy.

Even the sumerian account is goofy. 20,000 years really?

Only if the text are to be taken literally.  But there is no intellectual reason to think that it should be taken literally. None.  Prove that Genesis and the list is talking about real individuals that lived that long.  If you can't, then you have no reason to think that the list is to be taken literally as representing real individuals living that long.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 02:20:09 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 08:36:10 AMAnyway, on the dating or time ranges. On the one hand you have everything being made in 6 days, or some sorta interpretation for 6000 years, then add near centuries old humans, the whole 40 days, 40 years thing etc... with no real basis for any of those things.

Exactly, there is no basis for thinking that time lengths in the Genesis text is to taken literally... and that is why must Jews and most Christians are not young earthers.  The polls shows that only 1 in 10 Christians and Americans are young earthers.

So when you call into question theism... specifically Christianity... and the Genesis text... based on a small minority subset of a large group of people that do not represent the majority, you do yourself great disservice.

Should I call into question the veracity of atheism/atheists as a whole... based on a small minority segment of atheists who do great harm to humanity?  Of course not.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PM
thats a slippery slope, francis.

if theres no need to accept that genesis is talking about literal historical figures and dates, then theres no need to accept anything else in scripture as literal, including the existence of yaweh, jesus christ, or the fundamenal tenents of either judaism or christianity.

if one decides to reject some but not all of jewish and christian scripture as historically factual, then one is faced with the problem of establishing a way to tell which parts are factual and which are not.

thats a difficult and complicated procedure. how would you address it?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 02:35:19 PM

No one claims that God is beyond objective/verifiable reality.  Even Kevin admits this.  The issue is  that what can be objectively verified for one individual, may not always be repeated for another person.  But that doesn't make an experience less real or not based in reality.

Science itself is beyond objective/verifiable reality if science itself is the only way to objectively verify reality.  It can't prove or verify itself without arguing in circles.  The same with objective morals and beauty and math and abstract symbols and logic, etc.... as well as most of history ... since history itself is based on events that can't be repeated and are based on sources that can't be independently verified because no one can interview the sources.

You can't even objectively verify that you have any free will, nor that you are a real person and not an avatar on the laptop belonging to space alien... nor that you are nothing more than a brain in a vat.

But to think that there is no evidence for God's existence... is in my view... the height of hubris.

Hope you are doing well
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 02:58:35 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PMthats a slippery slope, francis. if theres no need to accept that genesis is talking about literal historical figures and dates, then theres no need to accept anything else in scripture as literal, including the existence of yaweh, jesus christ, or the fundamenal tenents of either judaism or christianity.

I disagree... I think you are committing a non sequitur. 

I chose a VERY SPECIFIC portion of text... and confined myself to that portion... and challenged anyone in here to show how that  VERY SPECIFIC portion of text was to be taken literally.   We must not commit the logical fallacy of making hasty sweeping generalizations by painting with a broad stroke.
   
We must use our brains and do what scholars and thinkers do... and that is to use logic and facts and objective criteria and common sense discernment, etc... to determine what is to be taken literal or not because the bible is filled with different types of writing and literary styles:  poetry and proverbs and wisdom sayings and historical narratives and personal correspondences and prophecy and legends and hyperbole language and law/statutory language and Genealogies, etc. etc

For example, does anyone seriously think the Bible is being literal when it describes God has having wings or Jesus as being a door?

And so as impartial thinkers,  we need to recognize that fact and judge each case on it's own evidentiary logical and historical merits.

Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PMif theres no need to accept that genesis is talking about literal historical figures and dates, then theres no need to accept anything else in scripture as literal, including the existence of yaweh, jesus christ, or the fundamenal tenents of either judaism or christianity.

I think you are creating a strawman. I confined myself to a very specific part of Genesis... and so I never made a sweeping general language about all of Genesis or about all the historical figures and dates.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PMif one decides to reject some but not all of jewish and christian scripture as historically factual, then one is faced with the problem of establishing a way to tell which parts are factual and which are not.

??? Historians do this all the time!  You can't be unaware that there is lot of legendary stuff and "miracles" and other stuff written about many other famous ancient figures that historians weed through and reject as historical.

We should do what historians and scientists do.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PMthats a difficult and complicated procedure. how would you address it?

Yes it is... all the more reason not to make sweeping hasty generalizations and not paint with a broad stroke and to at the very least... if this bothers you... do what historians and scientists already do.

God Bless you sir

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:03:35 PM
i dont "admit" that god is within objective/verifiable reality, francis.

that god should be verifiable is something i have actively asserted for many years. then i notice that people cannot do it.

what i then notice is that there is a great deal of assertion  that the existence of god has been proven or is obvious without a great deal of proof or obviousness  being around to support it.

theres as much evidence for the existence of god as there is for the existence of the loch ness monster.

its tbe proof derived from the evidence that is always lacking.

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:05:11 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 02:58:35 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PMthats a slippery slope, francis.

if theres no need to accept that genesis is talking about literal historical figures and dates, then theres no need to accept anything else in scripture as literal, including the existence of yaweh, jesus christ, or the fundamenal tenents of either judaism or christianity.

if one decides to reject some but not all of jewish and christian scripture as historically factual, then one is faced with the problem of establishing a way to tell which parts are factual and which are not.

thats a difficult and complicated procedure. how would you address it?


I disagree... I think you are committing a non sequitur. 

I chose a VERY SPECIFIC portion of text... and confined myself to that portion... and challenged anyone in here to show how that  VERY SPECIFIC portion of text was to be taken literally.   We must not commit the logical fallacy of making hasty sweeping generalizations by painting with a broad stroke.
   
We must use our brains and do what scholars and thinkers do... and that is to use logic and facts and objective criteria and common sense discernment, etc... to determine what is to be taken literal or not because the bible is filled with different types of writing and literary styles:  poetry and proverbs and wisdom sayings and historical narratives and personal correspondences and prophecy and legends and hyperbole language and law/statutory language and Genealogies, etc. etc

And so as impartial thinkers,  we need to recognize that fact and judge each case on it's own evidentiary logical and historical merits.

Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PM
if theres no need to accept that genesis is talking about literal historical figures and dates, then theres no need to accept anything else in scripture as literal, including the existence of yaweh, jesus christ, or the fundamenal tenents of either judaism or christianity.

I think you are creating a strawman. I confined myself to a very specific part of Genesis... and so I never made a sweeping general language about all of Genesis or about all the historical figures and dates.




Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PMif one decides to reject some but not all of jewish and christian scripture as historically factual, then one is faced with the problem of establishing a way to tell which parts are factual and which are not.

??? Historians do this all the time!  You can't be unaware that there is lot of legendary stuff and "miracles" and other stuff written about many other famous ancient figures that historians weed through and reject as historical.[/font][/size][/color]

We should do what historians and scientists do.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 02:28:06 PMthats a difficult and complicated procedure. how would you address it?

Yes it is... all the more reason not to make sweeping hasty generalizations and not paint with a broad stroke.

God Bless you sir




I apologize for the capitalizations  not sure what happened and how to fix it


sure, francis.

which parts of scripture prove tbat yaweh is not mythology?

dont worry abiut firmat. if yiu can put up with my typoes i can put up with your capitalization.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on August 01, 2022, 05:00:09 PM
Well, in looking, perhaps I had it backwards, turned around.
To dismiss, to disparage, without really knowing, that would be intellectual weakness. To look and assume, to imagine record keeping was not very good, without batting an eyelash (?), in a blink of an eye (?).
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:03:35 PMi dont "admit" that god is within objective/verifiable reality, francis.

I was pointing to the fact that you've experienced things which you were sure was something from God or something spiritual. you even keep mentioning a friend you have which experienced something that you believe him when he narrates it as being from God.  You may have changed your opinion about what the experiences  you've had, meant to you personally, but you don't reject that the experience you had was real. 

Well... there are many people... in the bible... and today (I'm one of millions) that has had experiences that the best explanation for it, was that it came from God.  It's called a born again experience.  You may not have experienced that, but it is real nonetheless... and VERY LOGICAL AND REASONABLE and which is why such spiritual experiences are called properly basic beliefs.

But to try and verify a spiritual experience... or even God... by using "measurements" and "criteria" and science... which only apply to material objects, is simply a category fallacy.  Nothing more, nothing less.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:03:35 PMthat god should be verifiable is something i have actively asserted for many years. then i notice that people cannot do it.

Because you are committing a category fallacy.  You keep wanting to use the WRONG tools for the job.  You don't use a microscope or a physical yardstick to determine beauty or morals or history or logic or spiritual experiences, etc.

You can't even verify that science is scientific, nor can you verify the very principles that science relies on and is founded on.  And you can't verify that George Washington or Socrates or Alexander the Great are real people, by using science.  You have to rely on and trust the testimony of people you can't even interview... and none of history can be repeated.

Does that history or Washington or science or 1st principles (which by definition can't be proven objectively true) or less true or less part of reality?  No.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:03:35 PMwhat i then notice is that there is a great deal of assertion  that the existence of god has been proven or is obvious without a great deal of proof or obviousness  being around to support it.

You can't even prove that you exist, so why would anyone say that the existence of God is proven?

And I don't of anyone (among the many people I know and associate with and read) who says that God is obvious without a great deal of proof to support it.

You might have a different threshold as to what you will PERSONALLY  accept as evidence and proof for the existence of God, but  that only  reveals your PERSONAL PSYCHOLOGY and tells us nothing about whether the case for God's existence itself is a better and more reasonable inference from the facts and evidences that is available to all of us.

God can show up to a person and show that He is just as real as a rock, and yet that person can still reject God's existence.  You are talking about personal psychology and nothing more.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:03:35 PMtheres as much evidence for the existence of god as there is for the existence of the loch ness monster.


I respectfully submit that you don't know what the case for the loch ness monster is, nor what the case for God's existence is.  You are just revealing your personal psychology and bias.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:03:35 PMits tbe proof derived from the evidence that is always lacking.

Proof is whatever a person will BELIEVE is the best conclusion from the evidence they are presented with.  Evidence is a matter of objective truth whereas proof is in the mind of the evaluator.

You don't have to go far to notice that many people will resist a truth (if they don't like the truth) in spite of the evidence.  We've all met people like that.

So along that fact... I never tell anyone that I can prove that God exists (no one can prove or disprove that God exists) or prove the reliability of the NT... instead I tell them I will be glad to to share the evidence that convinced me that God exists and that the Bible is reliable.

God Bless you sir
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 05:13:12 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:05:11 PMwhich parts of scripture prove tbat yaweh is not mythology?

 ??? No one uses the Bible to show that God's existence is the best inference and most likely conclusion from the evidence in front of all of us.

Secondly, what does this have to do with the discussion about whether the Genesis creation story is to be viewed as a young earth (6 literal days and/or an earth that is 10,000 years old) or an old earth (an earth that is billions of years old)... and what does this have to do with whether people in Genesis lived or up to 900 years old, etc????

God Bless you
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 01, 2022, 05:45:43 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PMProof is whatever a person will BELIEVE is the best conclusion from the evidence they are presented with.  Evidence is a matter of objective truth whereas proof is in the mind of the evaluator.


you could have just posted ^^^this, francis. it summarizes all that you have said, and its exactly backwards. evidence is any piece of information that someone apllies to a question, and it can be irrelevant, hearsay, nonsense, or rhetorical. evidence is seldom objective.

proof is independent of the mind of the evaluator, and exists in the same way for everyone, everywhere. that does not mean that everybody is mentally equipped to believe or accept it.

proof is proof, and does not depend on belief. merely because someone believes that an idea has been proven does not mean that it been proven. it merely means that people frequently believe in unoproven or unproveable things. there is plenty of room for the fuzzy logic you describe in inductive reasoning, but induction does not prove anything. only deduction can establish black and white values for proven and disproven, and you avoid deduction when discussing this issue.

narrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

can you answer that question, or will you avoid it again? if you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 05:45:43 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PMProof is whatever a person will BELIEVE is the best conclusion from the evidence they are presented with.  Evidence is a matter of objective truth whereas proof is in the mind of the evaluator.


you could have just posted ^^^this, francis. it summarizes all that you have said, and its exactly backwards. evidence is any piece of information that someone apllies to a question, and it can be irrelevant, hearsay, nonsense, or rhetorical. evidence is seldom objective.

proof is independent of the mind of the evaluator, and exists in the same way for everyone, everywhere. that does not mean that everybody is mentally equipped to believe or accept it.

proof is proof, and does not depend on belief. merely because someone believes that an idea has been proven does not mean that it been proven. it merely means that people frequently believe in unoproven or unproveable things. there is plenty of room for the fuzzy logic you describe in inductive reasoning, but induction does not prove anything. only deduction can establish black and white values for proven and disproven, and you avoid deduction when discussing this issue.

narrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

can you answer that question, or will you avoid it again? if you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

I disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 06:20:23 PM
An apple falls from the tree to the ground. That is evidence, not proof, that the apple falls to the ground because that is its natural place.

A cannon ball falls faster than a feather. That fact was used as evidence that heavy things fall faster, but that fact proves nothing.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PMI disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

francis. ^^^this is unimportant. i'll repeat the important question one last time. if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on.

Quotenarrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

can you answer that question, or will you avoid it again? if you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

i will be specific. you have referred to scientists and historians. most scientists i know are atheists. is that what you think we should do with judeo-christian scripture?

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on August 01, 2022, 07:47:26 PM
Quote from: maritime on January 07, 2010, 07:58:42 AMhttp://radio.seti.org/ (http://radio.seti.org/)
Jan. 4, 2010: Time's Mysteries Part II: Warping Time
3:45 to 20:53: Roy Gould ? Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

13:00 forward
Molly: Okay. So there's this relationship between speed and time. But time can also be warped by gravity as well, can't it?
Roy Gould: Yes.
M: How so?
RG: Yes. What Einstein discovered, or predicted, was that the closer you get to a massive object like the earth, the slower the scale of time, that is the more slowly time flows compared to the way it flows further away from a massive object. Now, here at the surface of the earth the effect is very, very slight so we don't really notice it. But if we lived closer to, let's say, the sun, or actually to a black hole, which is probably the densest object, then we would really notice it. If you could hover just outside a black hole, for example, time would flow so slowly, when we returned to earth everyone would--actually they'd be long since passed away and it would be thousands of years in the future. And so now you get to an extreme difference in time caused just by your proximity to a massive object.
M: So if I were to climb to the top of Mt. Everest--this is on my "to do list," by the way--time would run more quickly at the top of the mountain than it does down below?
RG: Very slightly more quickly. Yes.
M: Time--it's weird. I don't know another word for this, the way that time is warped by speed and by gravity is weird.
RG: Yes, it is weird. There is one, of course, very familiar effect from it and that is gravity itself. What Einstein showed was that here on earth at least where gravity is not so extreme, objects fall towards the earth because that is where time flows more slowly. And so when we drop an object we say, Oh it falls towards the earth. It's actually moving towards the region where time flows slightly more slowly. So even though we don't notice that effect, it's not a dramatic effect in terms of a clock, we certainly notice in it terms of the fall of objects. So if you're on top of Mt. Everest, you're not gaining very much in your clock, but if you fall off you'll certainly notice that effect.
M: Certainly if you fall off Mt. Everest you will probably notice the effect. Safe to say. Did you know that time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana?
...
M: The weirdness of time truly gets weird when you consider what happens to time in a black hole. Now if I were to fall into a black hole or, better yet, watch someone else falling into a black hole, what would I see?
RG: If you fall into a black hole and we imagine how that it's a very large black hole, so large that it takes you a long time to fall into the center and so you can observe what's going on. As you fall in, you notice nothing unusual as far as time goes. Your wrist watch runs exactly at the right time. Everything seems normal to you. But, again, that's where you are. To someone outside the black hole, they see something tremendously different. As you fall towards the black hole, your time appears to slow down and actually stop so that you appear to hover just outside the entrance to the black hole. It's called the event horizon. And the outside observer--we, sitting here in our studio--never actually see the person enter the black hole. You just see their image slowly fading away outside the black hole.
M: So my image would just freeze.
RG: Yes.
M: You would have just a still snapshot of me on the edge of a black hole.
RG: Exactly. And in the early days, the early astronomers called it a frozen star for that reason because anything falling into it appears to freeze.
M: That's a creepy image.
RG: Isn't it?
M: Well it is; it's a little unsettling. Now that's because there's this massive concentration of gravity in a black hole. That's what a black hole is, right, this massive concentration of gravity?
RG: Yes, and all the light that would normally just flow back out to us and send us an image is struggling to get out of the gravitational pull of the black hole and right at the horizon it can't get out. Even the light can't get out, it falls into the black hole, and so that's why we see nothing at all past that horizon.
M: Does time stop in a black hole, then? If you were in the center of a black hole would time be no more?
RG: Two amazing things happen inside a black hole with time and I find it hard to wrap my mind around it. The first is that time is predicted to come to an end at the very center of a black hole, at the singularity. We're talking now about the simplest kind of black hole, one that's not rotating or spinning. And that's a signal that our understanding of the laws of nature breaks down...umm, that Einstein's equations break down, that we really need a new understanding of how nature works. We don't know what it means for time to come to a complete end. The "time line"--whatever that direction of time means--it's suddenly cut off right at the center of a black hole. And so some physicists have called the black hole the reverse of creation. We don't know how time began either. How could it suddenly start? And so, in a sense, a black hole is that creation of the universe in reverse. Everything is destroyed at the center. Time apparently comes to an end. But we don't really know. We don't yet have the science to describe it.
RG: Now a second amazing thing happens inside a spinning black hole and I find this-- Don't ask me to describe it, Molly, but I'm just going to tell you where that state of the science is. When you fall to a certain distance inside a black hole and you can turn around and look at light coming into the black hole from outside, you're seeing light from every part of the universe pouring into your black hole. And the difference in time inside and outside the universe is so great that you actually can see the entire future of the universe, that is, the outside future of the universe, coming in and impinging on a spot inside the black hole.
M: How can you see things that haven't happened yet?
RG: They haven't happened but there's no contradiction because nothing that you do inside the hole can ever influence what happens outside the hole. Einstein once said to the widow of a friend of his who had just passed away, he said, You know, to a practicing physicist the past, present and future are one and the same thing. By which he meant, perhaps everything that can happen in the universe has already happened: we've made all of our choices already, that all of our free will has been exercised, we've been born, we've lived and we've even died, but we haven't--however nature replays all of that, we haven't gotten to it yet. And that's a very strange thought about time. I don't like to think of that.
M: Roy Gould, thank you very much for talking to us.
RG: My pleasure. Thank you, Molly.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PM
Fran, the interesting thing about your views is that you refuse to see how you pick and choose like everyone else. I'm sure you could find condemnation as having too liberal of a biblical view, while also finding condemnation for having too conservative a view of the bible.


To take that to all extremes, more and more liberal, or more and more conservative, that is the thing that allows me to believe that even agnostics and atheists are as welcome as the most conservative religious position one can imagine in a totally unpredictably orthodox view of the strangest religion we can imagine.


You always seem to have such a strong opinion of where your deity wants to draws that line. Interestingly, that is just where your views are.


For myself, I still don't think there is a line, whether due to no deity, or universalism.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on August 01, 2022, 08:33:02 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMexplain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

All (Holy Bible) scripture is true. But all such scripture is not similarly easy to explain to the unbeliever. So the Atheist/agnostic concentrates on these more "difficult" passages hoping to confound his prey while he merrily racks up points for himself -- all the while avoiding the God and truth offering eternal life.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 01, 2022, 10:33:32 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 01, 2022, 08:33:02 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMexplain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

All (Holy Bible) scripture is true. But all such scripture is not similarly easy to explain to the unbeliever. So the Atheist/agnostic concentrates on these more "difficult" passages hoping to confound his prey while he merrily racks up points for himself -- all the while avoiding the God and truth offering eternal life.


eyes, in my readings of scripture i have found close to two dozen examples of passages that contradict in matters of numbers, chronology, identities, places, quoting of other passages, or that describe events in contradictory ways. some of these are well-known and have been debated for the 1700 or so years that christian scripture has existed. they're not important for doctrine, but they give the lie to the statement that all scripture is "true," if "true" means historically factual.

their difficulty lies not in being hard to explain to an unbeliever, but in simply being contradictory. you have shown no interest in thinking about scripture critically, so i haven't bothered listing any of them. and i don't have much interest in reading the increasingly nasty comments you've started posting about people with whom you find disagreement.

but if anyone else here is interested in learning a few places where christian scripture is not "true," i would be happy to discuss them. they're not hard to find, and the inconsistencies are not hard to see.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PM
Eyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:57:13 PM
Maritime-- thanks for that post. Gould explains well, and describes the unexplainable rather than trying to explain it. Seems consistent with Kevin's view of time.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 01, 2022, 11:13:42 PM
QuoteExactly, there is no basis for thinking that time lengths in the Genesis text is to taken literally... and that is why must Jews and most Christians are not young earthers.  The polls shows that only 1 in 10 Christians and Americans are young earthers.


That's about 240 million people, man. That's over 2x the population of my entire country. Imagine if a whole country believed that, that would be considered a complete failure of an education system.

Or complete success depending how you look at it...


Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on August 02, 2022, 08:20:40 AM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 10:33:32 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 01, 2022, 08:33:02 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMexplain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

All (Holy Bible) scripture is true. But all such scripture is not similarly easy to explain to the unbeliever. So the Atheist/agnostic concentrates on these more "difficult" passages hoping to confound his prey while he merrily racks up points for himself -- all the while avoiding the God and truth offering eternal life.


eyes, in my readings of scripture i have found close to two dozen examples of passages that contradict in matters of numbers, chronology, identities, places, quoting of other passages, or that describe events in contradictory ways. some of these are well-known and have been debated for the 1700 or so years that christian scripture has existed. they're not important for doctrine, but they give the lie to the statement that all scripture is "true," if "true" means historically factual.

their difficulty lies not in being hard to explain to an unbeliever, but in simply being contradictory. you have shown no interest in thinking about scripture critically, so i haven't bothered listing any of them. and i don't have much interest in reading the increasingly nasty comments you've started posting about people with whom you find disagreement.

but if anyone else here is interested in learning a few places where christian scripture is not "true," i would be happy to discuss them. they're not hard to find, and the inconsistencies are not hard to see.

There are more than 400 seemingly contradictory passages in the Bible. But they have all been explained and with the Internet the explanations are very easy to find.

As for my being "nasty" I wasn't aware of this and I certainly have no intention of being unkind, rude or malicious. And I wonder if these so-called posts of mind are just a matter of not being carefully read. Because if my God exists we dwell in the midst of the trappings of hate, revenge, aggression and war. And to label these things as such is not to indict anyone that posts on this forum. If the God of the Bible exists then evil intent winds its way through all of his opposing forces and their literature and accoutrements, etc.

This is much more your forum than mind, Kevin -- and I left these regions twice before without so much as a hiccup. So perhaps if my ramblings greatly offend, you ought to consider extending yourself to buy some peace for yourself by getting me disengaged. After all you would still have Francis-the-Good to joust with. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on August 02, 2022, 08:32:07 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PMEyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?

What is truth? Truth is defined as conforming with fact or reality. Truth is genuine. Truth is veracity. Truth is reality and how things actually are. Holy Bible truth is always consistent with the will and being of God. God declares the nature of truth -- God made it so. God's very nature is truth and should always be described as such.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 02, 2022, 05:10:57 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 02, 2022, 08:32:07 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PMEyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?

What is truth? Truth is defined as conforming with fact or reality. Truth is genuine. Truth is veracity. Truth is reality and how things actually are. Holy Bible truth is always consistent with the will and being of God. God declares the nature of truth -- God made it so. God's very nature is truth and should always be described as such.

I guess we are not synchronous. I see "facts" as derivative facets of reality, not reality itself.

To answer the question, I understand "truth" to be an accurate representation f the relationships that exist between "things that exist."
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on August 03, 2022, 05:17:27 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PMEyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?

Yes/No
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 03, 2022, 05:37:07 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PMI disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

francis. ^^^this is unimportant.

I disagree again.  You keep saying that there is no evidence or very little for the existence of God.  So the words "evidence" and "proof" are very important.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi'll repeat the important question one last time. if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on.

That's cool, but that would be completely on you, and it won't be for anything I've done or not able to do in timely manners. Just because you come to a faulty and baseless conclusion, that doesn't justify your actions to act with false knowledge.

I often work 13hr days with my mind fully engaged and razor focused on my many technical tasks during the day... and when I get home, I'm sapped of all energy and crash.  Then I wake up early in the morning and resume the whole daily process again, 6 days a week. Add to that is the quiet time or prayer and meditation that I spend with my Lord to start and end each day, and the days are very long.

Sometimes I get a small window of opportunity to visit our forum and that is why you will see short periods of activity interspersed between long periods of inactivity.

To conclude that I am unable to answer a question of yours... or someone else in here... just because I happen to work extremely long days and I lack the time to devote to this forum like I would like to... is sheer folly and completely unwarranted.

After long stretches of hours and days completely focused on my tasks at work, I will not only be exhausted, but often, I will forget where I left off in a conversation.  And if you visit the name of the different threads in this forum, you'll notice right away that the names of the  threads don't always give you a clue as to all the things that were discussed in that particular thread.

And so I often not only forget what I was last working on... but I also find it difficult to find the conversation I was last in. And then when I get sidetracked in another conversation, that only exacerbates the problem.

For example, I can only remember one conversation with you that I "owe" you a response in.  It was about whether Jesus ever claimed... or the people believed that Jesus claimed or implied... to be God.  I wish I had a secretary to help me with keeping track with the different conversations and their locations, in which I'm involved in.

If you are truly truly truly interested in hearing my take or opinion on a question/objection you may have, then simply have mercy and remind me and tell me what it was and where it was, and I will do my best to accommodate you.

If this is not satisfactory to you, then that only reveals your personal psychology and has nothing to do with the facts of what is happening in my life and the limited time I have and whether or not I can answer a question.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMnarrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.
I already offered an answer, but I will offer it again. Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMcan you answer that question, or will you avoid it again?
I've never avoided a question, unless the question was being deliberately derogatory and the person asking the question had no desire to be serious and sincere.




Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMif you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

If you consider that I choose to avoid a serious and sincere question, then you do so without any warrant... and so all you do is reveal your own personal psychology and personal bias and prejudice by deliberately engaging in faulty and baseless conclusions.

You seem to have forgotten that I've asked you questions that you never responded to.  And yet not once did I think you were avoiding it. Instead I gave you grace and the benefit of doubt and thought that you must be extremely busy, like me... and so forgot it... like me.

Indeed, you've even admitted that you often don't read my posts if they are too long for your sensibilities and focus, so there are times when I never avoided or didn't answer your question, it was just simply a case that you didn't read my answer.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi will be specific.

Awesome. That's always a very good start for a fruitful discussion.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMyou have referred to scientists and historians. most scientists i know are atheists.

That appears to be an Ad populum fallacy.

Just because a person is called a scientist, that doesn't mean that the scientific data leads to atheism or that a person is justified in being an atheist because of the scientific data,  since science... the process and the data itself... can't prove or contribute anything to the question of whether God exits or not, to begin with.

The human beings who are scientists are just that... flawed human beings like you and I... subject to the same fallen sin nature and prejudices that all humans are subject and prone to.  What is important is not the scientists themselves (in so far that they are fallible human beings with their own agendas like all of us)... but what is important instead is the scientific data itself.

You YOURSELF have repeated many times that you are not impressed with what scientists say... especially when I or others bring them up as evidence in an argument (like in your debate UnklE)... but that you want to be able to look at the scientific data ITSELF and to make your OWN INFORMED decision/opinion about the scientific data.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMis that what you think we should do with judeo-christian scripture?

Already answered above.  Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.

And the science helps us to understand what is or is not NATURALLY possible.  Science helps us to understand the NATURAL world and universe. Not God Himself.


God Bless
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 03, 2022, 05:46:54 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 03, 2022, 05:17:27 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PMEyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?

Yes/No

Intriguing. I would like to know more about that answer, Eyes.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 04, 2022, 02:26:38 AM
Quote... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.


You're putting Jesus on equal historic footing as Alexander the Great?

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 04, 2022, 06:14:29 AM
Quote from: Francis on August 03, 2022, 05:37:07 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PMI disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

francis. ^^^this is unimportant.

I disagree again.  You keep saying that there is no evidence or very little for the existence of God.  So the words "evidence" and "proof" are very important.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi'll repeat the important question one last time. if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on.

That's cool, but that would be completely on you, and it won't be for anything I've done or not able to do in timely manners. Just because you come to a faulty and baseless conclusion, that doesn't justify your actions to act with false knowledge.

I often work 13hr days with my mind fully engaged and razor focused on my many technical tasks during the day... and when I get home, I'm sapped of all energy and crash.  Then I wake up early in the morning and resume the whole daily process again, 6 days a week. Add to that is the quiet time or prayer and meditation that I spend with my Lord to start and end each day, and the days are very long.

Sometimes I get a small window of opportunity to visit our forum and that is why you will see short periods of activity interspersed between long periods of inactivity.

To conclude that I am unable to answer a question of yours... or someone else in here... just because I happen to work extremely long days and I lack the time to devote to this forum like I would like to... is sheer folly and completely unwarranted.

After long stretches of hours and days completely focused on my tasks at work, I will not only be exhausted, but often, I will forget where I left off in a conversation.  And if you visit the name of the different threads in this forum, you'll notice right away that the names of the  threads don't always give you a clue as to all the things that were discussed in that particular thread.

And so I often not only forget what I was last working on... but I also find it difficult to find the conversation I was last in. And then when I get sidetracked in another conversation, that only exacerbates the problem.

For example, I can only remember one conversation with you that I "owe" you a response in.  It was about whether Jesus ever claimed... or the people believed that Jesus claimed or implied... to be God.  I wish I had a secretary to help me with keeping track with the different conversations and their locations, in which I'm involved in.

If you are truly truly truly interested in hearing my take or opinion on a question/objection you may have, then simply have mercy and remind me and tell me what it was and where it was, and I will do my best to accommodate you.

If this is not satisfactory to you, then that only reveals your personal psychology and has nothing to do with the facts of what is happening in my life and the limited time I have and whether or not I can answer a question.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMnarrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.
I already offered an answer, but I will offer it again. Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMcan you answer that question, or will you avoid it again?
I've never avoided a question, unless the question was being deliberately derogatory and the person asking the question had no desire to be serious and sincere.




Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMif you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

If you consider that I choose to avoid a serious and sincere question, then you do so without any warrant... and so all you do is reveal your own personal psychology and personal bias and prejudice by deliberately engaging in faulty and baseless conclusions.

You seem to have forgotten that I've asked you questions that you never responded to.  And yet not once did I think you were avoiding it. Instead I gave you grace and the benefit of doubt and thought that you must be extremely busy, like me... and so forgot it... like me.

Indeed, you've even admitted that you often don't read my posts if they are too long for your sensibilities and focus, so there are times when I never avoided or didn't answer your question, it was just simply a case that you didn't read my answer.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi will be specific.

Awesome. That's always a very good start for a fruitful discussion.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMyou have referred to scientists and historians. most scientists i know are atheists.

That appears to be an Ad populum fallacy.

Just because a person is called a scientist, that doesn't mean that the scientific data leads to atheism or that a person is justified in being an atheist because of the scientific data,  since science... the process and the data itself... can't prove or contribute anything to the question of whether God exits or not, to begin with.

The human beings who are scientists are just that... flawed human beings like you and I... subject to the same fallen sin nature and prejudices that all humans are subject and prone to.  What is important is not the scientists themselves (in so far that they are fallible human beings with their own agendas like all of us)... but what is important instead is the scientific data itself.

You YOURSELF have repeated many times that you are not impressed with what scientists say... especially when I or others bring them up as evidence in an argument (like in your debate UnklE)... but that you want to be able to look at the scientific data ITSELF and to make your OWN INFORMED decision/opinion about the scientific data.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMis that what you think we should do with judeo-christian scripture?

Already answered above.  Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.

And the science helps us to understand what is or is not NATURALLY possible.  Science helps us to understand the NATURAL world and universe. Not God Himself.


God Bless

sorry francis

tldr
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on August 04, 2022, 06:17:21 AM
^OMG
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 04, 2022, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 04, 2022, 06:14:29 AM
Quote from: Francis on August 03, 2022, 05:37:07 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PMI disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

francis. ^^^this is unimportant.

I disagree again.  You keep saying that there is no evidence or very little for the existence of God.  So the words "evidence" and "proof" are very important.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi'll repeat the important question one last time. if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on.

That's cool, but that would be completely on you, and it won't be for anything I've done or not able to do in timely manners. Just because you come to a faulty and baseless conclusion, that doesn't justify your actions to act with false knowledge.

I often work 13hr days with my mind fully engaged and razor focused on my many technical tasks during the day... and when I get home, I'm sapped of all energy and crash.  Then I wake up early in the morning and resume the whole daily process again, 6 days a week. Add to that is the quiet time or prayer and meditation that I spend with my Lord to start and end each day, and the days are very long.

Sometimes I get a small window of opportunity to visit our forum and that is why you will see short periods of activity interspersed between long periods of inactivity.

To conclude that I am unable to answer a question of yours... or someone else in here... just because I happen to work extremely long days and I lack the time to devote to this forum like I would like to... is sheer folly and completely unwarranted.

After long stretches of hours and days completely focused on my tasks at work, I will not only be exhausted, but often, I will forget where I left off in a conversation.  And if you visit the name of the different threads in this forum, you'll notice right away that the names of the  threads don't always give you a clue as to all the things that were discussed in that particular thread.

And so I often not only forget what I was last working on... but I also find it difficult to find the conversation I was last in. And then when I get sidetracked in another conversation, that only exacerbates the problem.

For example, I can only remember one conversation with you that I "owe" you a response in.  It was about whether Jesus ever claimed... or the people believed that Jesus claimed or implied... to be God.  I wish I had a secretary to help me with keeping track with the different conversations and their locations, in which I'm involved in.

If you are truly truly truly interested in hearing my take or opinion on a question/objection you may have, then simply have mercy and remind me and tell me what it was and where it was, and I will do my best to accommodate you.

If this is not satisfactory to you, then that only reveals your personal psychology and has nothing to do with the facts of what is happening in my life and the limited time I have and whether or not I can answer a question.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMnarrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.
I already offered an answer, but I will offer it again. Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMcan you answer that question, or will you avoid it again?
I've never avoided a question, unless the question was being deliberately derogatory and the person asking the question had no desire to be serious and sincere.




Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMif you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

If you consider that I choose to avoid a serious and sincere question, then you do so without any warrant... and so all you do is reveal your own personal psychology and personal bias and prejudice by deliberately engaging in faulty and baseless conclusions.

You seem to have forgotten that I've asked you questions that you never responded to.  And yet not once did I think you were avoiding it. Instead I gave you grace and the benefit of doubt and thought that you must be extremely busy, like me... and so forgot it... like me.

Indeed, you've even admitted that you often don't read my posts if they are too long for your sensibilities and focus, so there are times when I never avoided or didn't answer your question, it was just simply a case that you didn't read my answer.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi will be specific.

Awesome. That's always a very good start for a fruitful discussion.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMyou have referred to scientists and historians. most scientists i know are atheists.

That appears to be an Ad populum fallacy.

Just because a person is called a scientist, that doesn't mean that the scientific data leads to atheism or that a person is justified in being an atheist because of the scientific data,  since science... the process and the data itself... can't prove or contribute anything to the question of whether God exits or not, to begin with.

The human beings who are scientists are just that... flawed human beings like you and I... subject to the same fallen sin nature and prejudices that all humans are subject and prone to.  What is important is not the scientists themselves (in so far that they are fallible human beings with their own agendas like all of us)... but what is important instead is the scientific data itself.

You YOURSELF have repeated many times that you are not impressed with what scientists say... especially when I or others bring them up as evidence in an argument (like in your debate UnklE)... but that you want to be able to look at the scientific data ITSELF and to make your OWN INFORMED decision/opinion about the scientific data.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMis that what you think we should do with judeo-christian scripture?

Already answered above.  Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.

And the science helps us to understand what is or is not NATURALLY possible.  Science helps us to understand the NATURAL world and universe. Not God Himself.


God Bless

sorry francis

tldr


Sorry Kevin

You just proved what I said.  How can you say that I don't answer your questions or that I avoid them if you don't read my answers to begin with???

Not only that, but you yourself have written much longer posts than the one I wrote above.

You even said above: "if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on."   Well, the fact that I did answer your question but you didn't read it, shows that you have no merit or warrant for saying that I REFUSE to answer your questions or that I try to AVOID them.

Is this an example of you refusing and avoiding my answers?

Your claims have even less merit when I explained the time and physical constraints I'm operating under, and yet you didn't read that as well.

Anyway, while you may not extend mercy to me, I will always extend mercy to you and give you the benefit of doubt.

God Bless you sir



Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 04, 2022, 03:06:04 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 04, 2022, 02:26:38 AM
Quote... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.


You're putting Jesus on equal historic footing as Alexander the Great? 


????? What does your question mean?  Are you on equal historic footing as George Washington and Alexander the Great and Socrates and Napoleon?  Aren't you all historical figures/persons/human beings? Yes.  All of you existed.  So I don't understand your question.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 04, 2022, 05:44:26 PM
francis, we havent proven anything except that you are unable to say anything in a concise enough manner that i have time to read it.

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AM
Francis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources. 

That's the difference.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 06, 2022, 07:41:46 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 04, 2022, 05:44:26 PMfrancis, we havent proven anything except that you are unable to say anything in a concise enough manner that i have time to read it.


Kevin, all you've shown is your personal biased psychology and your inconsistency. 

(1) you yourself have written much longer posts than the one I had written in #166.   (2)  You keep saying I will avoid your questions and/or I am unable to answer your questions, and yet you don't read my answers to your questions, nor the conditions and time constraints I'm operating under in my life. And so your claims/opinions are empty.

As I said before, while you may not extend mercy to me, I will always extend mercy to you and give you the benefit of doubt for the reasons for your inconsistency... because of your intrinsic value as a human being that is made in the image of God. 

I admire you and I have no desire to try and "win" a point.  It's not about me... All I care about is your eternity.

God Bless you sir

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 06, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.

That's the difference.


Then you don't know or understand what evidence there is for Alexander the Great nor for Socrates nor for Shakespeare nor for Jesus, etc that historians use to determine that these and other ancient figures existed.

Indeed, it is obvious that you don't even know or want to know or want to believe  the evidence that many atheistic historians use to help  them determine which figures are historical.  And you don't even know what the case for the existence of Jesus' historicity is.

After the vast majority of historians (atheist and theist and agnostics alike) looked at all the evidence impartially, they have resoundingly said that Jesus deniers are a fringe group... just like flat earthers and the holocaust deniers.  And I had given you the citations for that.

Are you a flat earther or a holocaust denier or a fringe conspiracy theorists? I don't think you are.

Secondly, you don't understand the criteria that historians use to determine the reliability of ancient historical accounts and in determining which parts of the ancient document can be assessed as historical.

Thirdly, you don't understand the process that historians use to be able to glean non-miraculous historical facts from ancient documents... even if  the documents are filled with "miracles", etc like many ancient documents are.

etc etc

Think about it for a moment.  Let's suppose that after a great apologpytic world war... all records of your existence disappears or is erased... and the only record anyone in the future has of your existence is your mom's claim.  Does that make you any less historical and less real?  Of course not.  If your mom is considered reliable, then there is no  reason to doubt her claim that she gave birth to you.

The burden of proof is on anyone who doubts your mom's veracity.

That's the difference

Hope you and your family are doing well
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 09:09:50 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.

That's the difference.


Then you don't know or understand what evidence there is for Alexander the Great nor for Socrates nor for Shakespeare nor for Jesus, etc that historians use to determine that these and other ancient figures existed.

Indeed, it is obvious that you don't even know or want to know or want to believe  the evidence that many atheistic historians use to help  them determine which figures are historical.  And you don't even know what the case for the existence of Jesus' historicity is.

After the vast majority of historians (atheist and theist and agnostics alike) looked at all the evidence impartially, they have resoundingly said that Jesus deniers are a fringe group... just like flat earthers and the holocaust deniers.  And I had given you the citations for that.

Are you a flat earther or a holocaust denier or a fringe conspiracy theorists? I don't think you are.

Secondly, you don't understand the criteria that historians use to determine the reliability of ancient historical accounts and in determining which parts of the ancient document can be assessed as historical.

Thirdly, you don't understand the process that historians use to be able to glean non-miraculous historical facts from ancient documents... even if  the documents are filled with "miracles", etc like many ancient documents are.

etc etc

Think about it for a moment.  Let's suppose that after a great apologpytic world war... all records of your existence disappears or is erased... and the only record anyone in the future has of your existence is your mom's claim.  Does that make you any less historical and less real?  Of course not.  If your mom is considered reliable, then there is no  reason to doubt her claim that she gave birth to you.

The burden of proof is on anyone who doubts your mom's veracity.

That's the difference

Hope you and your family are doing well

The point is not whether a person we call Jesus ever existed, but whether the claims made about him are factual.

There is a great deal of historical evidence supporting many of the claims made concerning Alexander the Great, Socrates, Shakespeare. Not so much for Jesus and King Arthur.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 06, 2022, 09:47:12 PM
Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMFran, the interesting thing about your views is that you refuse to see how you pick and choose like everyone else. I'm sure you could find condemnation as having too liberal of a biblical view, while also finding condemnation for having too conservative a view of the bible.


To take that to all extremes, more and more liberal, or more and more conservative, that is the thing that allows me to believe that even agnostics and atheists are as welcome as the most conservative religious position one can imagine in a totally unpredictably orthodox view of the strangest religion we can imagine.


You always seem to have such a strong opinion of where your deity wants to draws that line. Interestingly, that is just where your views are.


For myself, I still don't think there is a line, whether due to no deity, or universalism.


Hello Shnozzola,  (are you a relative of Jimmy Durante?)



Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMFran, the interesting thing about your views is that you refuse to see how you pick and choose like everyone else. I'm sure you could find condemnation as having too liberal of a biblical view, while also finding condemnation for having too conservative a view of the bible.

The fact that everyone picks and chooses, only proves that not everyone is correct or can be correct, because that would violate the law of non contradiction.

I've seen Nobel laureate scientists express contradictory opinions and conclusions after they look at the SAME scientific evidence.

Obviously, even scientists are prone to pick and choose and can't all be correct if they contradict each other.

So what is the answer?

Each side makes their case, citing the evidence they use to support their case... and then everyone must determine for themselves which case has more rational merit and is a more reasonable inference from the facts and evidences in the case.

Agreed?




Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMTo take that to all extremes, more and more liberal, or more and more conservative, that is the thing that allows me to believe that even agnostics and atheists are as welcome as the most conservative religious position one can imagine in a totally unpredictably orthodox view of the strangest religion we can imagine.

I honestly don't know what that means.





Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMYou always seem to have such a strong opinion of where your deity wants to draws that line. Interestingly, that is just where your views are.

I'm confident in my opinion because I've had my opinions tested in the crucible of public forums.

But...

(1) A strong opinion is no guarantee that a person is correct or not. You can have an atheist with a strong opinion in favor of atheism and you can have a theist with a strong opinion in favor of theism.

But logically, they can't both be correct... even though they both have a strong opinion.

(2) Additionally, there is nothing wrong with a strong opinion.  I have a strong opinion that 1+1=2.  I have a strong opinion that the earth is not flat.  I have a strong opinion that the universe is billions of years old. I have a strong opinion that you have intrinsic value and worth.  I have a strong opinion that you exist.  I have a strong opinion that you are intelligent.  I have a strong opinion that God loves you so much.

And I'm sure you have strong opinions about some of the stuff in your own worldview.  As I think everyone does.  Some more than others.

So what do we do?  We always have to go back to what I said earlier... which is that each side or person makes their case, and then let it be judged on its own evidentiary and logical merits.  There is nothing else we can do when people have mutually exclusive strong opinions.



Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMFor myself, I still don't think there is a line, whether due to no deity, or universalism.

Still unclear what that means.

Hope you and your family are well


Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 06, 2022, 09:57:28 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 09:09:50 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.

That's the difference.


Then you don't know or understand what evidence there is for Alexander the Great nor for Socrates nor for Shakespeare nor for Jesus, etc that historians use to determine that these and other ancient figures existed.

Indeed, it is obvious that you don't even know or want to know or want to believe  the evidence that many atheistic historians use to help  them determine which figures are historical.  And you don't even know what the case for the existence of Jesus' historicity is.

After the vast majority of historians (atheist and theist and agnostics alike) looked at all the evidence impartially, they have resoundingly said that Jesus deniers are a fringe group... just like flat earthers and the holocaust deniers.  And I had given you the citations for that.

Are you a flat earther or a holocaust denier or a fringe conspiracy theorists? I don't think you are.

Secondly, you don't understand the criteria that historians use to determine the reliability of ancient historical accounts and in determining which parts of the ancient document can be assessed as historical.

Thirdly, you don't understand the process that historians use to be able to glean non-miraculous historical facts from ancient documents... even if  the documents are filled with "miracles", etc like many ancient documents are.

etc etc

Think about it for a moment.  Let's suppose that after a great apologpytic world war... all records of your existence disappears or is erased... and the only record anyone in the future has of your existence is your mom's claim.  Does that make you any less historical and less real?  Of course not.  If your mom is considered reliable, then there is no  reason to doubt her claim that she gave birth to you.

The burden of proof is on anyone who doubts your mom's veracity.

That's the difference

Hope you and your family are doing well

The point is not whether a person we call Jesus ever existed, but whether the claims made about him are factual.

There is a great deal of historical evidence supporting many of the claims made concerning Alexander the Great, Socrates, Shakespeare. Not so much for Jesus and King Arthur.

I understood 8livesleft's point differently that you did.

But ok, let's discuss your point then.

My point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not, to make a strong rational reasonable case from the facts we do and can know... that Jesus was Resurrected and thus He demonstrated Himself to be God Incarnate.

Anything less is moot and irrelevant.

It's like Paul said, If Jesus was not Resurrected, then Christianity collapses and we are all left in our sins and the Christians are to be most pitied for believing a lie and basing their salvation on a lie.

Hope you are your family are well

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on August 06, 2022, 10:10:03 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.

That's the difference.
The Bible is not a single source.  It is a gathering of multiple sources.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 06, 2022, 10:24:19 PM
bulls**t, francis. really. i'm surprised at you.

QuoteMy point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not, to make a strong rational reasonable case from the facts we do and can know... that Jesus was Resurrected and thus He demonstrated Himself to be God Incarnate.

i am aware of no verifiable facts on this matter. and i am aware of no reasonable case to be made from these non-verifiable facts.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 10:55:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 09:57:28 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 09:09:50 PM••••
The point is not whether a person we call Jesus ever existed, but whether the claims made about him are factual.

There is a great deal of historical evidence supporting many of the claims made concerning Alexander the Great, Socrates, Shakespeare. Not so much for Jesus and King Arthur.
••••
My point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not••••

By "we" you apparently mean people who already believe. The rest of the world could use some clear evidence.

But thank you for confirming that factual evidence concerning claims about Jesus is sparse compared to Alexander, Socrates, et al.

Quote from: Francis••••
It's like Paul said, If Jesus was not Resurrected, then Christianity collapses and we are all left in our sins and the Christians are to be most pitied for believing a lie and basing their salvation on a lie.
••••

Yes. I am sorry for you.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 06, 2022, 11:15:01 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 06, 2022, 10:24:19 PMbulls**t, francis. really. i'm surprised at you.

QuoteMy point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not, to make a strong rational reasonable case from the facts we do and can know... that Jesus was Resurrected and thus He demonstrated Himself to be God Incarnate.

i am aware of no verifiable facts on this matter. and i am aware of no reasonable case to be made from these non-verifiable facts.

whoa!

Why are you so angry and hostile and why do you have to use profanity and why can't you be calm and reasonable and have a civil discussion without so much drama and emotional turmoil?

I've always thought you were the classiest person in this forum.

I'm not sure what you are objecting to... but I'm talking about mundane historical facts and nothing more.  I never said that the Resurrection was a proven historical fact (Although I personally believe it was) because I know that miracles is not the purview of historians.  I'm talking about non-miraculous historical facts mined by historians and what we can infer from those historical facts.

I'm expressing my opinion that the Resurrection is the most  reasonable inference from the mundane non-miraculous historical facts (gleaned by the majority of historians and biblical scholars, atheists and theists alike)

I understand that you disagree with my opinion, but to use profanity to express a difference of opinion?  Is that civil and calm and reasonable?

I have never used profanity to disagree with your opinions, no matter how much I disagree with you.

Are you ok?  This is not the classy person I know.

Maybe you're having some difficulty on the job?

I care about you
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 06, 2022, 11:43:14 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 10:55:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 09:57:28 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 09:09:50 PM••••
The point is not whether a person we call Jesus ever existed, but whether the claims made about him are factual.

There is a great deal of historical evidence supporting many of the claims made concerning Alexander the Great, Socrates, Shakespeare. Not so much for Jesus and King Arthur.
••••
My point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not••••

By "we" you apparently mean people who already believe. The rest of the world could use some clear evidence.

But thank you for confirming that factual evidence concerning claims about Jesus is sparse compared to Alexander, Socrates, et al.

Quote from: Francis••••
It's like Paul said, If Jesus was not Resurrected, then Christianity collapses and we are all left in our sins and the Christians are to be most pitied for believing a lie and basing their salvation on a lie.
••••

Yes. I am sorry for you.




Kiahanie,


Quote from: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 10:55:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 09:57:28 PMMy point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not
By "we" you apparently mean people who already believe. The rest of the world could use some clear evidence.

No... it's the other way around.   I mean people who were once atheist and agnostic but who became persuaded because of the evidence. Scientists and lawyers and philosophers and mathematicians and biologists and historians and detectives and physicists and teachers and students and sanitary workers and farmers, and moms and dads, and military geniuses, and asphalt workers and grocery clerks and cab drivers and rock stars and movie stars and sports stars, etc etc etc etc... people from all walks of life.

That doesn't mean they are correct... it just means that many people from all walks of life have been persuaded by the evidence... and not because they already believed.



Quote from: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 10:55:40 PMBut thank you for confirming that factual evidence concerning claims about Jesus is sparse compared to Alexander, Socrates, et al.

You didn't read what I wrote. 

I was focusing on only ONE aspect of Jesus... and not the entirety of what we know... and so any evidence that is outside of that narrow scope, is completely irrelevant. 

For example, If you are making a case that Socrates said something SPECIFIC  that you  think was important, then any information  that has nothing to do with that specific point... like about his bathroom habits or color of hair and eyes and his height and where he went to school and who his wife was and anything else that has nothing to do with that very narrow specific statement from Socrates that you want to show... it's all irrelevant.

It doesn't mean all that other information doesn't exist about Socrates, it's just irrelevant to the point and case you are making about Socrates.

Surely can you see this?

I want to give you the benefit of doubt.



Quote from: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 10:55:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 09:57:28 PMIt's like Paul said, If Jesus was not Resurrected, then Christianity collapses and we are all left in our sins and the Christians are to be most pitied for believing a lie and basing their salvation on a lie.
Yes. I am sorry for you.

And I'm sorry that you can't see. 

I would gently encourage you to read 1Corinthians 1:6-3:4....

It describes you perfectly

Love you with all my heart

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 07, 2022, 12:17:56 AM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 11:15:01 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 06, 2022, 10:24:19 PMbulls**t, francis. really. i'm surprised at you.

QuoteMy point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not, to make a strong rational reasonable case from the facts we do and can know... that Jesus was Resurrected and thus He demonstrated Himself to be God Incarnate.

i am aware of no verifiable facts on this matter. and i am aware of no reasonable case to be made from these non-verifiable facts.

whoa!

Why are you so angry and hostile and why do you have to use profanity and why can't you be calm and reasonable and have a civil discussion without so much drama and emotional turmoil?

I've always thought you were the classiest person in this forum.

I'm not sure what you are objecting to... but I'm talking about mundane historical facts and nothing more.  I never said that the Resurrection was a proven historical fact (Although I personally believe it was) because I know that miracles is not the purview of historians.  I'm talking about non-miraculous historical facts mined by historians and what we can infer from those historical facts.

I'm expressing my opinion that the Resurrection is the most  reasonable inference from the mundane non-miraculous historical facts (gleaned by the majority of historians and biblical scholars, atheists and theists alike)

I understand that you disagree with my opinion, but to use profanity to express a difference of opinion?  Is that civil and calm and reasonable?

I have never used profanity to disagree with your opinions, no matter how much I disagree with you.

Are you ok?  This is not the classy person I know.

Maybe you're having some difficulty on the job?

I care about you

francis, i will no longer read any response from you longer than my question.

your statement ^^^above regarding "verifiable facts" and "rationale reasonable" arguments is simple bulls**t.

if not, you can explain why right here.

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 07, 2022, 12:40:14 AM
QuoteAnd you don't even know what the case for the existence of Jesus' historicity is.


Ok, besides the bible what else is it? Present your evidence here.

Quote Secondly, you don't understand the criteria that historians use to determine the reliability of ancient historical accounts and in determining which parts of the ancient document can be assessed as historical.


What document besides the bible? Present it here.

Quote The burden of proof is on anyone who doubts your mom's veracity.


You obviously didn't understand what I said.

So, again, you can take away any single piece of evidence regarding a real person's existence, say a mother's claim and there will still be hundreds of other pieces of evidence available. Like the father, siblings, birth certificate, employment records, school records, albums, I can go all day.

So, in this case, remove the bible, what else can you use as evidence for Jesus?

Like for Alexander, for whom we have many many pieces of evidence from all over the region.


Get it?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 07, 2022, 12:54:55 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on August 06, 2022, 10:10:03 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.

That's the difference.
The Bible is not a single source.  It is a gathering of multiple sources.

The NT is a collection of books from followers written after Jesus died. Many followers, sure, but still all from the same close group of people. So, for me that's essentially the same source. 

And what I'm saying is, besides the NT, what other evidence is there?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on August 07, 2022, 02:51:39 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 07, 2022, 12:54:55 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on August 06, 2022, 10:10:03 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,
If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?
Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.
Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.
That's the difference.
The Bible is not a single source.  It is a gathering of multiple sources.

The NT is a collection of books from followers written after Jesus died. Many followers, sure, but still all from the same close group of people. So, for me that's essentially the same source.
And what I'm saying is, besides the NT, what other evidence is there?
https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 07, 2022, 04:03:56 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on August 07, 2022, 02:51:39 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 07, 2022, 12:54:55 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on August 06, 2022, 10:10:03 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,
If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?
Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.
Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.
That's the difference.
The Bible is not a single source.  It is a gathering of multiple sources.

The NT is a collection of books from followers written after Jesus died. Many followers, sure, but still all from the same close group of people. So, for me that's essentially the same source.
And what I'm saying is, besides the NT, what other evidence is there?
https://www.history.com/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence


This is a good start!

So, the article mentions Flavius Josephus, who was born 37 years after Jesus' crucifixion and " was around when the early church was getting started, so he knew people who had seen and heard Jesus"

This seems to be built on the assumption that all early church members all saw and heard Jesus.

Are we just supposed to accept that assumption? If yes, then let's look at the statements: :

1.  "....one passage of Jewish Antiquities that recounts an unlawful execution, Josephus identifies the victim, James, as the "brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah."

Supposedly, Jesus has called his other apostles "his brothers," so which James are we talking about here?

Joseph did have a son named James, who would have been about 100+ since he supposedly died in 60s AD (Jesus died at 33 and james is supposed to be older). Lifespans at that time range from a low 35 to a high 80.

So, again, are we talking about the same guy?

2.  "Testimonium Flavianum," which describes a man "who did surprising deeds" and was condemned to be crucified by Pilate."


This statement is being debated with regards to it's authenticity, but since we know Josephus wasn't alive back then, we can probably assume he either heard it from those purported people in the know or assume he's simply recounting what was written in the bible. In my opinion, quoting someone or some passage doesn't validate what's being quoted.

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 09:33:14 AM
Just a quick note to say that I've had no problems with the rest of the Internet, but I have not been able to access IGI for the past several days. Sorry -- that leaves things unsaid/undone. And I'll be off the Internet by September 10 if not before. Please -- no tears -- it's been a learning experience that I would trade for a dish of homemade strawberry ice cream.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Teaspoon Shallow on August 07, 2022, 10:41:16 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 09:33:14 AMJust a quick note to say that I've had no problems with the rest of the Internet, but I have not been able to access IGI for the past several days. Sorry -- that leaves things unsaid/undone. And I'll be off the Internet by September 10 if not before. Please -- no tears -- it's been a learning experience that I would trade for a dish of homemade strawberry ice cream.
This site would not load for me either Eyes.  

If you would like to talk about your experiences I am here to listen.  

You have been a valued member and a mod during a very challenging time.  Thank you for all you have contributed over the years mate.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM
Quote from: Teaspoon Shallow on August 07, 2022, 10:41:16 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 09:33:14 AMJust a quick note to say that I've had no problems with the rest of the Internet, but I have not been able to access IGI for the past several days. Sorry -- that leaves things unsaid/undone. And I'll be off the Internet by September 10 if not before. Please -- no tears -- it's been a learning experience that I would trade for a dish of homemade strawberry ice cream.
This site would not load for me either Eyes. 

If you would like to talk about your experiences I am here to listen.

It's called Pulmonary Fibrosis -- I guess that's a blanket term (like rheumatism) that covers many different things. In my case they have ruled out any environmental cause and things like TB, etc. It's a progressive ongoing condition that scars your lungs. There is no cure and you end up drowning in a room full of air (LOL, hopefully unconscious). As a Marine I used to be able to run 20 miles and then settled in middle age to walking 5 miles each day, but now I can't walk 20 feet without falling into severe distress.

In my case it was first misdiagnosed as my heart and even on my first visit to a pulmonary doc -- he thought it was my heart, but a scan proved otherwise. There's an expensive medicine (Ofev) that delays the symptoms in some cases, but I tried it for a year without success and the GI side effects are not exactly a thrill. I'm now on 8 liters of oxygen and trying to hold on to my independence for another month or so and hoping that perhaps my heart will give out first.

I've had a wonderful life (just the best) but I am looking forward to even better things like meeting someone (anyone) from my childhood years because back then none of my extended family or any of my friends had a heavenly hope. I certainly did not so I want to be surprised.

Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.       
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 07, 2022, 01:20:53 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM
Quote from: Teaspoon Shallow on August 07, 2022, 10:41:16 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 09:33:14 AMJust a quick note to say that I've had no problems with the rest of the Internet, but I have not been able to access IGI for the past several days. Sorry -- that leaves things unsaid/undone. And I'll be off the Internet by September 10 if not before. Please -- no tears -- it's been a learning experience that I would trade for a dish of homemade strawberry ice cream.
This site would not load for me either Eyes. 

If you would like to talk about your experiences I am here to listen.

It's called Pulmonary Fibrosis -- I guess that's a blanket term (like rheumatism) that covers many different things. In my case they have ruled out any environmental cause and things like TB, etc. It's a progressive ongoing condition that scars your lungs. There is no cure and you end up drowning in a room full of air (LOL, hopefully unconscious). As a Marine I used to be able to run 20 miles and then settled in middle age to walking 5 miles each day, but now I can't walk 20 feet without falling into severe distress.

In my case it was first misdiagnosed as my heart and even on my first visit to a pulmonary doc -- he thought it was my heart, but a scan proved otherwise. There's an expensive medicine (Ofev) that delays the symptoms in some cases, but I tried it for a year without success and the GI side effects are not exactly a thrill. I'm now on 8 liters of oxygen and trying to hold on to my independence for another month or so and hoping that perhaps my heart will give out first.

I've had a wonderful life (just the best) but I am looking forward to even better things like meeting someone (anyone) from my childhood years because back then none of my extended family or any of my friends had a heavenly hope. I certainly did not so I want to be surprised.

Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

It sounds like you've lived a full and happy life of selfless service. I don't pray but I do sincerely hope that your days be with as much joy and as little pain as can be managed. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:37:38 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 09:33:14 AMJust a quick note to say that I've had no problems with the rest of the Internet, but I have not been able to access IGI for the past several days. Sorry -- that leaves things unsaid/undone. And I'll be off the Internet by September 10 if not before. Please -- no tears -- it's been a learning experience that I would trade for a dish of homemade strawberry ice cream.

That disruption seems to have been common.

Thanks for stopping by, Eyes. I appreciate you sharing some of your last thoughts with us.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.       

True, but I will hold you in the Light.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Shnozzola on August 07, 2022, 05:09:11 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 09:33:14 AMJust a quick note to say that I've had no problems with the rest of the Internet, but I have not been able to access IGI for the past several days. Sorry -- that leaves things unsaid/undone. And I'll be off the Internet by September 10 if not before. Please -- no tears -- it's been a learning experience that I would trade for a dish of homemade strawberry ice cream.
You know what the pope said, eyes, "we pray for the hungry,  and then we feed them, that's how prayer works."  🙂

All of us are right behind you, over these next years, all wishing for more homemade strawberry ice cream  (and Memphis barbecue, and walks along the ocean) and preparing to fade away.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: maritime on August 08, 2022, 05:11:24 AM
From the town beyond the wall, Elie Wiesel -- it's been a long while, time to reread.
Quote...
   "I like surprises," Pedro said nonchalantly.
   There were tears in Michael's eyes. He had never felt as close to anyone. He would have liked to do something for him. Offer him a precious object. Suffer for him. Die for him. "Thank you, Pedro," he murmured.
   "You're welcome. There's nothing more pleasant than to surprise a little brother. If you could have seen yourself, framed in the doorway, you would have believed in the richness of existence--as I do--in the possibility of having it and sharing it. It's so simple! You see a musician in the street; you give him a thousand francs instead of ten; he'll believe in God. You see a woman weeping; smile at her tenderly, even if you don't know her; she'll believe in you. You see a forsaken old man; open your heart to him, and he'll believe in himself. You will have surprised them. Thanks to you, they will have trembled, and everything around them will vibrate. Blessed is he capable of surprising and being surprised. If I had a prayer to address to God, it would be, 'O God, surprise me. Bless me or damn me: but let thy benediction or thy punishment be a surprise.'" ...
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Teaspoon Shallow on August 08, 2022, 10:43:18 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PMIt's called Pulmonary Fibrosis -- I guess that's a blanket term (like rheumatism) that covers many different things. In my case they have ruled out any environmental cause and things like TB, etc. It's a progressive ongoing condition that scars your lungs. There is no cure and you end up drowning in a room full of air (LOL, hopefully unconscious). As a Marine I used to be able to run 20 miles and then settled in middle age to walking 5 miles each day, but now I can't walk 20 feet without falling into severe distress.

In my case it was first misdiagnosed as my heart and even on my first visit to a pulmonary doc -- he thought it was my heart, but a scan proved otherwise. There's an expensive medicine (Ofev) that delays the symptoms in some cases, but I tried it for a year without success and the GI side effects are not exactly a thrill. I'm now on 8 liters of oxygen and trying to hold on to my independence for another month or so and hoping that perhaps my heart will give out first.

I've had a wonderful life (just the best) but I am looking forward to even better things like meeting someone (anyone) from my childhood years because back then none of my extended family or any of my friends had a heavenly hope. I certainly did not so I want to be surprised.

Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     
Unfortunately I am very familiar with Pulmonary Fibrosis.  I lost my father in-law in January this year to this disease. Stoic and pragmatic, just like his daughter.  This brilliant man knew his fate but decided to live his best life until the last week and a half where he was admitted to hospital.  His last chapter was short and painless.  I knew him for 28 years and will miss him for all my days.

I am stoked you have had a full life and have the support of your family.

Every engaging story, every striking sunset, every meal shared with a loved one comes to an end. So are our days but I am glad to have shared them with awesome people. 

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:03:58 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 07, 2022, 12:17:56 AM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 11:15:01 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 06, 2022, 10:24:19 PMbulls**t, francis. really. i'm surprised at you.

QuoteMy point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not, to make a strong rational reasonable case from the facts we do and can know... that Jesus was Resurrected and thus He demonstrated Himself to be God Incarnate.

i am aware of no verifiable facts on this matter. and i am aware of no reasonable case to be made from these non-verifiable facts.

whoa!

Why are you so angry and hostile and why do you have to use profanity and why can't you be calm and reasonable and have a civil discussion without so much drama and emotional turmoil?

I've always thought you were the classiest person in this forum.

I'm not sure what you are objecting to... but I'm talking about mundane historical facts and nothing more.  I never said that the Resurrection was a proven historical fact (Although I personally believe it was) because I know that miracles is not the purview of historians.  I'm talking about non-miraculous historical facts mined by historians and what we can infer from those historical facts.

I'm expressing my opinion that the Resurrection is the most  reasonable inference from the mundane non-miraculous historical facts (gleaned by the majority of historians and biblical scholars, atheists and theists alike)

I understand that you disagree with my opinion, but to use profanity to express a difference of opinion?  Is that civil and calm and reasonable?

I have never used profanity to disagree with your opinions, no matter how much I disagree with you.

Are you ok?  This is not the classy person I know.

Maybe you're having some difficulty on the job?

I care about you

francis, i will no longer read any response from you longer than my question.

your statement ^^^above regarding "verifiable facts" and "rationale reasonable" arguments is simple bulls**t.

if not, you can explain why right here.


I'm sorry to hear that.  I really am.  I always thought you were cool and classy and intelligent.  I'm sorry you feel the way you do.  But out of my admiration and respect for you, I will do as you say and leave you alone.

Take care my friend.  God bless
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:15:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 07, 2022, 12:40:14 AM
QuoteAnd you don't even know what the case for the existence of Jesus' historicity is.

Ok, besides the bible what else is it? Present your evidence here.
QuoteSecondly, you don't understand the criteria that historians use to determine the reliability of ancient historical accounts and in determining which parts of the ancient document can be assessed as historical.

What document besides the bible? Present it here.
QuoteThe burden of proof is on anyone who doubts your mom's veracity.

You obviously didn't understand what I said.
So, again, you can take away any single piece of evidence regarding a real person's existence, say a mother's claim and there will still be hundreds of other pieces of evidence available. Like the father, siblings, birth certificate, employment records, school records, albums, I can go all day.
So, in this case, remove the bible, what else can you use as evidence for Jesus?
Like for Alexander, for whom we have many many pieces of evidence from all over the region.

Get it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Secondly, you obviously didn't understand what I said.  Putting aside the different sources as listed in the above link, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Bible is.   The bible is NOT ONE SOURCE written by one person.  That is the mistake you are making and why I gently suggested that you don't understand how historians work nor what Historiography is or how it works.  The Bible is a COLLECTION of writings from different eyewitness accounts.

You even admit this fact in your post #187.  And yet you then turn around and say: "that's essentially the same source ".  This statement of yours shows just how myopic and uncomprehending you are about the historical method and the role of historians.  You appear to be a nice fellow, but your extreme bias has put blinders on you.

You even also admitted that it was good start when you were given another source for the historicity of Jesus by JST.  Did that persuade you?  No, even though these independent sources persuades historians to the point that they consider Jesus deniers are on the same level as fringe movements like the holocaust deniers and conspiracy nuts.

This again shows how your extreme bias puts blinders on you.

But even so, I consider you a friend.

Hope you and your family are well.

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 08, 2022, 05:40:18 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:03:58 PMI'm sorry to hear that.  I really am.  I always thought you were cool and classy and intelligent.  I'm sorry you feel the way you do.  But out of my admiration and respect for you, I will do as you say and leave you alone.

Take care my friend.  God bless


no, francis. ive never asked you to leave me alone.

i frequently ask you to be more concise, to address questions you are hiding from, and to satisfy the various burdens of proof that you like to avoid.

i am perfectly happy to continue this conversation. butr i don't have time to play word games or engage in rhetoric duels.

speak clearly, make your point, and don't dissemble. i will do the same. i am willing to continue on that basis. if you are not, our future conversations will all be very short.

you can change this relationship by responding to post 181. you made a positive statement that has obligated you to a burden of proof. i am still waiting for you to satisfy that obligation.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

True, but I will hold you in the Light.

I know you mean well and that you are genuinely sincere in your concern for Eyes... and I don't want to diminish that.

But a word of caution: Satan can and does disguise himself as an angel of light.  So in order that we don't deceive ourselves and others, we would/should always want to be sure we know what "light" you are using and pointing to before we hold anyone up to it.

But I know you know this and I know you are an honest and a morally good person.

Hope you and your family are well.

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

True, but I will hold you in the Light.

I know you mean well and that you are genuinely sincere in your concern for Eyes... and I don't want to diminish that.

But a word of caution: Satan can and does disguise himself as an angel of light.  So in order that we don't deceive ourselves and others, we would/should always want to be sure we know what "light" you are using and pointing to before we hold anyone up to it.

But I know you know this and I know you are an honest and a morally good person.

Hope you and your family are well.

Keep your satanic bulls**t to yourself, Francis.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 09:32:17 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 08, 2022, 05:40:18 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:03:58 PMI'm sorry to hear that.  I really am.  I always thought you were cool and classy and intelligent.  I'm sorry you feel the way you do.  But out of my admiration and respect for you, I will do as you say and leave you alone.

Take care my friend.  God bless


no, francis. ive never asked you to leave me alone.

i frequently ask you to be more concise, to address questions you are hiding from, and to satisfy the various burdens of proof that you like to avoid.

i am perfectly happy to continue this conversation. butr i don't have time to play word games or engage in rhetoric duels.

speak clearly, make your point, and don't dissemble. i will do the same. i am willing to continue on that basis. if you are not, our future conversations will all be very short.

you can change this relationship by responding to post 181. you made a positive statement that has obligated you to a burden of proof. i am still waiting for you to satisfy that obligation.

Post #s are outtasync again. I think this is what Kevin is referring to
https://isgodimaginary.com/forum/index.php/topic,66272.msg928156.html#msg928156
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 08, 2022, 09:56:18 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

True, but I will hold you in the Light.

I know you mean well and that you are genuinely sincere in your concern for Eyes... and I don't want to diminish that.

But a word of caution: Satan can and does disguise himself as an angel of light.  So in order that we don't deceive ourselves and others, we would/should always want to be sure we know what "light" you are using and pointing to before we hold anyone up to it.

But I know you know this and I know you are an honest and a morally good person.

Hope you and your family are well.

Keep your satanic bulls**t to yourself, Francis.

Take care my friend.  I hope you and your family are healthy and doing well.  God Bless
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 10:35:27 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 09:56:18 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

True, but I will hold you in the Light.
••••
But a word of caution: Satan can and does disguise himself as an angel of light.  So in order that we don't deceive ourselves and others, we would/should always want to be sure we know what "light" you are using and pointing to before we hold anyone up to it.
••••

Keep your satanic bulls**t to yourself, Francis.

Take care my friend.  I hope you and your family are healthy and doing well.  God Bless

Francis, I have tried to be tolerant of the sanctimonious arrogance evident in some of your posts. You have succeeded in prompting me to tell you where the devil lies.

Once upon a time Saul was walking to Damascus to attend some business when Satan appeared to him in a great light. Saul became Paul and led the community of Jesus followers away from the message of Jesus and toward the message of Satan.

On the Mountain Jesus declined earthly power, wealth, prestige. Look around at the "Christian" community. The followers of Paul have accepted the devil's bargain.

Paul never spoke for Jesus. Paul spoke for Satan, doing the devil's work because Jesus refused.

And you, a follower and promoter of Paul's deviltry, infer that the Light I have seen may have the same source as Saul's demon vision.

No Francis, you are still seeing through a glass darkly, through the smoky miasma of Saul's hallucination.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
QuoteThe bible is NOT ONE SOURCE written by one person.  That is the mistake you are making and why I gently suggested that you don't understand how historians work nor what Historiography is or how it works.  The Bible is a COLLECTION of writings from different eyewitness accounts.

Aren't all those ''different eyewitnesses" his followers or part of that same small group of people?

QuoteYou even also admitted that it was good start when you were given another source for the historicity of Jesus by JST.  Did that persuade you? No.

And I explained why I didn't find it convincing.

Quote even though these independent sources persuades historians

Oh, so you're appealing to authority now? So, if I find another historian that disagrees, what then?


So, those 2 pieces of documentary evidence are not enough to put Jesus on the same historical footing as Alexander.

Maybe King Arthur, Loch Ness Monster, Atlantis.

Which is not to say those things are fake. Look what happened to Troy, which was first mentioned in a story but was later found. So, the same thing could very well happen.
 

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 08, 2022, 11:41:27 PM
post 181




Quote from: kevin on August 06, 2022, 10:24:19 PMbulls**t, francis. really. i'm surprised at you.

QuoteMy point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not, to make a strong rational reasonable case from the facts we do and can know... that Jesus was Resurrected and thus He demonstrated Himself to be God Incarnate.

i am aware of no verifiable facts on this matter. and i am aware of no reasonable case to be made from these non-verifiable facts.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:49:09 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 10:35:27 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 09:56:18 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

True, but I will hold you in the Light.
••••
But a word of caution: Satan can and does disguise himself as an angel of light.  So in order that we don't deceive ourselves and others, we would/should always want to be sure we know what "light" you are using and pointing to before we hold anyone up to it.
••••

Keep your satanic bulls**t to yourself, Francis.

Take care my friend.  I hope you and your family are healthy and doing well.  God Bless

Francis, I have tried to be tolerant of the sanctimonious arrogance evident in some of your posts. You have succeeded in prompting me to tell you where the devil lies.

Once upon a time Saul was walking to Damascus to attend some business when Satan appeared to him in a great light. Saul became Paul and led the community of Jesus followers away from the message of Jesus and toward the message of Satan.

On the Mountain Jesus declined earthly power, wealth, prestige. Look around at the "Christian" community. The followers of Paul have accepted the devil's bargain.

Paul never spoke for Jesus. Paul spoke for Satan, doing the devil's work because Jesus refused.

And you, a follower and promoter of Paul's deviltry, infer that the Light I have seen may have the same source as Saul's demon vision.

No Francis, you are still seeing through a glass darkly, through the smoky miasma of Saul's hallucination.

This is what I've been wondering about...

Because I've also read that Paul fundamentally changed christianity to what we see today and Islam pretty much says the same thing - that the bible was corrupted over time.

Anyway, when it comes to Saul or Paul, it could be theorized that this is simply a guy who saw an opportunity and grabbed it. Much like those televangelists or cult leaders we see today.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on August 08, 2022, 11:58:02 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM
Quote from: Teaspoon Shallow on August 07, 2022, 10:41:16 AM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 09:33:14 AMJust a quick note to say that I've had no problems with the rest of the Internet, but I have not been able to access IGI for the past several days. Sorry -- that leaves things unsaid/undone. And I'll be off the Internet by September 10 if not before. Please -- no tears -- it's been a learning experience that I would trade for a dish of homemade strawberry ice cream.
This site would not load for me either Eyes. 

If you would like to talk about your experiences I am here to listen.

It's called Pulmonary Fibrosis -- I guess that's a blanket term (like rheumatism) that covers many different things. In my case they have ruled out any environmental cause and things like TB, etc. It's a progressive ongoing condition that scars your lungs. There is no cure and you end up drowning in a room full of air (LOL, hopefully unconscious). As a Marine I used to be able to run 20 miles and then settled in middle age to walking 5 miles each day, but now I can't walk 20 feet without falling into severe distress.

In my case it was first misdiagnosed as my heart and even on my first visit to a pulmonary doc -- he thought it was my heart, but a scan proved otherwise. There's an expensive medicine (Ofev) that delays the symptoms in some cases, but I tried it for a year without success and the GI side effects are not exactly a thrill. I'm now on 8 liters of oxygen and trying to hold on to my independence for another month or so and hoping that perhaps my heart will give out first.

I've had a wonderful life (just the best) but I am looking forward to even better things like meeting someone (anyone) from my childhood years because back then none of my extended family or any of my friends had a heavenly hope. I certainly did not so I want to be surprised.

Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     
I am really saddened to hear this.  May God's Spirit bring you and your loved one's comfort and courage as you prepare for the future.  I will keep you in my prayers.  Thank you for informing us. 
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 12:15:29 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:49:09 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 10:35:27 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 09:56:18 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

True, but I will hold you in the Light.
••••
But a word of caution: Satan can and does disguise himself as an angel of light.  So in order that we don't deceive ourselves and others, we would/should always want to be sure we know what "light" you are using and pointing to before we hold anyone up to it.
••••

Keep your satanic bulls**t to yourself, Francis.

Take care my friend.  I hope you and your family are healthy and doing well.  God Bless

Francis, I have tried to be tolerant of the sanctimonious arrogance evident in some of your posts. You have succeeded in prompting me to tell you where the devil lies.

Once upon a time Saul was walking to Damascus to attend some business when Satan appeared to him in a great light. Saul became Paul and led the community of Jesus followers away from the message of Jesus and toward the message of Satan.

On the Mountain Jesus declined earthly power, wealth, prestige. Look around at the "Christian" community. The followers of Paul have accepted the devil's bargain.

Paul never spoke for Jesus. Paul spoke for Satan, doing the devil's work because Jesus refused.

And you, a follower and promoter of Paul's deviltry, infer that the Light I have seen may have the same source as Saul's demon vision.

No Francis, you are still seeing through a glass darkly, through the smoky miasma of Saul's hallucination.

This is what I've been wondering about...

Because I've also read that Paul fundamentally changed christianity to what we see today and Islam pretty much says the same thing - that the bible was corrupted over time.

Anyway, when it comes to Saul or Paul, it could be theorized that this is simply a guy who saw an opportunity and grabbed it. Much like those televangelists or cult leaders we see today.

Yup. Like I said, the devil got him. Them too. Got them all.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on August 09, 2022, 12:17:10 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 10:35:27 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 09:56:18 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

True, but I will hold you in the Light.
••••
But a word of caution: Satan can and does disguise himself as an angel of light.  So in order that we don't deceive ourselves and others, we would/should always want to be sure we know what "light" you are using and pointing to before we hold anyone up to it.
••••

Keep your satanic bulls**t to yourself, Francis.

Take care my friend.  I hope you and your family are healthy and doing well.  God Bless

Francis, I have tried to be tolerant of the sanctimonious arrogance evident in some of your posts. You have succeeded in prompting me to tell you where the devil lies.

Once upon a time Saul was walking to Damascus to attend some business when Satan appeared to him in a great light. Saul became Paul and led the community of Jesus followers away from the message of Jesus and toward the message of Satan.

On the Mountain Jesus declined earthly power, wealth, prestige. Look around at the "Christian" community. The followers of Paul have accepted the devil's bargain.

Paul never spoke for Jesus. Paul spoke for Satan, doing the devil's work because Jesus refused.

And you, a follower and promoter of Paul's deviltry, infer that the Light I have seen may have the same source as Saul's demon vision.

No Francis, you are still seeing through a glass darkly, through the smoky miasma of Saul's hallucination.
Seeking those things is not following Paul. 

"To be sure, there is great gain in godly devotion along with contentment. [color=var(--du-color--blue-500,#4a6da7)]7 For we have brought nothing into the world, and neither can we carry anything out. [color=var(--du-color--blue-500,#4a6da7)]8 So, having food and clothing, we will be content with these things.[/font][/font][/size][/color][/font][/size][/color]
[color=var(--du-color--blue-500,#4a6da7)]9 But those who are determined to be rich fall into temptation and a snare and many senseless and harmful desires that plunge men into destruction and ruin. [color=var(--du-color--blue-500,#4a6da7)]10 For the love of money is a root of all sorts of injurious things, and by reaching out for this love some have been led astray from the faith and have stabbed themselves all over with many pains. [/font][/font][/size][/color][/font][/size][/color][color=var(--du-color--blue-500,#4a6da7)]11 However, you, O man of God, flee from these things." [/size][/color][/font](1 Tim 6:6-11)
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on August 09, 2022, 12:18:52 AM
I did none of that^^.  It was just a copy/paste.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 12:27:38 AM
Oh no, jst. Not you too. I thought you are a Jesus follower.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 09, 2022, 01:49:42 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 12:15:29 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:49:09 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 10:35:27 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 09:56:18 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 08, 2022, 09:07:40 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 08, 2022, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 07, 2022, 04:42:56 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 07, 2022, 01:07:47 PM••••
Don't get out your checkbook -- I lack for nothing except for maybe for prayers and those are hard to find around here.     

True, but I will hold you in the Light.
••••
But a word of caution: Satan can and does disguise himself as an angel of light.  So in order that we don't deceive ourselves and others, we would/should always want to be sure we know what "light" you are using and pointing to before we hold anyone up to it.
••••

Keep your satanic bulls**t to yourself, Francis.

Take care my friend.  I hope you and your family are healthy and doing well.  God Bless

Francis, I have tried to be tolerant of the sanctimonious arrogance evident in some of your posts. You have succeeded in prompting me to tell you where the devil lies.

Once upon a time Saul was walking to Damascus to attend some business when Satan appeared to him in a great light. Saul became Paul and led the community of Jesus followers away from the message of Jesus and toward the message of Satan.

On the Mountain Jesus declined earthly power, wealth, prestige. Look around at the "Christian" community. The followers of Paul have accepted the devil's bargain.

Paul never spoke for Jesus. Paul spoke for Satan, doing the devil's work because Jesus refused.

And you, a follower and promoter of Paul's deviltry, infer that the Light I have seen may have the same source as Saul's demon vision.

No Francis, you are still seeing through a glass darkly, through the smoky miasma of Saul's hallucination.

This is what I've been wondering about...

Because I've also read that Paul fundamentally changed christianity to what we see today and Islam pretty much says the same thing - that the bible was corrupted over time.

Anyway, when it comes to Saul or Paul, it could be theorized that this is simply a guy who saw an opportunity and grabbed it. Much like those televangelists or cult leaders we see today.

Yup. Like I said, the devil got him. Them too. Got them all.

Devil = drugs? 

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4392361&page=1

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 02:14:03 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 09, 2022, 01:49:42 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 12:15:29 AM••••

Devil = drugs?

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4392361&page=1



Drugs are absolutely one of the devils' tools, among others. Nefarious and multifarious are the ways of the Prince of Darkness.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 09, 2022, 02:22:29 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 02:14:03 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 09, 2022, 01:49:42 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 12:15:29 AM••••

Devil = drugs?

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4392361&page=1



Drugs are absolutely one of the devils' tools, among others. Nefarious and multifarious are the ways of the Prince of Darkness.

Not sure if devils/angels/gods would have been able to "reach" those dudes had they been sober...or in perfect health.

Severe dehydration/starvation/food poisoning can cause the same hallucinations...add drugs on top of all that and boom talking bushes.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Jstwebbrowsing on August 09, 2022, 04:02:36 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 12:27:38 AMOh no, jst. Not you too. I thought you are a Jesus follower.
I am.  But I don't see where Paul is not in agreement with Christ.

"Therefore, I appeal to you by the compassions of God, brothers, to present your bodies+ as a living sacrifice, holy+ and acceptable to God,+ a sacred service with your power of reason.+ [color=var(--du-color--blue-500,#4a6da7)]And stop being molded by this system of things,+ but be transformed by making your mind over,+ so that you may prove to yourselves+ the good and acceptable and perfect will of God." (Ro 12:1,2)[/font][/size][/color]

It is my understanding that Paul is saying to not be molded by the things you mentioned, earthly power, wealth, prestige, etc.  From birth we are programmed to seek these things, at least in this "Christian" country, but I don't see how Paul is to blame.   He taught against those things.  
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 04:56:58 AM
Quote from: Jstwebbrowsing on August 09, 2022, 04:02:36 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 09, 2022, 12:27:38 AMOh no, jst. Not you too. I thought you are a Jesus follower.
I am.  But I don't see where Paul is not in agreement with Christ.

"Therefore, I appeal to you by the compassions of God, brothers, to present your bodies+ as a living sacrifice, holy+ and acceptable to God,+ a sacred service with your power of reason.+ [color=var(--du-color--blue-500,#4a6da7)]2 And stop being molded by this system of things,+ but be transformed by making your mind over,+ so that you may prove to yourselves+ the good and acceptable and perfect will of God." (Ro 12:1,2)[/font][/size][/color]

It is my understanding that Paul is saying to not be molded by the things you mentioned, earthly power, wealth, prestige, etc.  From birth we are programmed to seek these things, at least in this "Christian" country, but I don't see how Paul is to blame.   He taught against those things. 

Paul apparently picked up some stuff from the people who knew Jesus or who knew people who knew Jesus, but a lot of what Paul preached was not preached by Jesus. Including your citation.

Jesus never spoke of "the good and acceptable and perfect will of God." Those are Paul's teachings, Paul's categories, not Jesus. Paul invents things, then builds sandcastles on them. Paul took Jesus' simple message and theologized it, adding his stuff where Jesus left blanks.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 09, 2022, 05:55:01 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
QuoteThe bible is NOT ONE SOURCE written by one person.  That is the mistake you are making and why I gently suggested that you don't understand how historians work nor what Historiography is or how it works.  The Bible is a COLLECTION of writings from different eyewitness accounts.

Aren't all those ''different eyewitnesses" his followers or part of that same small group of people?

QuoteYou even also admitted that it was good start when you were given another source for the historicity of Jesus by JST.  Did that persuade you? No.

And I explained why I didn't find it convincing.


Quoteeven though these independent sources persuades historians

Oh, so you're appealing to authority now? So, if I find another historian that disagrees, what then?


So, those 2 pieces of documentary evidence are not enough to put Jesus on the same historical footing as Alexander.

Maybe King Arthur, Loch Ness Monster, Atlantis.

Which is not to say those things are fake. Look what happened to Troy, which was first mentioned in a story but was later found. So, the same thing could very well happen.
 



Hello 8livesleft,



Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
QuoteThe bible is NOT ONE SOURCE written by one person.  That is the mistake you are making and why I gently suggested that you don't understand how historians work nor what Historiography is or how it works.  The Bible is a COLLECTION of writings from different eyewitness accounts.

Aren't all those ''different eyewitnesses" his followers or part of that same small group of people?

Isn't that an ad hominem or a genetic fallacy?  Aren't we supposed to judge an eyewitness account on it's own merits only?  What do you think detectives and lawyers do about a crime scene that was witnessed by a family... or a crime scene witnessed by atheists at an atheist conference or small atheist club? 

Isn't it true that multiple eyewitness accounts... even if they happen to be in the same family or a part of a small public venue... gives us more eyeballs and angles and perspectives and locations as checks and balances and by which to work with and get a more robust and multi-layered story/timeline about a crime scene or event,  than if we just relied on ONE eyewitness?

Of course it does.   It would be a horrible state of affairs if we had only ONE eyewitness!!

The fact is, Not all eyeballs and eyewitnesses see the EXACT same thing... especially if what you are trying to learn is about a person or an event covering a few years, and not just about one isolated event.  It's that divergency and different perspectives and recollections and memory which is so valuable to detectives and historians to help us paint an accurate picture.



Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
QuoteYou even also admitted that it was good start when you were given another source for the historicity of Jesus by JST.  Did that persuade you? No.

And I explained why I didn't find it convincing.

And you are not a historian, which is evident when we look at your objections, which in themselves are unconvincing.

The fact that the overwhelming majority of bona fide historians... real genuine historians... atheists and theists and agnostics... have cited the multiple layers of evidence which has persuaded them that Jesus was a real person and gives us a brief outline of his life... is more convincing to me than a non-historian like you... especially in light of your unconvincing objections.

8livesleft, just look at your comment about "brothers"!   Oh my... even today, I will call friends "brother" in  greeting.  And many bikers and members in other clubs and sports stars...  will often call each other "brother" even though they are not biological brothers.

In the same way, "brothers" was how they addressed followers of Christ among themselves at that time.  Even today, we hear people saying "you are my brother in Christ".

Do you think that when Jesus calls himself a "door", he literally meant he was a genuine wood "door"???

Brother is how I view Eyes and JST and Maritime, and MeAgain and others.  We are brothers and sisters in Christ.

Anyway... it's cool.  You and I just have a difference of opinion.


Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
Quoteeven though these independent sources persuades historians

Oh, so you're appealing to authority now? So, if I find another historian that disagrees, what then?

I would gently suggest that you don't know what the fallacy of "appealing to authority" means.

The fallacy is when the appeal is being made to an irrelevant authority and/or to an authority outside of the authority's special field of expertise.  It is not fallacious when the appeal is to a relevant and expert authority in the field we are talking about... which is historians.

Anyway... it's cool. 


Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PMSo, those 2 pieces of documentary evidence are not enough to put Jesus on the same historical footing as Alexander.

Maybe King Arthur, Loch Ness Monster, Atlantis.

Which is not to say those things are fake. Look what happened to Troy, which was first mentioned in a story but was later found. So, the same thing could very well happen.

I still don't know what that sentence means.

If you honestly don't think Jesus was a real person, then you are on the same fringe level as the holocaust deniers and flat earthers and conspiracy theorists and you are like the fringe people who think the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot  and UFO's are real... and so you can't really be taken seriously on this subject.

But you obviously think Jesus was a real person.  Otherwise, how can you have a conversation with others in here about whether or not Paul fundamentally changed Christianity and was simply a guy who saw an opportunity and grabbed it... if NO Jesus existed?  What would he be changing and what opportunity would there be for  him to "grab" if there was no Jesus?

Anyway... it's cool.   


Take care my brother and friend.  Maybe one day we will be able to play with some magic tricks together.

God Bless
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 10, 2022, 12:58:12 AM
QuoteIsn't that an ad hominem or a genetic fallacy?  Aren't we supposed to judge an eyewitness account on it's own merits only?  What do you think detectives and lawyers do about a crime scene that was witnessed by a family... or a crime scene witnessed by atheists at an atheist conference or small atheist club?


And I'm sure the Royal Society of Bigfoot Believers would be an excellent resource of "independent witnesses" for the existence of the sasquatch?

Quote 8livesleft, just look at your comment about "brothers"!   Oh my... even today, I will call friends "brother" in  greeting.  And many bikers and members in other clubs and sports stars...  will often call each other "brother" even though they are not biological brothers.
QuoteIn the same way, "brothers" was how they addressed followers of Christ among themselves at that time.  Even today, we hear people saying "you are my brother in Christ".


Ok, so where's the evidence then that the "James" being spoken of was the actual blood brother of Jesus? Do mere words make it true in your opinion?

Quote I would gently suggest that you don't know what the fallacy of "appealing to authority" means.
QuoteThe fallacy is when the appeal is being made to an irrelevant authority and/or to an authority outside of the authority's special field of expertise.  It is not fallacious when the appeal is to a relevant and expert authority in the field we are talking about... which is historians.


That's not what this said right on the top of a simple google search:

" When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by someone who said to be an "authority" on the subject."

Which is precisely what you keep doing by repeatedly citing historians in this context.

QuoteI still don't know what that sentence means.

Those 2 sources: bible witness accounts and Josephus are few and arguably weak compared to the many independent regional accounts of Alexander.

Alexander's soldiers and generals have also mentioned/written about him, which is equivalent to your witness accounts.

So, even if you remove all of Alexander's soldiers/generals/close friends from the records, there will still be many other sources with far more detail  available.

Quote But you obviously think Jesus was a real person.  Otherwise, how can you have a conversation with others in here about whether or not Paul fundamentally changed Christianity and was simply a guy who saw an opportunity and grabbed it... if NO Jesus existed?


Not necessarily.

Paul could be a real person who may not be telling the truth or may not have known what he was looking at when he claimed to have seen Jesus.

Quote What would he be changing and what opportunity would there be for  him to "grab" if there was no Jesus?


He would be grabbing the opportunity to take control of a very real small/fringe church movement.

OR

This could all very well be a fabrication by the roman empire.

The question is, without Rome's support, would there be Christianity?
 

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: none on August 10, 2022, 01:10:56 AM
I duuno, maybe HEyzooz err Jesus... um maybe they did have a trial and he leaned over to his attorney and said "psst.. it was him" and got away with it. not crucified and changed his name to John... his other brother.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 10, 2022, 01:33:28 PM
The following posts are in response to 8livesleft post #221. I broke my response up into multiple posts to make it more manageable and readable.


Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 09, 2022, 05:55:01 PMIsn't that an ad hominem or a genetic fallacy?  Aren't we supposed to judge an eyewitness account on it's own merits only?  What do you think detectives and lawyers do about a crime scene that was witnessed by a family... or a crime scene witnessed by atheists at an atheist conference or small atheist club?

And I'm sure the Royal Society of Bigfoot Believers would be an excellent resource of "independent witnesses" for the existence of the sasquatch?

Red herring and strawman fallacy.

We're not talking about the existence of big foot or flying saucers or leprechauns or fairies or Santa Claus, etc.   

We are talking about whether human beings (be they Bigfoot Believers or not) can serve as credible eyewitnesses as to whether they saw a person or not, etc... whether it be at a crime scene... or at an event... or at an atheist conference... or on the street... or in the neighborhood... and whether they had contact or interaction with said person in question... etc etc etc etc etc etc.

This is how detectives and historians and courtrooms work and how they do their jobs.  Especially cold case detectives and ancient historian scholars... if all they have to work with are documents and reports and accounts, etc.

In such cases... are you suggesting that the testimony of you and your family... and that of a group of atheists at a conference... are on the same level and par as eye witness testimony as a group of people who claim to have seen Bigfoot and UFO's and the Loch Ness monster?

That's the level of your reliable testimony and that of atheists, etc?

Can you see that?

Detectives and professional historians and courtrooms and judges, etc, know how to do their job.  Trust me, you are untrained as a historian and detective and judge and philosopher and scientist, etc, and so you can't do better and are not smarter than the best detectives and best historians, etc, in the world.

That doesn't mean they are right and your wrong... only that common sense and reasonable thinkers are going to listen to the general consensus of expert opinions, more than they will listen to you in areas that the experts have demonstrated a depth of knowledge and study far surpassing yours... and thus their opinions are more likely to be true than yours...  and where you are not an expert or have training in and don't have the same level of understanding as the majority of historians on the relevant topic.

I like you 8livesleft, but it seems that like other discussions we've had, all we are doing is going around in circles and accomplishing nothing beneficial. You appear to be a nice fellow, but I will let you have the last word on this.  You can say what you want about me and I won't defend myself.


Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 09, 2022, 05:55:01 PM8livesleft, just look at your comment about "brothers"!   Oh my... even today, I will call friends "brother" in  greeting.  And many bikers and members in other clubs and sports stars...  will often call each other "brother" even though they are not biological brothers.
....
In the same way, "brothers" was how they addressed followers of Christ among themselves at that time.  Even today, we hear people saying "you are my brother in Christ".

Ok, so where's the evidence then that the "James" being spoken of was the actual blood brother of Jesus? Do mere words make it true in your opinion?

My point is that at the very least, James was a sibling of Jesus (having the same biological mother) and thus the term "brother" was a familial term (in connection with James), and not just a figure of speech or some kind of spiritual greeting common among Christians like it was back then and as it is today... or even an affectionate greeting seen today among bikers and sports stars and common people, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James,_brother_of_Jesus
https://www.cnn.com/2015/03/11/living/jesus-brother-james
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-James-the-Lords-brother
https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780195393361/obo-9780195393361-0242.xml

Why is it that you couldn't go to your keyboard and do some research before you ask such simple questions like this?  You supposedly did it for the topic of "appeal to authority" (even though you didn't bother to read your own citation as I will show you below). 

But at least you appear to have made some kind of attempt with "appeal to authority" (although ultimately unsuccessful)... So why didn't you do the same for the topic of whether James was the name of one of Jesus' brother?

This will be my last post with you on this topic. I will let you have the last word on this and I won't defend myself against anything you may want to say about me in response.

END OF PART ONE.  PART TWO FOLLOWS.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 14, 2022, 02:15:11 AM
PART TWO OF MY RESPONSE TO POST #221 FROM  8LIVESLEFT.


Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 09, 2022, 05:55:01 PMI would gently suggest that you don't know what the fallacy of "appealing to authority" means.
...
The fallacy is when the appeal is being made to an irrelevant authority and/or to an authority outside of the authority's special field of expertise.  It is not fallacious when the appeal is to a relevant and expert authority in the field we are talking about... which is historians.

That's not what this said right on the top of a simple google search:

" When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by someone who said to be an "authority" on the subject."

Which is precisely what you keep doing by repeatedly citing historians in this context.

???? Why didn't you read the REST of that citation of yours???

https://www.softschools.com/examples/fallacies/appeal_to_authority_examples/430/#:~:text=Appeal%20to%20authority%20is%20a,%22authority%22%20on%20the%20subject.

Your own citation continued and said: "Instead of presenting actual evidence, the argument just relies on the credibility of the "authority".

But that is NOT what I did.  I gave you the evidence that the qualified historians used to come to their collective and universal conclusion that shows that Jesus did exist and that to deny the historicity of Jesus like you do, is a fringe theory on par with the holocaust deniers, etc.

This shows me that you either don't read what I write, or didn't understand.  It also appears that you don't do any research or your homework when you didn't even read the entirety of your own citation.


SO... let's go over the facts, shall we?  The following are citations (with quotes) that shows me that you don't really know what an appeal to authority fallacy is... nor do you appear to know when an appeal to authority is ok and legitimate to use... nor did you correctly characterize my use of authorities, by leaving out the fact that I supplied the evidence ALONG WITH the authorities... and therefore  I was never guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam.

..............

I highlighted the relevant material by making them bold and/or underlined them.  If there is any confusion, I gave the citation so you can check for yourself.


1)....

https://testmaxprep.com/blog/lsat/lsat-prep-concept-logical-fallacies-appeal-to-authority
QuoteThe appeal to authority flaw occurs when someone calls upon an expert or heeds an experts advice to validate an argument or position. Though it could be valid to call upon an expert, it is not so when the mere status of the person is the only thing called upon, and their authority is irrelevant to the point at issue.

NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: I never called upon the mere status of the person/authority/expert/historian... instead, I gave you the evidence as well.  And thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam



2)...

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority
Quoteappeal to authority
You said that because an authority thinks something, it must therefore be true.
It's important to note that this fallacy should not be used to dismiss the claims of experts, or scientific consensus. Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence. However, it is entirely possible that the opinion of a person or institution of authority is wrong; therefore the authority that such a person or institution holds does not have any intrinsic bearing upon whether their claims are true or not.

NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: I never claimed that the opinion and historical consensus among expert historians have any intrinsic bearing on what is true or not... and so that is why I gave you the evidence as well. And thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam 





3)...

https://iep.utm.edu/fallacy/#AppealtoAuthority

QuoteYou appeal to authority if you back up your reasoning by saying that it is supported by what some authority says on the subject. Most reasoning of this kind is not fallacious, and much of our knowledge properly comes from listening to authorities. However, appealing to authority as a reason to believe something is fallacious whenever the authority appealed to is not really an authority in this particular subject, when the authority cannot be trusted to tell the truth, when authorities disagree on this subject (except for the occasional lone wolf), when the reasoner misquotes the authority, and so forth. Although spotting a fallacious appeal to authority often requires some background knowledge about the subject or the authority, in brief it can be said that it is fallacious to accept the words of a supposed authority when we should be suspicious of the authority's words.

NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: The sources I gave used legit authorities... you can't or haven't demonstrated that the authorities cannot be trusted to tell the truth (Indeed, even among atheist historians the overwhelming consensus is that Jesus was a real person)... I never misquoted anyone... I never just relied on their words... but instead, I gave you the evidence as well. And thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam




4)...


https://www.fallacyfiles.org/authorit.html
QuoteTo sum up these points in a positive manner, before relying upon expert opinion, go through the following checklist:

1. Is this a matter upon which expert opinion is available? If not, then your opinion will be as good as anyone else's. If so, proceed to the next question:

2. Is the authority an expert on the matter? If not, then why listen? If so, go on:

3. Is the authority biased towards one side? If so, the authority may be untrustworthy. At the very least, before accepting the authority's word seek a second, unbiased opinion. That is, go to the last question:

4. Is the authority's opinion representative of expert opinion? If not, then find out what the expert consensus is and rely on that. If so, then you may rationally rely upon the authority's opinion.

5. If an argument to authority cannot pass these five tests, then it commits the fallacy of misleading appeal to authority.


NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: I followed the above checklist. The near universal agreement and acknowlegment among legitimate  historians... whether they are atheist or theist or agnostic... is that Jesus was a real historical person... and they passed the above checklist. I gave you the evidence as well. And thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam nor did I commit the fallacy of misleading appeal to authority.





5)...



https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
QuoteAn argument from authority refers to two kinds of arguments:

1. A non-fallacious argument from authority grounds a claim in the beliefs of one or more authoritative source(s), whose opinions are likely to be true on the relevant issue. Notably, insofar as the authorities in question are, indeed, experts on the issue in question, their opinion provides strong inductive support for the conclusion: It makes the conclusion likely to be true, not necessarily true. As such, an argument from authority can only strongly suggest what is true — not prove it.

2. A logically fallacious argument from authority grounds a claim in the beliefs of a source that is not authoritative. Sources could be non-authoritative because of their disagreement with consensus on the issue, their non-expertise in the relevant issue, or a number of other issues.

Correct uses of argument from authority involve deferred justification: Insofar as your claim accords with what experts on the issue believes, then your claim is also supported by the evidence the experts are relying on, even if you may not yourself be aware of what that evidence in fact is.

In order to be fallacious, the argument must appeal to and treat as authoritative people who lack relevant qualifications or whose qualification is in an irrelevant field or a field that is irrelevant to the argument at hand. For example, saying "There is no God, because Stephen Hawking said so and is a knowledgeable physicist." is a fallacious appeal to authority as Hawking's qualifications in physics do not automatically make him an authority on whether God exists. However, accusations of a false appeal to authority, or dismissing an argument because of someone's lack of relevant qualifications or expertise, runs the risk of encountering the pitfall of the Courtier's Reply. This is the counterfallacy to a misapplied appeal to authority: that the lack of an official and relevant qualification doesn't automatically undercut the argument.


NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: I used a non-fallacious argument from authority and used the argument from authority correctly by using expert historians who are qualified in the relevant field and also by giving you the evidence the experts are relying on. And thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam nor did commit the fallacy of misleading appeal to authority. 




6)...



https://www.logical-fallacy.com/articles/appeal-to-authority/
QuoteLegitimate Reference to Authority
The reference to this opinion is reasonable and person without deep knowlege on the topic should respect that opinion when most of the experts in the field have an agreed consensus on the matter.

If another expert disagrees with such opinion he would be probably wrong, If non-expert disagrees then he would be certainly wrong. We should take into account that scientific knowlege is evolving and improving.

Another aspect - it's best to trust not the opinions but the facts. A bright person is distinguished not by what he believes, but how and why he believes it. His faith is built on experience and therefore not dogmatic; it is based on evidence, not authority or intuition.


NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: There is a legitimate reference to authority and my use of authorities was legitimate because I used qualified  historians... whether they were atheist or theist or agnostic... who had deep knowledge on the topic and I gave you the evidence.  And thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam or of fallaciously using an appeal/reference to authority.



7)...


https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Appeal-to-Authority

QuoteAppeal to Authority
argumentum ad verecundiam

(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)

Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, [/b]without any other supporting evidence offered[/b]. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Logical Form:

According to person 1, who is an expert on the issue of Y, Y is true.

Therefore, Y is true.


NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: I never insisted a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true. Instead, I gave you the evidence.  And thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam




8)...


https://psychology.fandom.com/wiki/Appeal_to_authority
QuoteAn appeal to authority is a type of argument in logic also known as argument from authority, argumentum ad verecundiam (Latin: argument to respect) or ipse dixit (Latin: he himself said it, where an unsupported assertion depends on the asserter's credibility). It is one method of obtaining propositional knowledge and is a logical fallacy because its method of inference is not rock-solid. On the other hand, there is no fallacy involved in simply arguing that the assertion of the authority is likely to be true.


NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: Not only is there is no fallacy involved in simply arguing that the assertion of the authority is likely to be true... as I've been arguing all along... but I also gave the evidence that supports the near universal acknowledgement and conclusion among credible qualified historians... whether they are atheist or theist or agnostic... that Jesus was a real historical person... and so I committed no fallacy and I'm certainly not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam



9)...


http://ds-wordpress.haverford.edu/psych2015/projects/chapter/expert-opinionappeal-to-authority/
Quoteit is important to understand that not all appeals to authority are fallacious; if the authority that is appealed to is an expert in the subject field that is being argued, they can be trusted. Since so much of our information comes from experts, it is impossible to never believe one. Nevertheless, it is important to also remember that figures of authority are not perfect, and therefore may even be wrong within their field of expertise. But, for the most part, they can be trusted with information that is within their field of expertise.



NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: Not all appeals to authority are fallacious, but at the same time, figures of authority are not perfect... and  that is why I didn't simply rely on their conclusions only, but I also provided the evidence, and thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam



10)...



https://fallacyinlogic.com/appeal-to-authority-fallacy/
QuoteThe appeal to authority fallacy, also known as argument from authority, is a type of logical fallacy that refers to the different ways of fallaciously using the statements or opinions of authority figures in order to support a conclusion.

For instance, someone may assume that something must be true if a so-called expert believes it to be true, and no other evidence is needed.


Making a claim based on the opinions of experts is by no means always unreasonable or fallacious. In many issues, we have to rely upon the testimonies of relevant experts and scientific consensus – that is, the collective position of the scientists in a particular field of study.

For instance, for someone who is not a medical professional, it's a better option to seek a medical expert's advice about their medical issues than do what they themselves believe to be correct.

Relevant experts can provide us with strong reasons to believe that something is true due to their experience, training, knowledge, and access to more information. They are able to evaluate information better and put more compelling evidence and arguments together than a non-expert could. Consequently, when someone makes a claim that is in accordance with the views of the experts, it's also supported with all the evidence the experts are relying upon.

As such, there are certain requirements that should be met for an argument from authority to be legitimate:


-The authority is an acknowledged expert in the field under consideration.
-The statement of the authority is relevant to their field of expertise.
-There is a general agreement among experts in the field under consideration.

However, note that even the views of valid experts cannot guarantee that something is true; in terms of logic and argumentation, even experts can be wrong and their testimonies can only suggest that something is likely to be true, not that it is necessarily true.

Let's look at various ways this fallacy may occur.

......

APPEAL TO FALSE AUTHORITY
This is likely the most common way of erroneously citing (supposed) experts. It occurs when someone uses the words of poor or irrelevant authorities as evidence for a claim. In such a case, the authorities are unqualified or their expertise is not relevant to the argument being made.



NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT: Making a claim based on the opinions of experts is by no means always unreasonable or fallacious, however even the views of valid experts cannot guarantee that something is true... and that is why I didn't simply rely on their conclusions only, but I also provided the evidence, and thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam




11)...


https://www.thoughtco.com/logical-fallacies-appeal-to-authority-250336
QuoteLegitimate Appeal to Authority
Legitimate appeals to authority involve testimony from individuals who are truly experts in their fields and are giving advice that is within the realm of their expertise, such as a real estate lawyer giving advice about real estate law, or a physician giving a patient medical advice.

Not every reliance upon the testimony of authority figures is fallacious. We often rely upon such testimony, and we can do so for very good reason. Their talent, training and experience put them in a position to evaluate and report on evidence not readily available to everyone else. But we must keep in mind that for such an appeal to be justified, certain standards must be met:


1. The authority is an expert in the area of knowledge under consideration.
2. The statement of the authority concerns his or her area of mastery.
3. There is agreement among experts in the area of knowledge under consideration.

NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT:Not every reliance upon the testimony of authority figures is fallacious, and I provided the evidence the experts us, and thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam 



12)...


https://www.intelligentspeculation.com/blog/argument-from-authority
QuoteIt is important to be able to recognize when someone is using authority as the premise of an argument.  The trustworthiness of an authority can provide corrigible reason to believe their claims, but should not be viewed as a fully formed valid argument.  The claims made by authorities should be used as a means to focus our attention as we do our own research as they can help point us to the relevant data. Arguments in which the conclusion relies upon the claims of an authority are invalid and should be rejected, which includes your own arguments as well.  As a practitioner of the philosophy of Critical Thinking, it is imperative that you scrutinize your own arguments just as thoroughly as you would an opposing argument.


NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT:None of my conclusions, nor the near universal conclusion among valid expert historians that Jesus was a real person, was abased on just their claims alone... but supported by the evidence that they used and that I gave you, thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam 


13)...



https://thegodlesstheist.com/appeal-to-authority/
QuoteAppeal to authority is one of the most contentious and often misunderstood logical fallacies, since citing authorities is a very common argumentative technique. Indeed, much of our knowledge about matters beyond our direct experience is derived by believing what is told to us by some authority. As such, it is not necessarily fallacious to argue that a claim has warrant because it is endorsed by somebody with relevant expert or authority. Such appeals are only fallacious under particular circumstances, including:

When the authority has no relevant expertise or special insight into the claim being made. Citing a physicist who disputes the theory of evolution by natural selection, for example, would generally be an irrelevant appeal to authority since physicists have no special knowledge or expertise about the evidence for evolution. Determining exactly who has relevant expertise in a given situation can be difficult, but nevertheless it is clear that an appeal to be valid, authority must have expertise specifically relevant to the claim being made.

When many equivalently-qualified authorities disagree with the authority one is citing. In a highly contested field such as philosophy, for example, citing one ethicist who states that utilitarianism is deeply flawed as an ethical theory would likely be an instance of a fallacious appeal to authority, since many equally eminent ethicists hold that utilitarianism is not deeply flawed. Appealing to authorities is in general quite difficult when authorities sharply disagree with one another.

When the authority has been misquoted or taken out of context. This may seem quite obvious, but it is surprising how often famous figures are misquoted, or their quotes misunderstood or misused to defend positions they themselves never defended. Figures such as Plato, Socrates, Buddha, Einstein, and others are particularly likely to have inaccurate quotations attributed to them. Whenever authorities are cited in the form of a quotation it is important to carefully source that quotation and check the context in which it was made, so as to ensure the figure in question really did endorse the views being attributed to them.

When the authority's opinion or statements are granted excessive weight in the argument. For example, an eminent scholar in a particular field may have recently published a paper making some specific argument. In this situation, it would be invalid to argue that the claims are overwhelmingly likely to be true merely because they have been made by one eminent scholar, as the degree of justification provided by the opinion of a single scholar (even an eminent one) is simply great enough to warrant such a high degree of confidence, given that in any field individual scholars are quite often wrong when they are [/u]advancing novel arguments[/u].


NOTE TO 8LIVESLEFT:The near universal conclusion among valid expert historians that Jesus was a real person, was not based on just one historian, or even on a minority number of historians... and none were granted any excessive weight no matter how famous or eminent they might be... all the historians are valid authorities in the field of historical studies and thus have relevant expertise on the topic we are discussing... none of them have been misquoted or taken out of context... and I supplied the evidence that they used to come to their conclusion that Jesus was a real historical figure, thus I'm not guilty of any argumentum ad verecundiam 

...........


Conclusion:

1), There are legitimate appeals to authority, and I proved that I did use it properly and correctly by supplying the evidence that the experts themselves used to come to the near universal conclusion and historical assesment that Jesus was a real genuine person.

2). You did not even do any further research or reading into the very citation that you gave us (and which was the only one you used). If you did, you would have seen that not even your own citation supported your contention that I was misapplying the appeal to authority.

3). You committed a strawman by falsely characterizing my argument and my posts about how I was misusing or incorrectly using the appeal to authority.


And so because of all that, I don't think we are engaging in anything productive and so this will be my last post with you on this topic. I will let you have the last word on this and I won't defend myself against anything you may want to say about me in response.


END OF PART TWO.  PART THREE FOLLOWS.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Francis on August 14, 2022, 02:18:36 AM
PART THREE OF MY RESPONSE TO POST #221 FROM  8LIVESLEFT.



Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 09, 2022, 05:55:01 PMI still don't know what that sentence means.

Those 2 sources: bible witness accounts and Josephus are few and arguably weak compared to the many independent regional accounts of Alexander.

Alexander's soldiers and generals have also mentioned/written about him, which is equivalent to your witness accounts.

So, even if you remove all of Alexander's soldiers/generals/close friends from the records, there will still be many other sources with far more detail  available.

So you are admitting that Jesus was a real person after all?




Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 09, 2022, 05:55:01 PMBut you obviously think Jesus was a real person.  Otherwise, how can you have a conversation with others in here about whether or not Paul fundamentally changed Christianity and was simply a guy who saw an opportunity and grabbed it... if NO Jesus existed?

Not necessarily.

Paul could be a real person who may not be telling the truth or may not have known what he was looking at when he claimed to have seen Jesus.

??????????

Why are you talking about Paul and Jesus and their motivations when you admit that you don't even believe that they existed to begin with???????

In post #623 in the thread: "Why does an evil God allow good?"... you said that Bible is fictional.

So to me, your conversation about Jesus and Paul (if you believe the Bible is fictional as you assert) makes as much sense as if you were talking about other fictional characters like Santa and his elves and Big Foot and ufo's as if they are real and not fictional!

If neither Jesus nor Paul existed historically, then a fictional Paul could not fundamentally change Christianity nor grab any opportunity to change Christianity if Jesus also didn't exist... anymore than Big Foot and UFO's and Santa and elves can change anything or grab any opportunities. Fictional characters don't have creative power anymore than the number 7 has any creative power to do something.

To me, you're not making much sense. Sorry.





Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 09, 2022, 05:55:01 PMWhat would he be changing and what opportunity would there be for  him to "grab" if there was no Jesus?


He would be grabbing the opportunity to take control of a very real small/fringe church movement.

So you are admitting that Jesus was a real person after all?

Secondly, in another post... #623 in the thread: "Why does an evil God allow good?"... you said that Bible is fictional. So if no Jesus existed, how could there be a small/fringe church/Christian movement that is based on a non-existent fictional Jesus?  Indeed, if no Paul existed, how can Paul take control of any movement?

Unless you are admitting and agreeing with the evidence and the near universal consensus among expert historians that Jesus and Paul were real historical figures?

If you are not admitting that Jesus and Paul were real people, then your posts where you discuss fictional people and making moral judgments about those fictional people, makes no sense... at least not to me since you yourself claim that the bible is fictional.





Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PMOR

This could all very well be a fabrication by the roman empire.

And Big foot could all very well be real.  Space aliens visiting us from other galaxies could all very well be real. Santa Claus could all very well be real.  The Holocaust could all very well not have happened.  You could all very well not be real.

What benefit is accomplished when you speak like you do?

Again, how can there be a fabrication by the Roman Empire if neither Jesus nor Paul were historical people?

The Jews themselves never denied that Jesus and Paul were real people.  Indeed, why didn't someone go to the Romans and say something like... "UHMMM... excuse me sir... Emperor sir... UHMMM... neither Jesus nor Paul existed and all of us Jews know that neither had existed"?

Or...

"UHMMM... your excellency Emperor sir... none of Jews are sure why you fabricated the story of a crucifixion of a fictional person that never existed.  We're all shaking our heads at that one, sir"

It would be to the Jewish leader's advantage to tell the Emperor and the Roman Empire that there was no Jesus to begin with, because aftercall, you yourself claim that the Bible is fictional

   





Quote from: 8livesleft on August 08, 2022, 11:25:49 PMThe question is, without Rome's support, would there be Christianity?

The question is, how is  this relevant to the question of whether Jesus and Paul were real people, as attested to by the near universal conclusion of bona fide historians after they looked at all the evidence (which I gave to you)?

Your question seems like a red herring and is completely irrelevant to whether Jesus was a real person.

Indeed, how can there be a Christianity for Rome to support if there was no Jesus?  And if there is no Jesus, and thus no Christianity, who is Rome supporting? Afterall, you yourself claim that the Bible is fictional.

In fact, it would be to the Jewish leader's advantage to tell the Emperor and the Roman Empire that there was no Jesus to begin with. That would be sure fire way to squash Christianity before it even started.

Anyway... I like you 8livesleft, but all we are doing is going around in circles and not accomplishing anything beneficial or worthwhile.  And so for that reason, I will let you have the last word on this topic and I will not defend myself against anything you bring up.

Take care my friend.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 17, 2022, 02:10:29 AM
QuoteSo you are admitting that Jesus was a real person after all?


Not quite. I'm saying that Alexander definitely has far more evidence for his existence than Jesus.

Quote Why are you talking about Paul and Jesus and their motivations when you admit that you don't even believe that they existed to begin with???????


When I mention figures in the bible, I speak as if they did exist rather than having to always mention some sort of caveat or disclaimer like "If this person were real..."

Quote you said that Bible is fictional. So if no Jesus existed, how could there be a small/fringe church/Christian movement that is based on a non-existent fictional Jesus?  Indeed, if no Paul existed, how can Paul take control of any movement?


See above.

Quotenear universal consensus


To me this sounds like:

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people")[1][a] is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so.[2]

Quote among expert historians


Again sounding like:

Appeal to authority is a common type of fallacy, or an argument based on unsound logic. When writers or speakers use appeal to authority, they are claiming that something must be true because it is believed by someone who said to be an "authority" on the subject.

Quote Again, how can there be a fabrication by the Roman Empire if neither Jesus nor Paul were historical people?


Religious Scholar Joseph Atwill thinks it was. There are others as well.

Quote The question is, how is  this relevant to the question of whether Jesus and Paul were real people, as attested to by the near universal conclusion of bona fide historians after they looked at all the evidence (which I gave to you)?


What evidence? The ones presented by JST?

Quote Indeed, how can there be a Christianity for Rome to support if there was no Jesus?  And if there is no Jesus, and thus no Christianity, who is Rome supporting? Afterall, you yourself claim that the Bible is fictional.


Remember, Rome also supported Jupiter, Venus, Juno, Mars etc...made temples and things for them too. Were they real?

Quote Anyway... I like you 8livesleft, but all we are doing is going around in circles and not accomplishing anything beneficial or worthwhile.  And so for that reason, I will let you have the last word on this topic and I will not defend myself against anything you bring up.


Suit yourself.

Cheers mate

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 18, 2022, 08:29:29 PM
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/aug/18/its-so-alien-ive-never-heard-anything-like-it-folk-collective-heilung-on-recording-the-worlds-oldest-song?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Quoteabout 300,000 years ago (give or take a few millennia), the human larynx dropped

downwards, an evolutionary advance as vital in separating us from the apes as the development of opposable thumbs and a large cerebral cortex. It meant that our throats got larger, which enabled us to extend the sounds we could make beyond animalistic hooting and howling. Suddenly, we could talk. We could develop a vocabulary. We could sing
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 18, 2022, 08:31:44 PM
https://youtu.be/kmWTZ3KfnXE
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 18, 2022, 10:55:58 PM
Hey Kevin,

Have you heard this group?

https://youtu.be/jM8dCGIm6yc
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 18, 2022, 11:05:39 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 18, 2022, 08:29:29 PMhttps://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/aug/18/its-so-alien-ive-never-heard-anything-like-it-folk-collective-heilung-on-recording-the-worlds-oldest-song?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Quoteabout 300,000 years ago (give or take a few millennia), the human larynx dropped

downwards, an evolutionary advance as vital in separating us from the apes as the development of opposable thumbs and a large cerebral cortex. It meant that our throats got larger, which enabled us to extend the sounds we could make beyond animalistic hooting and howling. Suddenly, we could talk. We could develop a vocabulary. We could sing

Interesting. Neanderthals apparently lived to about 40,000 years ago. Which means they were around for 390k years.

If communication was limited to hoots, grunts, whistles, I would imagine they did a lot of sign language and maybe a rudimentary writing system?

Their brains were supposedly 10% larger than ours. I'm thinking they must've had some form of communication surpassing animal sounds and monkey see monkey do...
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 19, 2022, 02:27:22 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 18, 2022, 10:55:58 PMHey Kevin,

Have you heard this group?

https://youtu.be/jM8dCGIm6yc

how could i miss them?

my sister in law is mongolian
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 19, 2022, 02:34:25 AM
Quote from: kevin on August 19, 2022, 02:27:22 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 18, 2022, 10:55:58 PMHey Kevin,

Have you heard this group?

https://youtu.be/jM8dCGIm6yc

how could i miss them?

my sister in law is mongolian

Wow. Amazing group of people with a great world conquering lineage. Was able to try mongolian style lamb ribs at a mongolian place in shanghai and thought it was fantastic.

But that style is great right? That super low tone PLUS that very high whistle tone at the same time????!! 

Now, it's said that 2 denisovan groups mixed with asians, what if the sapiens sapiens saw how these denisovans spoke/sang and tried to copy it? 

Low guttural and high whistle?
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: kevin on August 19, 2022, 03:14:40 AM
throat singing.

i think? the inuit do it too

here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lP6sVveWf8g
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 19, 2022, 03:42:40 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 18, 2022, 11:05:39 PM••••
Interesting. Neanderthals apparently lived to about 40,000 years ago. Which means they were around for 390k years.

If communication was limited to hoots, grunts, whistles, I would imagine they did a lot of sign language and maybe a rudimentary writing system?

Their brains were supposedly 10% larger than ours. I'm thinking they must've had some form of communication surpassing animal sounds and monkey see monkey do...

Think of a tonal Morse code, variable length staccato bleeps, hoots, howls, snorts, shrieks, honks, etc, that distributes meaning over time. Plenty of variability to support a spoken language.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 19, 2022, 04:55:25 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 19, 2022, 03:42:40 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 18, 2022, 11:05:39 PM••••
Interesting. Neanderthals apparently lived to about 40,000 years ago. Which means they were around for 390k years.

If communication was limited to hoots, grunts, whistles, I would imagine they did a lot of sign language and maybe a rudimentary writing system?

Their brains were supposedly 10% larger than ours. I'm thinking they must've had some form of communication surpassing animal sounds and monkey see monkey do...

Think of a tonal Morse code, variable length staccato bleeps, hoots, howls, snorts, shrieks, honks, etc, that distributes meaning over time. Plenty of variability to support a spoken language.

Like clicks and whistles which are still being used today by some isolated tribes...
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 19, 2022, 01:52:16 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 19, 2022, 04:55:25 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 19, 2022, 03:42:40 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 18, 2022, 11:05:39 PM••••
Interesting. Neanderthals apparently lived to about 40,000 years ago. Which means they were around for 390k years.

If communication was limited to hoots, grunts, whistles, I would imagine they did a lot of sign language and maybe a rudimentary writing system?

Their brains were supposedly 10% larger than ours. I'm thinking they must've had some form of communication surpassing animal sounds and monkey see monkey do...

Think of a tonal Morse code, variable length staccato bleeps, hoots, howls, snorts, shrieks, honks, etc, that distributes meaning over time. Plenty of variability to support a spoken language.

Like clicks and whistles which are still being used today by some isolated tribes...

Thank you. I was trying to think of a current example. I had begun to think that my speculative language did not exist.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 24, 2022, 10:32:21 PM
Supposedly, Neanderthals and denisovans intermingled with sapiens sapiens for up to 260 thousand years.

Sort of goes against the notion that every superior species simply wipes out the previous one.

It may very well have been our superior communication that allowed us to adapt and spread out more quickly.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 24, 2022, 11:03:39 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 24, 2022, 10:32:21 PMSupposedly, Neanderthals and denisovans intermingled with sapiens sapiens for up to 260 thousand years.

Sort of goes against the notion that every superior species simply wipes out the previous one.

It may very well have been our superior communication that allowed us to adapt and spread out more quickly.

Or maybe as we spread we also spread disease that wiped out our cousins.
Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: 8livesleft on August 25, 2022, 12:08:30 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 24, 2022, 11:03:39 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 24, 2022, 10:32:21 PMSupposedly, Neanderthals and denisovans intermingled with sapiens sapiens for up to 260 thousand years.

Sort of goes against the notion that every superior species simply wipes out the previous one.

It may very well have been our superior communication that allowed us to adapt and spread out more quickly.

Or maybe as we spread we also spread disease that wiped out our cousins.

Very very possible...but pockets seemed to have survived and even mix some of their genes. 

Title: Re: The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals
Post by: Kiahanie on August 25, 2022, 12:26:57 AM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 25, 2022, 12:08:30 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 24, 2022, 11:03:39 PM••••
Or maybe as we spread we also spread disease that wiped out our cousins.

Very very possible...but pockets seemed to have survived and even mix some of their genes.


The gene-mixing encounters would have provided opportunity for disease transmission. The surviving pockets may not have done the mixing, sequestered away from the deadly sapiens biome.