(December 22, 2018 at 6:35 am)CDF47 Wrote: Those scholars are atheist based.Of course not. My point here is that you have no idea what you're talking about and you're just making up excuses on the fly in order to avoid the evidence brought against your unlikely claims. Go ahead, Mr. Know-it-All, tell us which of the above scholars are atheists. Then you can explain to us what you mean by "atheist based" and why it has any bearing on the historical accuracy of their work. And when you get done with them, I've got more than three dozen more fully-qualified biblical scholars for you to try to discredit.
(December 20, 2018 at 11:37 pm)Gwaithmir Wrote: Lame excuse on your part. It also doesn't change the fact that you're an intellectual illiterate with a closed mind who dishonestly ignores whatever scholarly evidence you find inconvenient, and you're completely incapable of considering the idea that you might be wrong. It is also evident by now that you're not here to discuss The Book of Daniel in order to conduct an honest pursuit of the truth. You're only here to proselytize.
These are just some of the impartial, fully-qualified biblical scholars whose books I have in my private library. All have Ph.D.'s in historical and divinity studies. Tell us which ones are atheists:
Louis E. Hartman
Alexander Di Lella
John J. Collins
Frank Leslie Cross
Philip Davies
Dell Chant
Jacques Doukhan
James D. Dunn
Malcolm Godden
Lester L. Grabbe
Ramon Hammer
Victor H. Matthews
I'd have to Google search each one. Can you tell me?
You see, I don't have to prove you to be ignorant and intellectually dishonest. I'm going let you prove that to us all by yourself.
As long as you keep making grandiose claims with no evidence to back them up, you're going to get called out for it.
"The world is my country; all of humanity are my brethren; and to do good deeds is my religion." (Thomas Paine)