₦airaland Forum

Martian - are there any historical accuracies in the Bible?

If so, how many/ what proportion?

Answer this question honestly and I think that will resolve this debate.

Martian:
And stop acting like the statue is the only reason the story is BS. What about the guys that walked around in a furnace and survived unscathed and the other ridiculous claims.
The fact that moses, jesus and whoever else you mentioned could have existed doesn't  preclude that these stories are myths.

The historicity of Gilgamesh has been more or less confirmed usinig different sources, but no one talks about his epic as if it actually happened even though he was a CONFIRMED king of one of the first civilizations.

Ohhhh! Calm down joor!

The issues are very simple. I believe I stated this in the OP. Anyone who knows anything about me on this forum knows very well that I do not hold the bible to be my creed. I stated as early as the third post or so on this thread that I regard the bible to generally contain alot of myths. Anyone who knows me infact neednt have waited for me to state that. It has been my mantra for years.

The question was very simple: why should an atheist demand non-biblical sources for the existence of characters like Daniel, Moses, or Jesus?

Now when you align the issues with this question you wil find that all the issues yourself and PA1982 have raised are rather beside the point - given that I am not a proponent os strict bible historicity - and matter of factly, I never have been - just as you know very well yourself.

The core question that I ask is this - are these not ALL ancient records? Why do we reject them as proof of the existence of the persons referred to? The question is really that simple. Jesus for example has a great many ancient books written about him. Far more than the four cannonical gospels. Why should anyone discount all these writings and demand that secular sources of his existence are produced. He wasn't secularly relevant, and as such that should not arise.

Now I need to further comment that on account of the deficient knowledge of ancients, a great many ancient scripts are ridden with superstition. An ancient writer might write that a god appeared in the sky: this may mean that he saw a comet. One should be careful in interpreting that which is written and fit it with the context of the times. I cannot agree with the position that since magical events are reported in an ancient acript, then the script is an entire lie: it seems far more logical to me to try to absorb the deficient knowledge of the ancients and see what they were in fact trying to describe.

For example there is an atheist on this forum who likes to make a big deal about the fact that in the bible, stars are described as falling to the earth. He says it is laughable because of what we now know of the size and distance of stars. I consider this athiest quite silly for saying this repeatedly because I dont know how else he expects an ancient writer to describe meteors and meteorites.

Overall, the point remains that there will indeed be innacuracies in these writings - heck even secular historians had innacuracies. I have not seen anybody saying that the innacuracies of secular historians renders their entire writings lies.

Martian:
Yea, I guess it wasn't you I quoted saying there is "history and science" behind the production.

Of course there is.

As if you didn't say "pointers to ETs are quite a lot". I made it all up.

Of course there are.

Martian:
It seems he prefers myths and superstition to historical accuracies. He started a thread about the  "Spiritual significance of WW2"  and sought the perspective of the grail message people.

Please this has nothing to do with you son.

Well, he also found spiritual significance in "Pocahontas on Pandora" aka Avatar, so it's not surprising.

Yes? And so? Please lets get serious. That remains my very adamant view and it certainly has nothing to do with this thread.

Please after you help him with this quest, I need help in confirming the existence of Gilgamesh's Cedar forest and the location of the Tower of Babel. Also, I need help in recovering the chariots at the bottom of the red sea.

See this man.

Martian:
Yea, I know, we all know but you are the one who commited the alien fallacy. There are educated guess, then there are "craziness" like the History channel series YOU cited.

O please be done with this falsehood already. If you cannot comprehend simple grammer I cannot help you there. At no time did I commit any alien fallacy: indeed another poster - Mazaje specifically put the question to me as to if I was suggesting alien involvemnet and I set him right with a capital No. The comments are there to read, and if you and other posters are bent of makng jackasses of yourselves over that then the joke forcefully rebounds on you mate.

O, and by the way, just as I said - there is yet NO satisfactory explanation for the construction of the pyramids, so kindly cease to bandy the falsehood that it has been sufficiently explained -

The unknowns of pyramid construction chiefly center on the question of how the blocks were moved up the superstructure. There is no known accurate historical or archaeological evidence that definitively resolves the question. Therefore, most discussion on construction methods involves functional possibilities that are supported by limited historical and archaeological evidence.

Historical accounts for the construction of the Egyptian pyramids do little to point definitively to methods to lift the blocks; yet most Egyptologists refer to these accounts when discussing this portion of pyramid construction.

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

PA1982:
^^^
Come, come, the construction of the pyramids has been explained again and again, and the many foolish claims and falsehoods about them have been debunked any number of times.

No madam, as a matter of fact whereas there are many explanations bandied about, there still does not exist a satisfactory explanation of the quarrying and construction methods deployed.

Are you actually suggesting the Babylonians had access to that amount of gold the Book of Daniel cites?

To be sincere, i have no idea what amount of gold the babylonians may or may not have had access to. Nor do I think that that impinges upon my point. Fabulous amounts of treasure are described regarding the ancient Aztecs. I do not know what amounts they actually had either.

But I will give you an example of what I mean.

It is reported that in one of their human sacrifice rituals, they sacrificed 84, 000 people. This is an incredible figure. Studies on the logistics of doing such actually concluded that this figure was impossible - and that they probably sacrificed only about 2000.

Nobody can tell the truth about this matter - but my point is simply this - NOBODY can discredit the story on the ground of the stupendous figure mentioned. At all events what may be agreed is that some number of people were ssacrificed.

In the same way with the Daniel story, even if the size of the gold involved is disputed - and mark you - there could be discrepancies in the weights being written and the way we inteprete them today - certainly we may not seize upon that as a ground fr discreditting the book. The size may simply have been different. Aand even that we cannot tell for sure!

Have you really not understood the historical inaccuracies I took the trouble to post?

O, nobody denies this. But are there not also many historical accuracies contained therein?

Even the writings of standard historians do contain innacuraccies, no?

Martian:
PA1982 also said, the amount of gold needed for such a monument would have been impossible to procure during that period and that's when YOU introduced the "Anciet Aliens" to "fill in the gap".

I introduced ancient aliens to fill in the gap? You must not be reading. I stated that the pyramids are so astonishing that there are now theories of extra terrestial involvement. Now sir, in case you cannot read, that translates to a definition of how stupendous the pyramids are - so stupendous that people have developed such theories. Now that answers PA1982's issue on the stupendous nature of a described feat. Oh, gosh.

^ O please would you stop messing up the thread with these pictures? Kindly go back to my original comment and recognise that there is no place for this ridiculous self-mockery of yours. The issue was about staggering ancient  feats - someone sought to discredit the book of Daniel on account of a reported staggerring feat. The details of such a feat aside, I have simply pointed out that the pyramids were another staggering feat - so staggering that some have alluded to extra-terrestial involvement - and the point remains that -  the fact that a feat is staggering is not enough grounds to discredit a book! - or the existence of the claimed writer for that matter. You may discredit such on other grounds, but certainly not on that ground. For if the pyramids had been destroyed, then probably one would have discredited any accounts of them as being improbable!

Now that is the crux of the point, and nothing else. The silly posts of yourself and the posters above mock only yourselves if you are not able to make an intelligent response to that.

mazaje:
Deepsight are you saying that the pyramids were built by ancient aliens?. . .Is that your position? Really?. . .

No, I am not saying this. Someone made a comment regarding some amazing constructions described in Daniel. I simply pointed out that there exist some amazing ancient constructions - the pyramids - which are so amazing that people even attribute them to aliens! Therefore for me one should nor seek to denigrate ancient texts based on the "amazingness" of the structures described. If the pyramids has been destroyed and then described in an ancient biblical text, certainly skeptics would contend that no such structure was possible.

I really need to be sure that people are schooled on exactky what building the pyramids entailed.

Martian:
You are aware the show is BS and wild assumptions but you choose to believe it?!!!
When answering to skepticism about how such heavy stones could have been moved without machinery, Redford says, "I usually show the skeptic a picture of 20 of my workers at an archaeological dig site pulling up a two-and-a-half ton granite block." He added, "I know it's possible because I was on the ropes too."[/b]http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080328104302.htm

http://www.skepdic.com/dvinefal.html
This fallacy is also a variation of the alien fallacy: I can't figure this out, so aliens must have done it. Or, This is amazing; therefore, aliens did it. Or, I can't think of any other explanation; therefore, aliens did it. Or, this is just too weird; so, aliens are behind it.

[b]If something were to happen to our civilization and records were lost, will future generations look at the ISS and and claim it has evidence of "Ancient Aliens"

No! For crying out loud, read the posts! PA1982 spoke about the fact that some incredible feats were described in Daniel. So please get the context of my comments. My comments were that there have been also astonishing feats in history very hard to acheive - such as the pyramids. That is exactly why I stated that some of these feats have been so astonishing that extra terrestial involvment had been alluded to. The point is simply that indeed PA1982 may not use the incredible nature of those feats as an argument in light of the fact that there have been many astonishing ancient acheivements - such as the pyramids. By the way, i really dont think you have a careful study of what building the pyramids took - especially considering the interior designs.

I hope you get the point now.

^ Are u having a laff? Men do you know what the Egyptian pyramids took to build - with the available tachniques then? And you are posting this joke above - were the same size of stones even used? Abeg make I no start. Anyway you missed the point. The point was about what PA1982 said - and basically i mentioned the pyramids to show that staggering and hard-to-believe feats were acheived by the ancients. That was the point.

Martian:
No DeepSight, Just No!!! NatGeo shows are usually real but they sometimes have to cater to the fringe conspiracy theorists in order to keep the advertisement dollars coming in. Shows like "Ancient Aliens" and "Finding Bigfoot" are NOT to be taken seriously.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Aliens
Tsoukalos is a 1998 graduate of Ithaca College in Ithaca, New York, with a degree in sports information and communication.

I am aware of this and I absolutely disagree.

1. In the first place please note that the facts you mentioned above have absolutely NOT discredited the point that the construction of the Egyptian pyramids remains a marvel and mystery till this day - something that will present a huge challenge to even modern construction techniques - not to speak about the hammer and chisel technques that are said to have constructed the pyramids. Only persons who are not aquainted with teh size of the rocks involved and the heights to which they were lifted would not understand the point being made.

2. The pointers to ancient extra-terrestial or other bits of information are quite alot. There are dozens of ancient artworks of things that could only be described as spacecraft. The minimum that is obvious is that there is a huge gap in history somehwere.

3. Remember to be careful about qualifications. People with no qualifications in specific studies often exhibit surprising knowledge in such fields provided they have taken an avid interest in researching the subject.

4. I would not accept your assessment of the quality of the Ancient Aliens Series. A great deal of history and science is involved in the production.

^ For philosophical or logical depth, he is just capital ZERO!

The world celebrates mediocrity, honestly!

Allahu AKbar.

KABOOM!

^^^ Ha. Abeg. Alhamdudillai. Allahu Akbak. KABOOM!

Dwakins is a known nit wit

PA1982:
Deep Sight-
Read the entire discussion about the gold needed for the reported structure
We're talking about 270 cubic yards of gold and 1181 tons.
It's simply not on.
The measurements stated in the text are crook.

For me, however,the most convincing arguments were the really striking historical errrors.
And that the language and 'theology' of the text is more accord with the second century BC, not the sixth BC.

Have you undertaken a specific study of what it took to construct the pyramids? It is so mind boggling, when you have the details. So much so that there are now theories of extra terrestial involvement. Watch the NAT geo SERIES - "Ancient Aliens".

Where is Kunle Oshob?

mazaje:
The bible is a collection of stories from older civilizations with a new twist. . . . . .Nothing more, nothing less. All of the books were written when there were no genre life fiction or real life, all were written when literacy was only for the elites . . . .A lot of the books were written long after the events they recorded, example the book of Daniel. . . Scriptural texts are ancient text with a twist and a purpose, they are NOT historical books because they are heavily salted and filled with mythology and superstition which can not be separated from reality. . .The stories in scriptures may contain the names of places and real people but doesn't make the stories true, just as than the real places in the Greek myths are not evidence for Hercules.

Remember Troy. . . The city was once thought to be mythical but was later found by archeologist, does that mean that all the Gods talked about by the people are real?. . . . . The "Odyssey and the Iliad" dealt with a city that was supposed to be a myth. It was found as well. Now because it was found, does that make Athena, Poseidon, Odysseus, Circe and the other Gods, monster and people real?

Hmm, ati gbo. My question is, in light of all the writings, is it tenable to say that Moses, Jesus and Daniel, never existed? I hope you know that aside from the four canonical gospels, Jesus had been wriiten about in a great many other non-canonical gospels? What level of fantasy would permit that? Esp as he is not described as Posiedon or other such?

plaetton:
Religious books are written for religious purposes not for historical accuracy. Biblical accounts hardly meet the thresholds of reliablity because they are usually written with a specific religious authority ,for a specific audience, and with specific ecclessiastical agendas.
For example , even the christians do not want you to apply standard academic criteria to analyse scripture, since ,according to most them, applying carnage (common sense) knowledge to understand scriptural issues is futile. What is required is faith, they always say.

We have to consider that the old testament was written and compiled by yahwehist scribes around 600 -650bc in babylon ,and the new testament by unknown writters writing for a Hennenic audience centuries after the pupported events.
Thereafter, the early church fathers most likely added, deleted, redacted and selected what should be included in the bible. 35 or so non-cannonical books were rejected because they were alleged to have been spurious in content and authorship.

If you now consider the fact that the originals of these manuscripts are not available for analysis, and that all we have are edited copies of edited copies of copies of translated copies of translated copies, then its easy to imagine all could have been lost in translation. .
Therefore, this document was written, compliled, translated, and periodically edited, all along by people who have a peculiar world view and who share a vested interest in propagating and maintaining such worldview.


The book of Job, for example, have been shown to have been written by more than two different authors in several different time periods in locations not remotely close to ancient isreal. Most likely a myth or legend borrowed from another culture.
Ezekeil is also said to have been written by two different authors with many revisions.
it should never bee taken seriously as a historical source.

And by the way, athiests are not the only ones who point out the non-historicity of jesus .He is too conspicously absent for a great man who lived and influenced many during an era of great literary activity.

The vatican has miles of underground libraries of ancient texts and scrolls(probably looted from the great library of Alexandria) that may never ever be in the public domain. I suspect that they must be protecting a truth so precious and fragile, that it must be protected by a battalion of falsehoods.

Sincerely, I agree with virtually 100 per cent of your words above. My issue is this - is it probable that Moses, Daniel, and Jesus never existed?

buzugee:
with your mindset you cant make it into heaven. heaven will be an orderly and patriachal society where the man goes out to hunt and gather the food while the woman stays at home to look after the kids. there will be no office jobs in heaven. there will be no corporate world. the work will be farming, fishing, hunting for the men and making clothes and looking after the kids and cooking for the women. if you think that is too chauvinistic for you, then the lord will not admit you in. you know what the problem is ? you think you are a white man because your spirit is entrenched in his system of equality of the sexes, womens rights, the woman can drink as much if not more than men, women can be cops arresting men and beating men down etc etc etc. all this foolishness is heathenistic and is the way of the heathens. listen brother, you better learn to adjust your mind to the heavenly way of thinking or you will be left behind by the messiah.

Jesus Christ! Lo ru ko Jesu. Alhammdullai. Lo ru ko IFA. Lo ru ko SANGO. Why did I bother. Oya, forward march! Go ye forth and enslave all the women in the world.

buzugee:
while you are a fallible, getting blown by the wind, non-structural mortal, our messiah and lord says HEBREW 13 VS 8 I am the same yesterday, today, and forever.

Your messiah is a chauvinist forever? Think again bro. No, not at all. Not for one second. Those are cultural ideas from that period that should be left in that period please.

O please, dont make this about me. You dont know me and you cannot suppose anything regarding my manliness or feminity. Just face the question: its a questionb of Chauvinism. No worries with a man as the head - BUT - this is entirely different from primitive chauvinistic ideas which say that a woman must keep silent and never minister. That is quite a primitive and most chauvinistic idea. It should be frowned upon by every modern person. That's the issue - deal with it, and stop paying unhealthy attention to my person. Danke.

Image123:
You seem to lack basic knowledge of the Trinity doctrine. Everyone knows it is God in three persons. So what with your eureka moment? Do you even need anything on trinity or no trinity. You need Jesus Himself in your life.

Hahahahahahahaha! Basic Knowledge of the Trinity Doctrine indeed! There you go - God in three persons - and yet even attested christians have a different understanding of that! Alhamdudillahi. Una no go kill pesin. Chai!

Bro, have a nice weekend. I am trying to pick up pieces of a broken one. Cheers.

Contradicting yourself. So if indeed you accept there are lots of intelligent women like jesoul, why would you hold on to a primitive command asking women not to minister? What if the woman is endowed with the spirit of God and a gift for ministry. Paul was either a rabid chauvinist or simply hostage to the primitive ideas of his time. You should liberate yourself from such.

^ Well if you wish. There is no doubt that the God of scripture is glaringly chauvinist. But that was a misrepresentation based on patriachal cultural domination. You should rebel against it just as surely as we all rebel against the command in the OT not to shave our beards.

Gold smelters normally are rather small things because they usual process relatively small amounts of the precious metal. So, no gold smelter in the world could have handled such a project. Even if they had, it would have been impossible to have moved it with the primitive technology of that day, let alone sat it upright.

I would be hesitant about this sort of argument in light of the existence of such monuments as the Pyramids, teh construction of which remains a mystery till this day!

^ You know, I am not a bible apologist - and I certainly do not believe that all that is in the Bible is true. There are a great many myths contained therein as well as outrightly manipulated text. Nevertheless that is not what makes me want to have this discussion. My issue is why would someone state that people such as Moses or Daniel or perhaps Jesus never existed simply because the ancient writings recording their activities are contained in the Bible?

buzugee:
this is exactly why the lord says that women should keep quiet and be seen but not heard. because they are emotional creatures with no sense of understanding.

SHAT AP! ! !

Chauvinism.

I just read an interesting (Christian) defense of the historicity of the book of Daniel.

The Book of Daniel

As we proceed the Book of Daniel will become relevant to our examination of evidences for the accuracy Judeo-Christian theology. This relevance will be explained when we engage this examination. For now, however, it is first important to discuss the reliability and historicity of the Book of Daniel. Or more specifically, to address the scholarly objections to a 6th century dating of Daniel.

(NOTE: Later it will be shown that the Book of Daniel is sufficient to conclusively demonstrate the existence of prophecy and the supernatural within the Judeo-Christian scriptures and therefore the reliability of Judeo-Christian theology even if the scholarly dating of this book to the 2nd century is accepted.)

According to the Bible (specifically the Book of Daniel itself), Daniel was a prophet who lived during the 6th century B.C.

"Daniel - In the Bible, a Hebrew prophet of the sixth century B.C." - The American Heritage¨ Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.

"Daniel - 1: the Jewish hero of the Book of Daniel who as an exile in Babylon interprets dreams, gives accounts of apocalyptic visions, and is divinely delivered from a den of lions 2: a book of narratives, visions, and prophecies in canonical Jewish and Christian Scripture -- see BIBLE table." - Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary

Chapter 1 of the Book of Daniel informs us that Daniel was taken captive into exile in Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar (II) when he conquered Israel's southern kingdom of Judah.

Daniel 1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. 2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god. 3 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes; 4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. 5 And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king. 6 Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: 7 Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego, 18 Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in, then the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar. 19 And the king communed with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore stood they before the king. 20 And in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm.

From the historical record we know that these events took place in 586 B.C.

"Judaism - After Nebuchadrezzar's decisive defeat of Egypt at Carchemish (605 BCE), Jeremiah identified the scourge as Babylon. King Jehoiakim's attempt to be free of Babylonia ended with the exile of his successor, Jehoiachin, along with Judah's elite (597); yet the court of the new king, Zedekiah, persisted in plotting new revolts, relyingÑagainst all experienceÑon Egyptian support." - Britannica.com

"Judaism - In 587/586 BCE the doom prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel came true. Rebellious Jerusalem was reduced by Nebuchadrezzar, the Temple was burnt, and much of Judah's population dispersed or deported to Babylonia." - Britannica.com

"Diaspora - The first significant Jewish Diaspora was the result of the Babylonian Exile (q.v.) of 586 BC. After the Babylonians conquered the Kingdom of Judah, part of the Jewish population was deported into slavery." - Britannica.com

"Jerusalem - Jerusalem became the spiritual and political capital of the Hebrews. In 586 B.C. it fell to the Babylonians, and the Temple was destroyed." - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Nothing in Daniel's record at this point conflicts with our modern understanding of history. Instead, what Daniel reports is completely consistent with what we now know of history, that upon conquering Judah, Nebuchadnezzar did take captive many of the nobles and people and bring them back to Bablyon. The second chapter of the book states that Daniel was one of these captives who became one of the chief ministers of the court of King Nebuchadnezzar and his successors through a series of events, initiated by Daniel's interpretation of a Nebuchadnezzar's dream.

Complete Article - http://www.biblestudying.net/christianity3.html

Why is it that many atheists are of the view that in acknowledging historical texts, books in the bible should be exempted? For example, when an atheist disputes teh existence of Jesus, he will demand that one should provide him with sources outside of scripture. Is this a reasonable demand? Are scriptural texts not themselves ancient writings which record many well known facts?

Discuss?

Image123:
John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

"the glory I had WITH thee. . . ." I think that says it all. Thats a clear reference to two persons and not 1!

^ But there is a struggle na. All power has been given to him. By whom? Who gives the power and who takes the power? The same person? He sits at teh right hand side of Someone. Sitting at the right hand side of himself. He approaches the throne and gives obeisance to God. And yet he is the same God. He is said to be subject to God. And yet he is the same sovereign God who is subject to none. He says the father is greater than him. And yet he is the same father. You cannot be equal to yourself. Once u talk about equality, you are referring to two entities, and not one. His disciple calls him good. He says o no, I am not good, only God is good. And yet, he is the self same God. I tire abeg. Make I jus sharrrap for hia before dem abuse me again.

^ Bros stop struggling with all these lies. abeg just live according to conscience. simple.