Chat with a creationist

[Abishalom]

No, I'm not confusing the two. I made it quite clear that I distinguished between consistent and identical. Just because the message might be consistent (not identical) does not prove that it came from any OT books as we know it today, and that those OT books that it's consistent with must then predate that 10th century pottery. What if both the OT books and the pottery have another older source or sources in common?

As I've said before, I'm not knowledgable in this field, and I could very well be wrong. It's just that saying that a fragment proves the existence of some books of the Bible being from the 10th century BC seems like a huge leap to me.

Well then you must be misunderstanding the argument. I never said the artifact inscription must have came from the OT we have today. I said that there must have been scripture already in circulation since AT LEAST 10th century BC. Like I previously said the OT was completed by at least 2nd century BC (when the Septuagint was completed). But the Septuagint was a Greek translation of the original Hebrew, so there was obviously scripture already available at the time.

It may be 'just a fragment". But it's a fragment (of something larger obviously) written in Hebrew FOUND IN ISRAEL that contained themes not present in neighboring cultures (ie. protect the widow, orphan, stranger poor and oppressed etc) and was dated to the 10th century BC. These themes just so happen to be in the bible we know today. Obviously these concepts have been around for a while. That's not a huge leap...well maybe it is for you. But let's just say it is a "huge leap", then what would be more plausible other than "we don't know" (more like we don't want to know)?

[Minimalist]

You don't know shit about any facts but Khirbet Qeiyafa is a wet dream. First of all, side by side translations of it show wildly different meanings. In addition the noted American scholar , Chris Rollston has dismissed the idea of it being Hebrew.

Secondly, if it were in Hebrew so what?. It has nothing to do with any biblical text which, in case you forgot, was the original question posed.

The whining opinions of aged biblical apologists that there must have been a Hebrew version before the Greek are based on wishes. Where is the evidence for THOSE writings?

Do you understand what you are looking for now?

[Abishalom]

You don't know shit about any facts but Khirbet Qeiyafa is a wet dream. First of all, side by side translations of it show wildly different meanings. In addition the noted American scholar , Chris Rollston has dismissed the idea of it being Hebrew.

Secondly, if it were in Hebrew so what?. It has nothing to do with any biblical text which, in case you forgot, was the original question posed.

The whining opinions of aged biblical apologists that there must have been a Hebrew version before the Greek are based on wishes. Where is the evidence for THOSE writings?

Do you understand what you are looking for now?

Do you have a link to those side by side translations (or the argument from Chris Rollston for that matter)?

If it isn't Hebrew then what was it? If it is Hebrew and that translation is correct then yes the theme present is consistent with what's in the bible.

Nobody is saying that there must have been a "Hebrew bible" prior. I am saying there must have been scriptures in circulation. It's not like they had books or a printing press back then. They had scriptures on scrolls. So you are asking for something that doesn't exist. The "bible" wasn't officially put together until about 4th century AD. But the scriptures were already in circulation for centuries prior.

[FallentoReason]

1. The distance of the earth from the sun within the right amount of degrees in which if we were even slightly closer we would burn to death or slightly further, we would freeze to death. The mechanism of the human body, especially the workings of the human eye. The earth's perfect ecosystem. These are some of the proofs of God, but you don't want there to be God, so why even bother asking for proof? Until God opens your eyes, you will live your life reasoning Him away!

Tell him to look into the sky like 'Abraham' did. Every single star up there could potentially be a solar system like ours. By default we represent the low probability of life because we are here.

Also, the earth is only a 'perfect ecosystem' because it's adapted to the environment. It doesn't work backwards in the sense that one can say the ecosystem is perfect because the earth was placed just right. Instead, our planet was in an optimal position therefore life could commence.

2. Well, the earth varies in temperature between roughly -30 degrees to roughly 120+ degrees and that has been consistent for as far back as it has been measured. The fact that it rotates on its axis around the sun keeps us from entirely freezing when we are further away and entirely burning up when we are closer. I can't tell you the exact amount closer, but amazing how it has remained at a survivable distance for all this time! How did the eye evolve over time, please explain.

Again, out of the billions upon billions of planets out there, the earth by default represents the chance that a planet could have the features like ours. It's basic probability.

A 4 minute explanation of the evolution of the eye: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Stb9pQc9Kq0

3. Now, as far as historical accuracy, are you saying that there were no such people as the Babylonians, the Chaldeans, the Egyptians(that's an easy one), the Hebrews(another softball)? What about countries cities like Rome or countries like Greece, Spain and Egypt? What about the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers or the Red Sea? What about Mt Ararat? What about people like Pontius Pilate, the kings of Israel David and Solomon, Cyrus King of Persia and Herod the Great? All historical people! Facts!

?

Spiderman lives in New York, a real city. Is spiderman real? I don't understand the point he's trying to make.

4. All of those things I listed are in the Bible. You said there are no facts in the Bible, I wanted to prove to you that there are! And with the Bible putting those people, places and things in the proper context of history, it lends the Bible some credibility. Do you have any such thing by which to argue evolution?

Ah I see. Spiderman lives in New York, a real city. Spiderman is not real.

I just posted a thread on transitional fossils. That's usually one of the topics creationists will bring up against evolution.

4. It proves historical accuracy, now you are just being a denier. Part of the reason I trust it is because it records history accurately. Actually, 93% is kind of high from what I hear, but even if that is true, so what?  It is a theory that everyone keeps calling fact. You have NO historical data to prove it and it keeps changing constantly. Although the Bible has different versions and has been printed in many languages, the basic message has not been changed.

No historical data to prove what? Jesus? Well yes... that is correct. Transitional fossils? There is data in the form of fossils that gives evidence for this, hence why the theory hasn't been trashed because it still holds true.

5. Gravity is not a theory it is a LAW!! Obviously I am not the clueless one here. Please tell me how the Bible came into existence. Historians, non-Christian ones have verified the existence of Jesus of Nazareth and his death on a cross. Yes, He could be considered a revolutionary to the religious system of the time, but a good teacher? Jesus is recorded as calling Himself God. Do you think Him to be a good teacher with claims like that?

We don't have any writings from eyewitnesses, so it's all baseless assertions until shown otherwise. Tell him to read Matthew 9:9 and ask him why he speaks in 3rd person.

6. First off, only the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, the New Testament was written in Greek. Those languages have not changed and we can still translate them today, as a matter of fact that's exactly what theologians do! Sorry dude(assuming I am talking to a male figure here), but you make bad arguments and you have your "facts" very wrong. I would do a little more study to know what you are speaking about. Good day!

Translating is a trivial topic.

[Justtristo]

The whining opinions of aged biblical apologists that there must have been a Hebrew version before the Greek are based on wishes. Where is the evidence for THOSE writings?

Do you understand what you are looking for now?

May I ask are there any scholars who would argue for the Old Testament originally being written in Greek, rather than Hebrew and Aramaic in some sections (such as the book of Daniel).

[Abishalom]

Tell him to look into the sky like 'Abraham' did. Every single star up there could potentially be a solar system like ours. By default we represent the low probability of life because we are here.

You're using appeal to probability. There are billions of solar systems in the universe therefore there must a at least 1 with life. That's not a reasonable conclusion.

Also, the earth is only a 'perfect ecosystem' because it's adapted to the environment. It doesn't work backwards in the sense that one can say the ecosystem is perfect because the earth was placed just right. Instead, our planet was in an optimal position therefore life could commence.

I'm that's not a reasonable rebuttal of the fact the earth (out of billions of planets) is the only documented one with diverse life.

Again, out of the billions upon billions of planets out there, the earth by default represents the chance that a planet could have the features like ours. It's basic probability.

A 4 minute explanation of the evolution of the eye:

In what way does a guy BUILDING a model that resembles eye function of various organism prove that they "evolved" naturally. There no logic or evidence in this video to support that claim.

Spiderman lives in New York, a real city. Is spiderman real? I don't understand the point he's trying to make.

Spiderman isn't in the bible (). But those peoples mentioned are and in correct order that agrees with history.

Ah I see. Spiderman lives in New York, a real city. Spiderman is not real.

I just posted a thread on transitional fossils. That's usually one of the topics creationists will bring up against evolution.

Well then Spiderman doesn't actually live in New York (since he's not real).

No historical data to prove what? Jesus? Well yes... that is correct. Transitional fossils? There is data in the form of fossils that gives evidence for this, hence why the theory hasn't been trashed because it still holds true.

Post link to thread please.

[Minimalist]

The whining opinions of aged biblical apologists that there must have been a Hebrew version before the Greek are based on wishes. Where is the evidence for THOSE writings?

Do you understand what you are looking for now?

May I ask are there any scholars who would argue for the Old Testament originally being written in Greek, rather than Hebrew and Aramaic in some sections (such as the book of Daniel).

It probably was not written at all until the Greeks came along. Many religions begin as oral tales in the hands of priests. The fact that we have no texts...or even inscriptions in tombs argues against any great literary tradition. Perhaps Philip R Davies would be the best place to start.

[Abishalom]

It probably was not written at all until the Greeks came along. Many religions begin as oral tales in the hands of priests. The fact that we have no texts...or even inscriptions in tombs argues against any great literary tradition. Perhaps Philip R Davies would be the best place to start.

Why do you make such baseless assumptions? Are you aware that it was the Greeks who ordered the Greek translation of the bible from Hebrew as a "scholarly writing"? So obviously the scriptures had to have been around for quite some time.

If you have Google Chrome you can translate this page. But this is a tomb dated to at least 6th or 7th century BC.
http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%9...7%99%D7%AA

So we can safely conclude that the Hebrew scriptures were at least in already circulation at some prior time to the 6th/7th century BC. Of course I posted an article discussing a Hebrew artifact dated around 10th century BC. That coupled with the fact that the Hebrew language has been around since at least 10th century BC. Then we can safely conclude that the Hebrew culture has been around since at least some time prior to the 10th century BC.

[Drich]

Hey, shithead, all you have to do is produce a Hebrew document of the torah which pre-dates the Septuagint. I'm sure there will be legions of biblical scholars in your debt because you have found something that all of them combined have missed.

All you have to do is post it.


You'll forgive me if I do not hold my breath waiting for you to come up with something which does not exist?

we had this conversation 3 different times and each time you got a link to the dead sea scrolls main page. do you need another?

[DeeTee]

Here is a link to the Khirbet Qeiyafa home page

http://qeiyafa.huji.ac.il/

People who do not want the Bible shown to be true love to sit in their chairs and just deny. They refuse to present any evidence to the contrary as it is easier to deny than do their own work.

Here is a link to the ostracon page

http://qeiyafa.huji.ac.il/ostracon.asp

I have heard about this discovery but have not had the time to investigate more fully but I have no problem with it being an example of 10th century BC work. Seems that I. finkelstein has written on the topic as well and his position is of no surprise because he needs to protect his low chronology. If the discovery stands it destroys Finkelstein's theory.

http://zwingliusredivivus.wordpress.com/...l-qeiyafa/