RE: Overstating the case for Athiesm.
March 7, 2014 at 8:50 pm
(This post was last modified: March 7, 2014 at 9:01 pm by rsb.)
So some more research on the dead sea scrolls:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_sc....281991.29
Book of Isaiah, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Isaiah
From there:
The book opens by setting out the themes of judgement and subsequent restoration for the righteous. God has a plan which will be realised on the "Day of Yahweh", when Jerusalem will become the centre of his worldwide rule. On that day all the nations of the world will come to Zion (Jerusalem) for instruction, but first the city must be punished and cleansed of evil. Israel is invited to join in this plan. Chapters 5–12 explain the significance of the Assyrian judgement against Israel: righteous rule by the Davidic king will follow after the arrogant Assyrian monarch is brought down. Chapters 13–27 announce the preparation of the nations for Yahweh's world rule; chapters 28–33 announce that a royal saviour (a messiah) will emerge in the aftermath of Jerusalem's punishment and the destruction of her oppressor.
The oppressor (now identified as Babylon rather than Assyria) is about to fall. Chapters 34–35 tell how Yahweh will return the redeemed exiles to Jerusalem. Chapters 36–39 tell of the faithfulness of king Hezekiah to Yahweh during the Assyrian siege as a model for the restored community. Chapters 40–54 argues that the restoration of Zion is taking place because Yahweh, the creator of the universe, has designated the Persian king Cyrus the Great as the promised messiah and temple-builder. Chapters 55–66 are an exhortation to Israel to keep the covenant. God's eternal promise to David is now made to the people of Israel/Judah at large. The book ends by enjoining righteousness as the final stages of God's plan come to pass, including the pilgrimage of the nations to Zion and the realisation of Yahweh's kingship.
The dead sea scrolls MAY predate Jesus by radiocarbon dating, however as many copies of the book were found, the practice of copying the book was established. Thus I conclude they are not originals. Thus I conclude that it is reasonable and plausible that the jewish messiah myth predated the alleged historical jesus or jesus(pl). Does not mean he did exist, however "romans kept good records" is certainly NOT a true statement, it is a wonder we have anything at all from that period.
Well then I think basically "atheism" in your definition is useless as the lack of evidence for a god has absolutely no "proof" that there is not one. Any number of examples of things which are now known to be true, but previously had no evidence, abound. The proof that existing theologies are false and those who spread them are liars has actual teeth. I guess faced with that definition I would have to join Sagan as an agnostic. I just don't the philosopher's definition of logic regarding proof, if there were a "philosophical burden of proof or onus (probandi) is the obligation on a party in an epistemic dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position" then I can't even prove gravity, and in fact can "disprove" it by citing lack of evidence and contrary evidence. However that just seems like nonsense, and given I can do really neat things if I put on my engineer hat with all sorts of false approximations of the truth. It just seems like a really outdated form of thinking.
I appreciate where you are coming from but when you have people pushing their theology who are proven liars and scoundrels, you need a little more than just atheism as you define it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_sc....281991.29
Book of Isaiah, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Isaiah
From there:
The book opens by setting out the themes of judgement and subsequent restoration for the righteous. God has a plan which will be realised on the "Day of Yahweh", when Jerusalem will become the centre of his worldwide rule. On that day all the nations of the world will come to Zion (Jerusalem) for instruction, but first the city must be punished and cleansed of evil. Israel is invited to join in this plan. Chapters 5–12 explain the significance of the Assyrian judgement against Israel: righteous rule by the Davidic king will follow after the arrogant Assyrian monarch is brought down. Chapters 13–27 announce the preparation of the nations for Yahweh's world rule; chapters 28–33 announce that a royal saviour (a messiah) will emerge in the aftermath of Jerusalem's punishment and the destruction of her oppressor.
The oppressor (now identified as Babylon rather than Assyria) is about to fall. Chapters 34–35 tell how Yahweh will return the redeemed exiles to Jerusalem. Chapters 36–39 tell of the faithfulness of king Hezekiah to Yahweh during the Assyrian siege as a model for the restored community. Chapters 40–54 argues that the restoration of Zion is taking place because Yahweh, the creator of the universe, has designated the Persian king Cyrus the Great as the promised messiah and temple-builder. Chapters 55–66 are an exhortation to Israel to keep the covenant. God's eternal promise to David is now made to the people of Israel/Judah at large. The book ends by enjoining righteousness as the final stages of God's plan come to pass, including the pilgrimage of the nations to Zion and the realisation of Yahweh's kingship.
The dead sea scrolls MAY predate Jesus by radiocarbon dating, however as many copies of the book were found, the practice of copying the book was established. Thus I conclude they are not originals. Thus I conclude that it is reasonable and plausible that the jewish messiah myth predated the alleged historical jesus or jesus(pl). Does not mean he did exist, however "romans kept good records" is certainly NOT a true statement, it is a wonder we have anything at all from that period.
(March 7, 2014 at 8:44 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: ...
I don't believe it is hair splitting.
They are 2 different subjects. One specifically concerns the existence of gods, and the evidence for or against the claim. The other specifically concerns the real world, negative consequences concerning dogmatic theistic beliefs.
Well then I think basically "atheism" in your definition is useless as the lack of evidence for a god has absolutely no "proof" that there is not one. Any number of examples of things which are now known to be true, but previously had no evidence, abound. The proof that existing theologies are false and those who spread them are liars has actual teeth. I guess faced with that definition I would have to join Sagan as an agnostic. I just don't the philosopher's definition of logic regarding proof, if there were a "philosophical burden of proof or onus (probandi) is the obligation on a party in an epistemic dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position" then I can't even prove gravity, and in fact can "disprove" it by citing lack of evidence and contrary evidence. However that just seems like nonsense, and given I can do really neat things if I put on my engineer hat with all sorts of false approximations of the truth. It just seems like a really outdated form of thinking.
I appreciate where you are coming from but when you have people pushing their theology who are proven liars and scoundrels, you need a little more than just atheism as you define it.
