Dad on Youtube

[anyathesword]

You don't seem to be catching the fact that what some dude who might or might not have existed is irrelavent to what events did and did not take place centuries or millenia before that.

What some dude who might or might not have existed said or didn't say or did or didn't believe is irrelavent to whether what he said or believed is true or not.

All you are doing is engaging in circular reasoning, argument from authority, etc. Stop with the logical fallacies, take a step back and look at it objectively, without your faith goggles and a priori beliefs.




I've already explained to you 3 times now how it most certainly does not fit into history. Not even by a longshot.




What does "mud building a wall " and the name "habiru" (which is actually heavily contested to mean hebrew - acadamics don't simply assume this to be the case - only bible thumpers believe this to be the case) prove about anything remotely connected to exodus?

How is this evidence about anything connected to exodus?

Why didn't egyptian society collapse after losing a million worker hands overnight?
Why did egyptian society instead only grow stronger economically and in influence?

It makes no sense.

It doesn't make sense to me why the Holocaust happened, but it did.

The evidence is clues to the fact that the Egyptians were aware of the Israelites and had connections with them. The other papyrus I listed shows a list of slaves they had. The name on it was the same as in the Bible. A Hebrew name. Another papyrus tells about plagues Egypt suffered and they fit very well with the Biblical plagues. The fact is me or anyone else can give you as much facts or evidence or even just a little indirect knowledge about an event, nothing will change. You will think it never happened. Does that mean it didn't?

No. You can't prove that it didn't happen.

Well, I did some research here to answer your questions and from the looks of it, Egypt did not prosper after the Exodus. It started to decline.

"The military power of Egypt continued to decline during the reign of Amenhotep 3rd. In fact, he conducted only one campaign during his reign. The was against the Nubians in the fifth year of his reign.

The Tell el-Amarna Tablets date from his reign. Among these inscriptions are a number of letters from the king of Jerusalem to Amenhotep 3rd asking for help against invaders known as the Habiru.

The Habiru are plundering all the lands of the king. If no troops come in this very year, then all the lands of the king are lost. (King of Jerusalem).

The Habiru were not a specific racial group, but rather were thought of as barbarians. These particular Habiru may have been the Israelites under Joshua who were now moving into Canaan and taking the land. Because of her military decline, Egypt made no attempt at intervention.

Then with Akhenaton, he started a monothiest rerigious reform and he had no sons to succeed him, but he had seven daughters who were married to various Egyptian nobles. Disputes over succession arose and the country was plunged into civil war...

Egypt now stood balanced on the brink of collapse. The last few pharaohs had shown little interest in the administration and this only served to add to the troubled situation. Only a small spark would have been necessary to plunge Egypt into revolution and civil war.

Then with Rameses, some victories and building reforms were done."

Anyway, you can keep reading, but basically Egypt kept declining and became North and South.

EGYPT - THE LAND OF THE NILE

 

[anyathesword]

And 100% of my family celebrate Christmas.......and none of us believe it actually to be the birthday of a god....!

Read what DH says.....just because you believe in something doesn't make it TRUE....!

Ok? And?

It's true, Jesus was probably born in the Spring or fall.

It is a complicated thing that one guy decided to combine a gods birthday with the birthday of Jesus just to make the people happy. Thats where we get trees and présents and lights and whatever, it isn't Christian célébrations, it's pagan.

Yes and if you don't believe in something, it doesn't make it false.

What is true is true, whether you believe it or not!!!

 

[PsychoSarah]

Ok? And?

It's true, Jesus was probably born in the Spring or fall.

It is a complicated thing that one guy decided to combine a gods birthday with the birthday of Jesus just to make the people happy. Thats where we get trees and présents and lights and whatever, it isn't Christian célébrations, it's pagan.

Yes and if you don't believe in something, it doesn't make it false.

What is true is true, whether you believe it or not!!!

true that, but you know, it doesn't make what you believe more likely to be true than secular views.

 

[biggles53]

Ok? And?

It's true, Jesus was probably born in the Spring or fall.

It is a complicated thing that one guy decided to combine a gods birthday with the birthday of Jesus just to make the people happy. Thats where we get trees and présents and lights and whatever, it isn't Christian célébrations, it's pagan.

Yes and if you don't believe in something, it doesn't make it false.

What is true is true, whether you believe it or not!!!

No....you missed it...

You seem to think that, just because a significant percentage of people believe something, that this is somehow evidence for it being correct....

That is a logical fallacy, as has already been explained to you......it's called the argumentum ad populum fallacy, or appeal to popularity...

There is NO link between the extent of a belief and it's authenticity.....to repeat a couple of well-worn examples; most people at one time thought the sun orbited the earth, that diseases were caused by demons, that storms were caused by unhappy gods, that witches lived amongst them......they were WRONG, regardless of how many people thought those things were true...!

Tell me Anya, when Islam becomes the most populous religion on the planet, as it may well do in your lifetime, will you immediately convert...? After all, using your reasoning, how could so many people be wrong...!?

 

[anyathesword]

No....you missed it...

You seem to think that, just because a significant percentage of people believe something, that this is somehow evidence for it being correct....

That is a logical fallacy, as has already been explained to you......it's called the argumentum ad populum fallacy, or appeal to popularity...

There is NO link between the extent of a belief and it's authenticity.....to repeat a couple of well-worn examples; most people at one time thought the sun orbited the earth, that diseases were caused by demons, that storms were caused by unhappy gods, that witches lived amongst them......they were WRONG, regardless of how many people thought those things were true...!

Tell me Anya, when Islam becomes the most populous religion on the planet, as it may well do in your lifetime, will you immediately convert...? After all, using your reasoning, how could so many people be wrong...!?

No, the difference with Jesus and Christianity is the whole basis of saying it IS the TRUTH, nothing but the TRUTH; not maybe, not if you believe it or not, not if it sounds good or not, not a little here, a little there, not if it sounds like a fairytale, not if a human thinks it is or isn't, it just IS. That's it.

It's not maybe or a little or no it's not. Jesus said He is. Period.

No other religion or person has ever made this claim. It's not about popularity, it's not about feeling good, it's not about wishing it was true, it is true. In fact, logically, Jesus was not popular, that's why He was killed and tortured! God isn't popular, not many people follow Him, niether want to admit that He is quite real.

In my opinion, this is just my opinion; what's popular nowadays is Hollywood, models, sex, money, success, fame, and drugs.

You are right. People's belief doesn't dictate wether it is true or not. That's why it is true, whether you believe it or not.

Well, it's a little complicated but yes some diseases can be caused by demons. Witches do exist, especially in Satanist cults. How can you prove these things to be false? How can you prove that Jesus was a nobody and isn't the Truth?

Islam is not the Truth.

And I never used this reasoning, popularity means it's true. You said it, I don't agree with it.

 

[anyathesword]

true that, but you know, it doesn't make what you believe more likely to be true than secular views.

I know! That's why Jesus explained directly that He is the Truth. The rest is from the world...

 

[biggles53]

No, the difference with Jesus and Christianity is the whole basis of saying it IS the TRUTH, nothing but the TRUTH; not maybe, not if you believe it or not, not if it sounds good or not, not a little here, a little there, not if it sounds like a fairytale, not if a human thinks it is or isn't, it just IS. That's it.

It's not maybe or a little or no it's not. Jesus said He is. Period.

No other religion or person has ever made this claim. It's not about popularity, it's not about feeling good, it's not about wishing it was true, it is true. In fact, logically, Jesus was not popular, that's why He was killed and tortured! God isn't popular, not many people follow Him, niether want to admit that He is quite real.

In my opinion, this is just my opinion; what's popular nowadays is Hollywood, models, sex, money, success, fame, and drugs.

You are right. People's belief doesn't dictate wether it is true or not. That's why it is true, whether you believe it or not.

Well, it's a little complicated but yes some diseases can be caused by demons. Witches do exist, especially in Satanist cults. How can you prove these things to be false? How can you prove that Jesus was a nobody and isn't the Truth?

Islam is not the Truth.

And I never used this reasoning, popularity means it's true. You said it, I don't agree with it.

So let's see your rock-solid evidence...

"My religion is true because..........I say my religion is true...!"

"All other religions are NOT true because.......they aren't MY religion..!"

Yep.....can't argue with any of that....your evidence is just overwhelming..

(what were you saying again about people thinking that you were stupid......?)

 

[biggles53]

Oh....and I almost missed this little gem...

Well, it's a little complicated but yes some diseases can be caused by demons.

Please indicate which diseases are caused by demons, because, as a good little Christian, you should be demanding an exorcism for the poor sufferers....

Witches do exist, especially in Satanist cults.

Again, as a good Christian, why are you not demanding that these witches be hunted down and killed...? In fact, if you were a true follower of your faith, why aren't you seeking to kill them yourself...!?

 

[DogmaHunter]

It doesn't make sense to me why the Holocaust happened, but it did.

We're not discussing why it happened... we're discussing the non-existing evidence that it happened.

The evidence is clues to the fact that the Egyptians were aware of the Israelites and had connections with them.

1. the evidence barely suggests such a thing, if at all
2. being aware of a tribe of jews somwhere at some time is not the same as a million jewish slaves walking out of an ancient city.

Again, new york exists but that doesn't mean spiderman does as well.

The other papyrus I listed shows a list of slaves they had. The name on it was the same as in the Bible.

Acadamic source for this thing? Please. Also, a SINGLE name is just that: a single name. Nothing remotely similar to a MILLION slaves walking out overnight.

If we look hard enough, i'm sure we can find Roman and Greek slaves in egypt as well.

Another papyrus tells about plagues Egypt suffered and they fit very well with the Biblical plagues.

They don't. Academia dismiss this bible-thumper claim as selective reading and wishfull thinking.

The fact is me or anyone else can give you as much facts or evidence or even just a little indirect knowledge about an event, nothing will change. You will think it never happened.

But you didn't give me any facts or evidence. You only gave bible stories and claims rejected by actual academia. I would accept evidence if you had evidence. But you don't.

Here's a fun fact that I haven't told you yet...
I, as an atheist, actually used to believe the exodus story. Not with all the supernatural bits off course... But I used to assume that jews indeed were the slave class of Egypt, that they organised themselves and revolted against the authorities, that a dude named Mozes was their inspirational leader (kind of like Spartacus) and that during this revolution, they escaped into what was to be called Israel.

However, I changed my mind about that once it became increasingly clear that there is no evidence at all to support this and that instead there is plenty of evidence for the opposite like the fact that Egypt didn't collapse economically after losing a million worker hands or the fact that nothing in egyptian historical records can be found about that many jewish slaves ever being part of egypt.
Also the existence of evidence that jews ARE the lower class caanites that revolted against the elite. They never invaded this region. They ALREADY lived there.

No. You can't prove that it didn't happen.

Don't shift the burden of proof. It's upto the people that claim it happened to support it. Your claims aren't true by default until proven otherwise.

Well, I did some research here to answer your questions and from the looks of it, Egypt did not prosper after the Exodus. It started to decline.

Not because of a million slaves leaving overnight. You're randomly picking periods of troubles to support your a priori conclusions.

"The military power of Egypt continued to decline during the reign of Amenhotep 3rd. In fact, he conducted only one campaign during his reign. The was against the Nubians in the fifth year of his reign.

The Tell el-Amarna Tablets date from his reign. Among these inscriptions are a number of letters from the king of Jerusalem to Amenhotep 3rd asking for help against invaders known as the Habiru.

The Habiru are plundering all the lands of the king. If no troops come in this very year, then all the lands of the king are lost. (King of Jerusalem).

The Habiru were not a specific racial group, but rather were thought of as barbarians. These particular Habiru may have been the Israelites under Joshua who were now moving into Canaan and taking the land. Because of her military decline, Egypt made no attempt at intervention.

Keyword: "may". Academia dispute this.

Anyway, you can keep reading, but basically Egypt kept declining and became North and South.

You should read yourself and inform yourself from proper sources. This temporary decline and split had nothing to do with a million slave workers walking out.

 

[biggles53]

Anya, here are some of the words of Israel's leading academics and researchers....

"The Israelites never were in Egypt. They never came from abroad. This whole chain is broken. It is not a historical one. It is a later legendary reconstruction – made in the seventh century [BCE] – of a history that never happened."

Deconstructing the Walls of Jericho - Ze'er Harzog

"W]e have no clue, not even a single word, about the early Israelites in Egypt: neither in monumental inscriptions on the walls of temples, nor in tomb inscriptions, nor in papyri. Israel is absent – as a possible foe of Egypt, as a friend, or as an enslaved nation"

Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman

 

[PsychoSarah]

I know! That's why Jesus explained directly that He is the Truth. The rest is from the world...

So I should believe one guy who claimed to be of god, or all the worldly observations made in the more than 1000 years after... Hmmm

 

[anyathesword]

So let's see your rock-solid evidence...

"My religion is true because..........I say my religion is true...!"

"All other religions are NOT true because.......they aren't MY religion..!"

Yep.....can't argue with any of that....your evidence is just overwhelming..

(what were you saying again about people thinking that you were stupid......?)

You really don't understand do you? You don't get the simple point I'm getting across. Let's use the Law as an example.

All countries have laws. Driving Under the influence is against the Law. The Law here has the authority whether you like it or not.

So if I were to come and tell you my law is right because I say it is right! All other laws are not true because they are not MY laws!!!

Does that even make any sense to you?

The Law is the Authority whether you believe it to be or not.

I don't think I am as stupid as you think I am. You obviously are having a hard time with a simple subject here.

Jesus is the Authority. NOT whether I say or not! That's what HE said!

And stop acting like you know what I think, because you obviously don't know.

 

[PsychoSarah]

You really don't understand do you? You don't get the simple point I'm getting across. Let's use the Law as an example.

All countries have laws. Driving Under the influence is against the Law. The Law here has the authority whether you like it or not.

So if I were to come and tell you my law is right because I say it is right! All other laws are not true because they are not MY laws!!!

Does that even make any sense to you?

The Law is the Authority whether you believe it to be or not.

I don't think I am as stupid as you think I am. You obviously are having a hard time with a simple subject here.

Jesus is the Authority. NOT whether I say or not! That's what HE said!

And stop acting like you know what I think, because you obviously don't know.

But what if someone claims something to be the law, and they are wrong? Not only that, but we only "know" what Jesus said on the basis of people passing down the story a bit and finally, long after Jesus was dead, writing down the rules that had gone through decades of oral history (and thus making it highly likely that many of the events would become exaggerated or altered as they were retold over and over by memory). The people that wrote the bible claim Jesus said certain things; but Jesus himself never wrote in it, so why consider it reliable?

 

[anyathesword]

Oh....and I almost missed this little gem...



Please indicate which diseases are caused by demons, because, as a good little Christian, you should be demanding an exorcism for the poor sufferers....



Again, as a good Christian, why are you not demanding that these witches be hunted down and killed...? In fact, if you were a true follower of your faith, why aren't you seeking to kill them yourself...!?

I'm not going to discuss a subject that you mock. If you are interested, you have great books on it and witness testimonies and doctor reports.

Stop being so sarcastic, I don't know what you are trying to do. You obviously do not understand these subjects and how they work. I'm not a good little Christian and I never claimed to be.

Study for yourself if you are interested. You don't go hunting down witches to kill them. Please don't say stupid things.

Witches are normal people with demons Inside of them. They invite the demons into themselves willingly. They perform all kinds of supernatural acts. In the end they are destroyed by the demons Inside of them. These demons are too powerful for a human to fight. Only the name of Jesus can cast them out.

Do you ever take time to Watch movies based on true stories or do you just mock things because you think it's all fantasy and not true? These kind of things are not a joke. Take the Exorcism of Emily Rose for example.

Anyway, suit yourself and think what you will.

 

[DogmaHunter]

You really don't understand do you? You don't get the simple point I'm getting across. Let's use the Law as an example.

All countries have laws. Driving Under the influence is against the Law. The Law here has the authority whether you like it or not.

So if I were to come and tell you my law is right because I say it is right! All other laws are not true because they are not MY laws!!!

Does that even make any sense to you?

The Law is the Authority whether you believe it to be or not.

I don't get this law analogy at all. How is this analogous to your faith in a religion?

Jesus is the Authority. NOT whether I say or not! That's what HE said!

But you are believing it and we aren't.
Muhammed said other things. But you're not buying what islam is selling, right?

We aren't buying what your religion is selling. To me, this jezus dude is just a guy (assuming he even existed, off course) who believed a bunch of stuff. Just like any other guy, he can be wrong.

And stop acting like you know what I think, because you obviously don't know.

When you tell us, we do know.

You are using jezus in a fallacious argument from authority. We aren't accepting the dude as being an authority. In fact, speaking primarily for myself here, I don't accept anyone as being an authority.

People can be wrong and indeed ARE wrong all the time.

This is like throwing around bible verses at atheists... Nobody cares. Bible verses only impress people who actually believe the bible.

So whatever jezus said according to the bible only impresses people who actually believe the bible.

We aren't such people. Exodus however is an actual claim about an supposedly real event that actually took place in reality and not in supernatural lala-land.

Personally, I have no issue at all with accepting stories from the bible if the evidence to support those events exists. But in case of exodus, the evidence simply isn't there. And from academic archeology, it's actually the other way round... there's lots of evidence that the jewish background is not at all what the OT claims it is.

 

[anyathesword]

But what if someone claims something to be the law, and they are wrong? Not only that, but we only "know" what Jesus said on the basis of people passing down the story a bit and finally, long after Jesus was dead, writing down the rules that had gone through decades of oral history (and thus making it highly likely that many of the events would become exaggerated or altered as they were retold over and over by memory). The people that wrote the bible claim Jesus said certain things; but Jesus himself never wrote in it, so why consider it reliable?

I have a question for you. Have you ever read just parts of the Bible or even most of it and then read other religious books or myths or whatever? Do you see any difference in the way the Bible is written and in the way other religious books are written? Do you see the authority over and over again in it?
Jesus's story and what He said was passed down and was made certian to be passed down correctly and efficiently.

Did you know the Bible was the first document to ever be printed on a printing press?

I do believe Jesus wrote a passage in Révélations. Obviously it would be logical that the witnesses wrote down exactly what he said because they were there to witness it. Then passed it down and had it spread all over the world.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I have a question for you. Have you ever read just parts of the Bible or even most of it and then read other religious books or myths or whatever? Do you see any difference in the way the Bible is written and in the way other religious books are written? Do you see the authority over and over again in it?
Jesus's story and what He said was passed down and was made certian to be passed down correctly and efficiently.

Did you know the Bible was the first document to ever be printed on a printing press?

I do believe Jesus wrote a passage in Révélations. Obviously it would be logical that the witnesses wrote down exactly what he said because they were there to witness it. Then passed it down and had it spread all over the world.

I have read all of the bible, read Greek and Norse myths, have been exposed to Hindu mythology because of a relative from India, and I know a little bit about Egyptian gods. I have always found religion fascinating and hope to obtain a Quran for summer reading. I did know that the bible was the first book on the printing press, and it isn't particularly shocking. However, the only significant difference I see between those other stories and myths compared to the bible is that they are more well written and contradict themselves less , and the gods of those ancient religions (Hindu being perhaps the oldest surviving religion and thus could also be considered ancient) also are more relatable and are more realistic in my opinion when it comes to their personalities. Overall, I don't see anything special about the bible beyond the cultural significance it has had in human history.

 

[anyathesword]

I don't get this law analogy at all. How is this analogous to your faith in a religion?



But you are believing it and we aren't.
Muhammed said other things. But you're not buying what islam is selling, right?

We aren't buying what your religion is selling. To me, this jezus dude is just a guy (assuming he even existed, off course) who believed a bunch of stuff. Just like any other guy, he can be wrong.



When you tell us, we do know.

You are using jezus in a fallacious argument from authority. We aren't accepting the dude as being an authority. In fact, speaking primarily for myself here, I don't accept anyone as being an authority.

People can be wrong and indeed ARE wrong all the time.

This is like throwing around bible verses at atheists... Nobody cares. Bible verses only impress people who actually believe the bible.

So whatever jezus said according to the bible only impresses people who actually believe the bible.

We aren't such people. Exodus however is an actual claim about an supposedly real event that actually took place in reality and not in supernatural lala-land.

Personally, I have no issue at all with accepting stories from the bible if the evidence to support those events exists. But in case of exodus, the evidence simply isn't there. And from academic archeology, it's actually the other way round... there's lots of evidence that the jewish background is not at all what the OT claims it is.

My faith does not determine that Jesus is true. He determines wether He is true or not.

Well thank God Jesus was not only a man, now was He?? He was God too! If He was so ordinary and not influential, then our AD and BC would have no meaning!

I'm not giving bible verses here. I'm giving summeries because I know it doesn't matter to you guys anyway.

So who are the Jews then?

 

[anyathesword]

So I should believe one guy who claimed to be of god, or all the worldly observations made in the more than 1000 years after... Hmmm

Because Jesus already knew what the world was like and was going to be like. That's why He told His disciples many things and you can see them written in the Bible. The world today is exactly like He said it was.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I know the questions aren't directed at me, but out of boredom i'll answer anyway.

I have a question for you. Have you ever read just parts of the Bible or even most of it and then read other religious books or myths or whatever?

I've read the bible cover to cover twice. I re-read certain chapters afterwards.
I've also read the quran cover to cover, parts of the bagavad Ghita and some parts of Greek, Roman and Egyptian mythology.

Do you see any difference in the way the Bible is written and in the way other religious books are written?

Not really, no.
Each of these books have their own style and stuff, sure.
But all are obviously religious books written with an undertone of authority.

Do you see the authority over and over again in it?

The book written with the biggest undertone of authority is by far the Quran.

Jesus's story and what He said was passed down and was made certian to be passed down correctly and efficiently.

lol. Do you even know how the bible was compiled? Centuries after jezus alledgelly lived? It sounds like you don't.

At least with the Quran, the book was compiled in full within 20 years after muhammed died (who, btw, certainly lived as there's plenty of contemporary and independent confirmation of the man existing). Not only was it compiled within 2 decades after his death... it was also compiled by his very companions. Meaning that the quran is a collection of first hand accounts, with no generations of oral tradition in between.

If we are going to use the way these books are compiled and written as a measure of how believable they are, then the Quran wins hands down. No competition at atll.

Did you know the Bible was the first document to ever be printed on a printing press?

This is relevant why exactly?

I do believe Jesus wrote a passage in Révélations

It doesn't matter what you believe.

Obviously it would be logical that the witnesses wrote down exactly what he said because they were there to witness it. Then passed it down and had it spread all over the world.

No different then Muhammed's companions then I guess. Except, off course, that we actually have evidence of the Quran being compiled in written form by those very people within 20 years after his death, while the bible was only compiled centuries later.

You should be carefull with these kinds of arguments if those exact arguments actually give more credibility to a rivaling religion.