RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
January 1, 2019 at 4:26 pm
(This post was last modified: January 1, 2019 at 4:54 pm by T0 Th3 M4X.)
So about 10 minutes into the video and so far:
- Most of it is based on conjecture. Such as "The nomads would have behaved a certain way." How do they know?
- They claim there is no evidence for the patriarchs, but if you admittedly don't know something, you can't logically form a negative position on their existence. They used the example of Abraham. They stated there is no evidence, since they don't assume the Bible to be factual, so as such there is no way for them to know who Abraham was, along with how or if he existed. If they admittedly don't know, then they can't form a conclusion.
So just to expand on the technical problems with their statements, and I'll use citations for these, the Mari Tablets have demonstrated something completely different than what they're asserting.
From Encyclopedia Britannica under Abraham, section titled:
The Genesis narrative in the light of recent scholarship
The saga of Abraham unfolds between two landmarks, the exodus from “Ur of the Chaldeans” (Ur Kasdim) of the family, or clan, of Terah and “the purchase of” (or “the burials in”) the cave of Machpelah. Tradition seems particularly firm on this point. The Hebrew text, in fact, locates the departure specifically at Ur Kasdim, the Kasdim being none other than the Kaldu of the cuneiform texts at Mari. It is manifestly a migration of which one tribe is the centre. The leader of the movement is designated by name: Terah, who “takes them out” from Ur, Abram his son, Lot the son of Haran, another son of Terah, and their wives, the best known being Sarai, the wife of Abram. The existence of another son of Terah, Nahor, who appears later, is noted.
Most scholars agree that Ur Kasdim was the Sumerian city of Ur, today Tall al-Muqayyar (or Mughair), about 200 miles (300 km) southeast of Baghdad in lower Mesopotamia, which was excavated from 1922 to 1934...
(Jumping down to Paragraph 4, since the whole bit is kinda long, and might as well get to the point)
There have been many surprising items in the thousands of tablets found in the palace at Mari. Not only are the Ḫapiru (“Hebrews”) mentioned but so also remarkably are the Banu Yamina (“Benjaminites”). It is not that the latter are identical with the family of Benjamin, a son of Jacob, but rather that a name with such a biblical ring appears in these extrabiblical sources in the 18th century bce. What seems beyond doubt is that these Benjaminites (or Yaminites, meaning “Sons of the Right,” or “Sons of the South,” according to their habits of orientation) are always indicated as being north of Mari and in Harran, in the Temple of Sin."
____
In light of the first 10 minutes, I would say the video is problematic. The whole point of there venture was to try and disprove the Bible, and as such, they found a way to do it in their own heads while disregarding what has already been discovered and disregarding that knowledge.
But I suppose I'll hear more Buckyisms about why I shouldn't listen to the mean old encyclopedia.
My preference is always to have friendly dialogue, but sometimes it's not as easy as it sounds. I do apologize. Although there are disagreements, I find value in everybody regardless of belief (or disbelief). It doesn't mean I wouldn't want to toss them into a pool of hungry sharks at times, but I'm sure others feel the same way about me.
- Most of it is based on conjecture. Such as "The nomads would have behaved a certain way." How do they know?
- They claim there is no evidence for the patriarchs, but if you admittedly don't know something, you can't logically form a negative position on their existence. They used the example of Abraham. They stated there is no evidence, since they don't assume the Bible to be factual, so as such there is no way for them to know who Abraham was, along with how or if he existed. If they admittedly don't know, then they can't form a conclusion.
So just to expand on the technical problems with their statements, and I'll use citations for these, the Mari Tablets have demonstrated something completely different than what they're asserting.
From Encyclopedia Britannica under Abraham, section titled:
The Genesis narrative in the light of recent scholarship
The saga of Abraham unfolds between two landmarks, the exodus from “Ur of the Chaldeans” (Ur Kasdim) of the family, or clan, of Terah and “the purchase of” (or “the burials in”) the cave of Machpelah. Tradition seems particularly firm on this point. The Hebrew text, in fact, locates the departure specifically at Ur Kasdim, the Kasdim being none other than the Kaldu of the cuneiform texts at Mari. It is manifestly a migration of which one tribe is the centre. The leader of the movement is designated by name: Terah, who “takes them out” from Ur, Abram his son, Lot the son of Haran, another son of Terah, and their wives, the best known being Sarai, the wife of Abram. The existence of another son of Terah, Nahor, who appears later, is noted.
Most scholars agree that Ur Kasdim was the Sumerian city of Ur, today Tall al-Muqayyar (or Mughair), about 200 miles (300 km) southeast of Baghdad in lower Mesopotamia, which was excavated from 1922 to 1934...
(Jumping down to Paragraph 4, since the whole bit is kinda long, and might as well get to the point)
There have been many surprising items in the thousands of tablets found in the palace at Mari. Not only are the Ḫapiru (“Hebrews”) mentioned but so also remarkably are the Banu Yamina (“Benjaminites”). It is not that the latter are identical with the family of Benjamin, a son of Jacob, but rather that a name with such a biblical ring appears in these extrabiblical sources in the 18th century bce. What seems beyond doubt is that these Benjaminites (or Yaminites, meaning “Sons of the Right,” or “Sons of the South,” according to their habits of orientation) are always indicated as being north of Mari and in Harran, in the Temple of Sin."
____
In light of the first 10 minutes, I would say the video is problematic. The whole point of there venture was to try and disprove the Bible, and as such, they found a way to do it in their own heads while disregarding what has already been discovered and disregarding that knowledge.
But I suppose I'll hear more Buckyisms about why I shouldn't listen to the mean old encyclopedia.
(January 1, 2019 at 3:55 pm)pocaracas Wrote:(January 1, 2019 at 2:51 pm)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: You are always fair and kind, and I can honestly say I've enjoyed my conversations with you.
Thank, man.
I've also enjoyed my conversations with you, but I must admit I don't enjoy many of the conversations you have with others... they seem more like "did too, did not, did too, did not, did too, did not"... it's a frustrating read.
My preference is always to have friendly dialogue, but sometimes it's not as easy as it sounds. I do apologize. Although there are disagreements, I find value in everybody regardless of belief (or disbelief). It doesn't mean I wouldn't want to toss them into a pool of hungry sharks at times, but I'm sure others feel the same way about me.
![[Image: 2010-SMB-001.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=scoutmasterbucky.com%2Fgraphics%2FSMB%2520Historical%2520Items%2F2010-SMB-001.jpg)
![[Image: s-l640.jpg]](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/DjAAAOSwpIhe1HCM/s-l640.jpg)
