The entire point is that their historical existence AND THEIR CLAIMS have absolutely nothing to do with each other.None of them are viewed to be gods. Only one even addresses a god. No proof of Jesus does not negate his divinity.
Your pursuit of specific names and dates and copies is a misguided red-herring.No, what I'm getting at is how accurate the transmission of the teachings from the founding/founder of the religion or earliest evidence of it. With lots of manuscripts from different time periods, you can follow corruptions in the text. The closer to the original text usually means the better chance it was copied accurately.You make an excellent point.However, how accurately something was copied has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the inherent truth value of the original teaching.
Your very oldest and most accurate transcripts are from "The Dead Sea Scrolls" and the overwhelming majority of that goldmine does not support the modern christian viewpoint.There is both Masoretic text and Septuagint text found in the caves. With the book of Isaiah, there are only a few minor transmission errors until the earliest full Masoretic text is found. This shows the great degree of care taken in copying the text from generation to generation. The Christian copyists were not quite as careful, but we have more manuscript evidence from an earlier timeframe than any other ancient manuscript evidence.However, how accurately something was copied has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the inherent truth value of the original teaching.
The Epic of Gilgamesh is an ancient writing that we have multiple, independent original manuscripts of, that very closely corroborate each other.Original usually implies one. Someone writes the original and others copy from it.Thanks, more hair-splitting.
By "original" I mean the actual paper and or clay tablet and or inscribed bone or shell that was written on by people of ancient times.
This would be in contrast to a writing about a supposed (or claim of) older teaching, like when Plato speaks of Atlantis.Plato doesn't offer any original manuscripts from actual Atlantians. He just makes a claim, and writes it down.According to the Midrash, the Torah was created prior to the creation of the world, and was used as the blueprint for Creation.[3] The majority of Biblical scholars believe that the written books were a product of the Babylonian captivity (c. 600 BCE), based on earlier written and oral traditions, which could only have arisen from separate communities within ancient Israel, and that it was completed by the period of Achaemenid rule (c. 400 BCE).[4][5]
whatever the rather pretentious phrase 'ultimate reality' means!
The modern scholarly consensus is that the Torah has multiple authors and that its composition took place over centuries.[21] This contemporary common hypothesis among biblical scholars states that the first major comprehensive draft of the Pentateuch was composed in the late 7th or the 6th century BCE (the Jahwist source), and that this was later expanded by the addition of various narratives and laws (the Priestly source) into a work very like the one existing today. [wiki]
In a similar way the Jewish Torah ITSELF claims to be like, super super old, even older than the universe, but the oldest actual copy (original manuscript) we have is...
University of Bologna Professor Mauro Perani announced the results of carbon-14 tests authenticating the scroll's age as roughly 800 years old.The scroll dates to between 1155 and 1225, making it the oldest complete Torah scroll on record.[LINK]
Based on these fact alone (age and multiple copies), do you believe the Epic of Gilgamesh is true?I'm going to hazard a guess of "no".True, in what sense? Obviously, it is a legitimate record from the time since it is carved in stone. It is also based on a historical king, confirmed by archeologists. The rest of the story seems to be clocked in legend and myth.Ok, so when Enki (a.k.a. EA, the god of water, knowledge, and creation) tells Utnapishtim (Noah) to demolish his house and build a boat to save his family from the super top secret scheduled flood... THAT'S JUST A RIDICULOUS MYTH?
It sorta seems like you're saying, "how accurately something was copied has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the inherent truth value of the original teaching".
Not really. Making predictions does not, itself, mean anything at all. What you need is a RELIABLE SYSTEM OF MAKING PREDICTIONS THAT IS INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIABLE. Making some number of accurate predictions without revealing your methods "oh, I had a dream or vision or heard a voice" - is less than meaningless.1. I challenge you to show me biblical predictions/prophecy that are wrong from what I gave you (Daniel 2, 9, 12).2. Nostradamus' prophecies are too ambiguous. You can make them into anything.3. History is a verifier of biblical prophecy.Let's just say for the sake of argument, that Daniel 2, 9, 12 is 1000000000000000000% accu-rat.Does this fact alone lend any credibility to any of their beliefs about GODS? Not really. Making predictions does not, itself, mean anything at all.
Ok, but does that mean, that hypothetically speaking, if you were convinced that some other religion (Judaism) had older and more reliable texts than yours (Christianity), that you would then convert? That is the crux.Not if the very texts you read speak of a Messiah that would come to the people and the people do not exist in covenant after AD 70. Not if your Scriptures describe a Messiah coming before Jerusalem is once again destroyed. Not if these NT authors appealed to your very OT scriptures and showed you how they all apply to Jesus, and were willing to go to their deaths proclaiming the Messiah had come, was put to death and had risen from the dead and to repent before the coming judgment that God continually warned these OT people would come if they did not repent and turn to them, then they crucify the Sent One, the Deliverer, as Moses forecasted.
Regarding Jesus’ birth—Isaiah 7:14: “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.” Isaiah 9:6: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Micah 5:2: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.”
Concerning Jesus' ministry and death—Zechariah 9:9: “Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.”
Psalm 22:16-18: “Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet. I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing.”
Linguistic arbitrariness is always favored by the atheist, who makes arguments that are contingent on twisting language in order to justify an irrational and obviously moronic position.If they don't believe truth, why make exception in language!
What do you base your notion that atheists don't believe in truth on? It seems to me that you base it on an idosyncratic theory that god and truth are interchangeable synonyms. That is what I flatly reject.If they don't believe truth, why make exception in language!
I already included biblical verses on how the records were passed down from generation to generation until they were codified by Moses and possibly those he used to help him. I.e., Genesis 5:1.
In a similar way the Jewish Torah ITSELF claims to be like, super super old, even older than the universe, but the oldest actual copy (original manuscript) we have is...Yes, it does, like the genealogies that were passed down and trace humanity to Adam and Eve. (see link above).
University of Bologna Professor Mauro Perani announced the results of carbon-14 tests authenticating the scroll's age as roughly 800 years old.The scroll dates to between 1155 and 1225, making it the oldest complete Torah scroll on record.[LINK]Interesting! Not that old.
True, in what sense? Obviously, it is a legitimate record from the time since it is carved in stone. It is also based on a historical king, confirmed by archeologists. The rest of the story seems to be clocked in legend and myth.Ok, so when Enki (a.k.a. EA, the god of water, knowledge, and creation) tells Utnapishtim (Noah) to demolish his house and build a boat to save his family from the super top secret scheduled flood... THAT'S JUST A RIDICULOUS MYTH?Many ancient records contain creation and flood accounts which makes you wonder if they borrowed from a common source that was corrupted over the years as they departed from the true account. Many ancient beliefs around the world contain such accounts that, because of oral tradition before the written accounts, have been corrupted.
It sorta seems like you're saying, "how accurately something was copied has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the inherent truth value of the original teaching".I'm saying the OT or Hebrew Bible, having many authors, is one cohesive and unified account that deals with common themes and deals mostly with a specific people, Israel and how it relates to God.
Let's just say for the sake of argument, that Daniel 2, 9, 12 is 1000000000000000000% accu-rat.Does this fact alone lend any credibility to any of their beliefs about GODS? Not really. Making predictions does not, itself, mean anything at all.If it is 100% accurate then, since it claims to be a revelation of God speaking to Daniel, it would confirm it is God's revelation.
Well stated.Unless you believe every god exists you are an atheist on some level. If you believe any god exists you are a theist on some level.
You may enjoy this BBC radio podcast on linguistic philosophy. Not quite as dry as it seems!c.20MB.
That is you don't merely demand that reality 'is' (which is not indispute) but that 'reality so loved the world that it gave its only begotten son... etc', that reality hears and answers prayers and damns sinners to hell.
I appreciate your generosity, and your candor.And since I am aware that atheists aren't aware of this and take much pride in their error, I try to be nice about it because haven't we all been very wrong at times? I know I have.
It would be haughty to presume that just because you can see only 2 possibilities means that those are the only 2 possibilities.
The point here is that I care about as much as YOU DO about the accuracy of Hindu prophecy. Because, even if Hindu prophecy was 100% accurate, it would still not convince you to change your beliefs. Accurate predictions are made by mortals every day of the year. IT PROVES NOTHING. People thought Democritus was a GOD when he proved he could predict the weather. Ancient people were quite unskeptical.You made the claim that these ancient religions were equivalent.They are all unfalsifiable (based on unknowable claims that are beyond our epistemological limits) AND logically incoherent.
There is not much specific to Hindu prophecy, whereas the biblical prophecy is very specific.So exactly when is the Jesus going to return to Earth?
Look, ok, let's say that, just between you and me, every prediction of the holy scriptures is the very face of perfection.That still means absolutely zero regarding any other untestable claims.For example, if Democritus said, "There will be a terrible storm in two weeks time" and, verily, it came to pass exactly as he predicted, and then Democritus said, "Your wife will become pregnant and will bear a son" does this mean that Democritus is divinely inspired?
And then, if Democritus said, "Everyone should get together and build a temple to the goddess Demo and bring peace offerings to her daily, especially wine, for the goddess Demo absolutely loves wine and it puts her in a good humor so she doesn't send earthquakes and foreign invaders and stuff that you don't like."Would you, personally, drop everything and worship the great and powerful Demo?
Show me a human/humans who has/have made hundreds of prediction before the facts that have come to pass.Wow, I was wondering when you might ask me this... Let me introduce you to, Tom Skilling - https://www.facebook.com/pg/TomSkilling/posts/He has made literally thousands of accurate predictions before the facts have come to pass.
How does a human know so many things in advance?I have no earthly idea, therefore TOM SKILLING MUST CERTAINLY BE DIVINELY INSPIRED, you can't prove me wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!It is not normal nor can it be demonstrated with complete accuracy, except I claim from the Bible when properly interpreted.The qualifier, "when properly interpreted" is an awesome loophole.
And don't forget that even stock traders can go on a hot streak, but, by law, they still need to inform the public that, "past performance is not a guarantee of future results".
Well stated.If you were to conceive that the nature of God is actually more like light and water than any physical form or substance then maybe you can perceive how everything within that Reality is immersed within the very same substance therefore there is no true distinction between what is created and the Creator. That would be like saying clay is no longer clay because it was formed into an object. Or that water is no longer water because you poured it into another glass....
Yes it is. There is no evidence that Jesus was a real person who lived on Earth. Period. I believe all kinds of stuff about my gods too. They don't walk around on Earth just like Jesus.
Wow, I was wondering when you might ask me this... Let me introduce you to, Tom Skilling - https://www.facebook.com/pg/TomSkilling/posts/
Your very oldest and most accurate transcripts are from "The Dead Sea Scrolls" and the overwhelming majority of that goldmine does not support the modern christian viewpoint.There is both Masoretic text and Septuagint text found in the caves. With the book of Isaiah, there are only a few minor transmission errors until the earliest full Masoretic text is found. This shows the great degree of care taken in copying the text from generation to generation. The Christian copyists were not quite as careful, but we have more manuscript evidence from an earlier timeframe than any other ancient manuscript evidence.
Wow, I was wondering when you might ask me this... Let me introduce you to, Tom Skilling - https://www.facebook.com/pg/TomSkilling/posts/What is it you want me to glean from this link since I receive a popup that wants me to give my name and email address which I refuse to do. I am not a member of Facebook.Please list some of the specifics.
