Total topics: 8
History sections and mythohistory sections usually do very well on websites. Shouldn't Dart implement this?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Miscellaneous
Methuselah
What is one of the biggest arguments "against" the historicity of biblical characters? Well of course, it is their unbelievable longevity.
Take Methuselah as an example, he is said to be the bibles longest living human at an incredible and unbelievable 969 years.
Methuselah (US: /məˈθuːzˌlɑː/) (Hebrew: מְתוּשֶׁלַח Məṯūšélaḥ, in pausa מְתוּשָׁלַח Məṯūšā́laḥ, "Man of the javelin" or "Death of Sword";[1] Greek: Μαθουσάλας Mathousalas)[2] was a biblical patriarch and a figure in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Having died at the age of 969, he lived the longest of all human figures mentioned in the Bible.[3]
Enmebaragesi
However, we have a king on the Sumerian king list named Enmebaragesi whom is credited with having reigned in Sumeria for 900 years and until recently was thought to be a mythological figure. However recent archaeological excavations have found Enmebaragesi a place in the history books afterall.
Enmebaragesi (Sumerian:𒂗𒈨𒁈𒄄𒋛)[3] originally Mebarasi (Sumerian:𒈨𒁈𒋛)[1] was the penultimate king of the first dynasty of Kish and is recorded as having reigned 900 years in the Sumerian King List. Like his son and successor Aga he reigned during a period when Kish had hegemony over Sumer.a[4] Enmebaragesi signals a momentous documentary leap from mytho-history to history, since he is the earliest ruler on the king list whose name is attested directly from archaeology.
Cattle count
Now even though Enmebaragesi is now believed to have historicity, we still have the problem of this 900 year reign. Obviously we do not believe he reigned for 900 years.
My initial theory was that the 900 years represented tax years, and not calendar years, as the ancients used to operate a tax system called the cattle count which did not operate around the current annual year system. However I have kind of ditched this theory, because for Enmebaragesi to have reigned for a total of 900 cattle counts would have meant his administration was a very greedy administration indeed, and his people must have been extremely poor having to keep up with all those cattle counts.
In ancient Egypt, the cattle count was one of the two main means of evaluating the amount of taxes to be levied, the other one being the height of the annual inundation. A very important economic event, the cattle count was controlled by high officials, and was connected to several cultic feasts. In addition it served as a means of dating other events, with the entire year when it occurred being called "year of the Xth cattle count under the person of the king Y". The frequency of cattle counts varied through the history of ancient Egypt; in the Old Kingdom it was most likely biennial, i.e. occurring every two years, and became more frequent subsequently.
Ziusudra
A better explanation might come from Ziusudra, whom is a Sumerian king that is also being thought of as less and less mythological and more and more historical with archaeological excavation. Apparently Ziusudra is credited with a reign of 3,600 years. It has been suggested though, that this is a copyist error with 10 sars being (which equals 3,600 years) mistakenly used instead of 10 years. Therefore archaeologists would be of the belief that Ziusudra reigned for 10 years, not 10 sars.
He is recorded as having reigned as both king and gudug priest for ten sars (periods of 3,600 years),[3] although this figure is probably a copyist error for ten years.[4]
Conclusion
So do we now have to review the actual ages of those mythological and biblical figures? They may not be that old afterall.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Antitheists and Atheists
This thread mostly concerns those that oppose theism, though not exclusively. Theists are still welcome to share their theory. But what I mostly want to know is what your interesting theories are for the creation of Abrahamic religion and how and why it evolved to become the world-wide phenomena it is today? Did it begin as some nefarious conspiracy involving a secret cabal to take over the world? Or did it all just come about by accident?
Example
I will give an example of a theory.
Based on the Wikipedia link below, one might conclude that Abrahamic religion began as an alternative means to conquering Canaan, and perhaps even usurping power away from the Egyptian pharaohs.
The Israelites and their culture, according to the modern archaeological account, did not overtake the region by force, but instead branched out of these Canaanite peoples and their cultures through the development of a distinct monolatristic—and later monotheistic—religion centered on Yahweh.[90][91][92][93][94][95]
Theories
So what are your theories regarding how it all began, and why?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Garden of Eden
The word Eden allegedly derives from the Sumerian root word "Edin" meaning "plain" or "steppe".
Gu-Edin
It just so happens that there was indeed a historical plain in Sumer named Gu-Edin.
Jacob/Israel
According to Genesis 46:27 Israel and his entire house of 70 gathered up their livestock and went to meet an unnamed pharoah.
Israel and his entire house of 70,[46] gathered up with all their livestock and began their journey to Egypt.
Userkaf
According to Egyptologists Egyptian fifth dynasty pharoah Userkaf had 70 women and a chieftain sent to Egypt from Canaan.
while the Old Kingdom annals record that he received tribute from a region that is either the Eastern Desert or Canaan in the form of a workforce of one chieftain and 70 foreigners[102] (likely women),[93
The exodus
The Israelites were made to depart Egypt, according to myth.
The Exodus (Hebrew: יציאת מצרים, Yeẓi’at Miẓrayim: lit. 'Departure from Egypt') is the founding myth of the Israelites.[1]
Conquest of the Hyksos
According to Egyptology, Ahmose I did indeed lead a military expulsion of Asiatics out of Egypt during the ancient Egyptian 18th dynasty.
King David
King David is alleged to be the first king of the united monarchy of Israel and Judah.
Solomon the temple builder
His son and successor was king Solomon the temple builder.
Solomon (/ˈsɒləmən/; Hebrew: שְׁלֹמֹה, Shlomoh),[a] also called Jedidiah (Hebrew יְדִידְיָהּ Yedidyah), was, according to the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament,[3] Quran, and Hadiths, a fabulously wealthy and wise king of the United Kingdom of Israel who succeeded his father, King David.[4]
Osorkon I
By coincidence, Egyptian pharoah Osorkon I the temple builder and second pharoah of Egypts 22nd dynasty appears to have inherited the kingdom of Israel from his father.
The son of Shoshenq I and his chief consort Karomat A, Osorkon I was the second king of ancient Egypt's 22nd Dynasty and ruled around 922 BC – 887 BC. He succeeded his father Shoshenq I, who probably died within a year of his successful 923 BC campaign against the Pilistines and the kingdom of Israel. Osorkon I's reign is known for many temple building projects and was a long and prosperous period of Egypt's History.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Pauline epistles
Forgetting about whether or not Jesus Christ was born to a virgin and rose from the dead after three days, I want to know what the earliest historical attestation for Jesus Christ is, and according to google the earliest historical written reference for Jesus comes from the Pauline epistles, dated to approximately 50 or 60 AD.
Given that the Pauline epistles are generally dated AD 50–60, they are the earliest surviving Christian texts that include information about Jesus.[129] These letters were written approximately twenty to thirty years after the generally accepted time period for the death of Jesus, around AD 30–36.[129]
What about the earlier mention by Claudius?
But, do we have an earlier mention by Claudius? It has been claimed that Roman emperor Claudius made a reference to an individual named Chrestus sometime between 41 ad and 54 ad. The reference is as follows:
Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome.
Historicity
Certain historians and scholars apparently accept that this remark attributed to Claudius is genuine
As it is highly unlikely that a hypothetical Christian interpolator would have called Jesus "Chrestus", placed him in Rome in 49, or called him a "troublemaker", the overwhelming majority of scholars conclude that the passage is genuine.[23]
Sagas of Iceland
The Sagas of Iceland were written a good twenty years after the events spoken about (feel free to correct me regarding the actual amount of years). Yet we typically do not doubt that Norse explorers were indeed amongst the first to inhabit Iceland, and we generally do not accuse the Icelanders and Norwegians of lying, just because the Sagas were written "after" the events.
This may be a terrible example. However I am sure there are plenty other examples of matters written after the fact that we just take as gospel without question.
The Sagas of Icelanders say that a Norwegian named Naddodd (or Naddador) was the first Norseman to reach Iceland, and in the 9th century he named it Snæland or "snow land" because it was snowing. Following Naddodd, the Swede Garðar Svavarsson arrived, and so the island was then called Garðarshólmur which means "Garðar's Isle".
My question
So my question is. Do you agree that the Pauline epistles are the first historically reliable mention of Jesus Christ? Do you believe that Claudius was referring to Jesus Christ? And is it not reasonable to conclude that a historical mention of Jesus Christ within approximately 17 years of his death points to Jesus Christ being an actual historical figure at the very least? Even if we doubt his divinity and the miraculous claims attributed to him, there is evidence to suggest he was at the very least historical, and there probably was indeed a man named Jesus Christ with a mother probably named Mary?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Pro Abortionist required for a debate
I have made an error in the debate Resolved: Abortion is, on balance, moral. .
I am not actually pro Abortion, nor anti Abortion, but I took on this debate because I noticed it was a new user and felt it would be good to give him/her a debate. However only afterwards did I realise (the instant I pressed accept) that the user put themselves forward as Con.
I was originally intending to argue from the position that "it is unconfirmed" that Abortion, is on balance, moral.
I have thought about continuing with the debate with the same argument as Pro, but that would only work if Con's opening argument is not the exact same.
Also if it was one of my tongue n cheek debates I would happily continue and try and test the argument. However as abortion is a serious subject and issue I do not feel right arguing a position I do not hold. Cannot bring myself to do it.
So I have asked for the debate to be put back in to "open challenge", and the poster has been asked if this is ok, but appears to be unwilling. Which of course the user is perfectly entitled to do.
So are there any Pro Abortionists that would be willing to take my place in this debate please?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Miscellaneous
Yahoo Answers closing on April 20th
Yahoo Answers is shutting up shop on April 20th.
Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Copious amount of addicted users begging for a replacement idea
At the moment the Yahoo Answers question and answers site is full of panicking users desperately asking for ideas for an alternative.
What are some good alternatives of Yahoo Answer? ?
Everyone from here should answer as many questions as possible leaving a link to Debateart
As it says on the tin.
This is a real chance to get lots more debaters and potential donaters.
Everyone should go to Yahoo Answers and answer as many questions as possible leaving a link to debateart.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Miscellaneous
Only four days to go. I am 7-1 down. I feel that is a little harsh. You may disagree. But can we have some votes on this please. Honest votes too. If you genuinely disagree with me that is fine.
My over-all argument is apparent in my very first sentence, when i state that Genesis is mostly based on Mesopotamian mythology, and Mesopotamian mythology, which genesis is built on, is not a blue-print for evolution. And i provided examples of the mythology Genesis creation myth was b uilt upon, such as "godess Mami".
This right there in my opinion pretty much removes Genesis being compatible with modern science, which is what Charles Darwin was supporting.
Even Charles Darwins personal beliefs are not important really. The Scientific thesis he is proposing does not co-cooperate with Genesis.
Also for those that think i over used wikipedia. I only use wikipedia as a foundation to build an argument upon. I leave it to my opponent as to whether he accepts the information or wishes to challenge. If he challenges, i will then find another source. Encyclopedia Britanicca most likely. but he never made this challenge. Therefore i stuck with wikipedia.
I also admit i focus more on facts and information, than grammar. And i make a lot of slight errors regards to typos et cetera. I type very fast and should learn patience.
Those that think humour is not a good thing for a formal debate also might wish to include that as a conduct violation, as i always seek to bring a little humour in to everything, no matter how formal, and i did make an attempt to bring humour in to this debate. My opponent was a little scathing of this.
But i personally fail to see how my main two objectives, described above, about Mesopotanian mythology and modern day science being two different things were ever refuted. Modern day science is not based upon mythology, and i made it perfectly clear in my argument, that this was my main argument.
Please can we have some votes.
If you do not agree with me. I shall accept that.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion