(May 15, 2015 at 2:54 pm)Nestor Wrote:(May 15, 2015 at 2:42 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Dismissing the OT which is just dog shit as far as historical evidence is concernedThe OT contains a lot of important historical and geographical information, especially about conflicts the early Hebrews confronted. True, it's full of myth and embellishment, but so was practically every ancient text prior to (and still many following) the 5th century. It isn't until Thucydides that we have the first serious attempt (Herodotus notwithstanding) at reporting events free of nationalistic and religious fervor, and even then we have to take account of blatantly false information and individual bias.
The OT is terrible as history, even forgetting all of the ridiculous miracles. For example, the Jews were never enslaved en mass in Egypt, nor did they wander the desert for 40 years. It is so unreliable that nothing in it should be believed, unless confirmed by some independent evidence. And then one is simply believing the independent evidence, not the OT.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
