Archeologly proves the Bible?

[paximperium]

DOC, what exactly do you think "sole ruler of Israel" means?


Hint, whether or not he had associations with Rome in no way means that citizens of Israel were required to register for a Roman census.

I'm interested in DOC explaining how sole ruler King Herod of the Herodian Dynasty fits into the Roman governmental structure.

 

[joobz]

Yes.
He was supported by the Romans and Judea was a Roman client state. In what way does that make Judea a Roman territory?

Using DOC's reasoning, Jalal Talabani isn't the independant President of Iraq, but a puppet president for the United States.

 

[Cleon]

So are you saying the Land of Palestine occupied with Roman soldiers is not Roman territory?

And are you saying Herod was not a puppet of the Romans:

Good rule of thumb: Any time someone begins a sentence/question with "are you saying," most of the time what follows is complete straw.

DOC, there is a difference between Roman territory proper and a Roman-controlled client state. Herod ruled on behalf of the Romans. In Roman territory, the Romans ruled directly.

It's really not a difficult distinction to make.

 

[Simon39759]

You know, I think there is, close to us, a good example that can illustrate how Jesus' biography and achievement could have been quickly amplified, growing and becoming utterly convincing to the point of people breaking the law or dying or putting loved ones inclear danger because of it.

Of course, DOC will never admit that Jesus' story might have followed the same model, instead hiding, if he addresses the point at all, behind some special pleading, maybe some mentions of president or of the influence of Christianity...

 

[DOC]

Actually this is what Sherwin-White said:

"For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Yet Acts is, in simple terms and judged externally, no less of a propaganda narrative than the Gospels, liable to similar distortions." - Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament by A. N. Sherwin-White pg 189.

I guess he believes anything to do with the Divinity of Christ is a distortion. He accepts the history of Acts as overwhelming, but once Acts talks religion, he calls it propoganda. That is a supernatural bias, plain and simple.

So?

So you have no problem with someone who claims to be a academic basically saying these statements by Luke are true because I believe they are possible, but these other statements by Luke are a "distortion" and "propaganda" because I do not believe supernatural events can occur. Can't you see how his own "personal" beliefs on the supernatural and not cold analyzation of the writing are causing him to use derogatory wording. That is a bias and not cold rational analyzation. If he wants to refer to them as "supernatural aspects" or "beyond presently known science" fine, but his wording "distortion" and "propaganda" show a definite unprofessional bias.

 

[Hokulele]

So you have no problem with someone who claims to be a academic basically saying these statements by Luke are true because I believe they are possible, but these other statements by Luke are a "distortion" and "propaganda" because I do not believe supernatural events can occur. Can't you see how his own "personal" beliefs on the supernatural and not cold analyzation of the writing are causing him to use derogatory wording. That is a bias and not cold rational analyzation. If he wants to refer to them as "supernatural aspects" or "beyond present known science" fine, but his wording "distortion" and "propaganda" show a definite unprofessional bias.

Where does Sherwin-White state that the other statements by Luke are "distortion" and "propaganda" because he "does not believe in supernatural events"? Where does he refer to them as "supernatural aspects"? Are you making things up again?


But to the larger question, I have no problem with people who demonstrate a bias against things for which there is no evidence. Such as Jesus' purported divinity.

 

[DOC]

Where does Sherwin-White state that the other statements by Luke are "distortion" and "propaganda" because he "does not believe in supernatural events"? Where does he refer to them as "supernatural aspects"? Are you making things up again?


But to the larger question, I have no problem with people who demonstrate a bias against things for which there is no evidence. Such as Jesus' purported divinity.

I said that is what he is "basically saying" or in other words implying and I stand by that statement.

And my Evidence thread currently in the History Forum shows there is evidence; maybe not proof but there is evidence.

 

[Hokulele]

I said that is what he is "basically saying" or in other words implying and I stand by that statement.

So you are basically admitting that you are completely wrong, or at least implying that. Got it.

And my Evidence thread currently in the History Forum shows there is evidence; maybe not proof but there is evidence.

That thread shows that there are opinions, but no evidence for Jesus' resurrection. This was clearly shown in post #3 in that thread.

 

[eccles]

The Bible fact -proveable, or fiction based on real people

Just reading all the comments here I would say that nobody can prove the Bible, Archaeologists, Theologists, Biblical Scolars. We would have to agree that, as there are NO extant authored manuscritps, how do we know if the copies were accurately done. It is obvious that mistakes were made in translations from Aramaic to Greek. It is known that
Spin doctors" changed, omitted and added passages, especially around the time of the Council of Nicea and subsequent Church Councils. Not only that but most of the omitted books were destroyed.

I have a theory that during the missing 20 years of Jesus life he may have gone to Egypt and learned a lot of magic from the Temple Priests. There are known to have been experts in magic.

About Jesus himself. There is less known about him other that the bible than any other historical person. Just about all stories would be fables. How many fables have been written about Robin Hood, King Arthur and even recently a man who did live: Davy Crocket.

It is worth thinking about.

 

[Simon39759]

So you have no problem with someone who claims to be a academic basically saying these statements by Luke are true because I believe they are possible, but these other statements by Luke are a "distortion" and "propaganda" because I do not believe supernatural events can occur. Can't you see how his own "personal" beliefs on the supernatural and not cold analyzation of the writing are causing him to use derogatory wording. That is a bias and not cold rational analyzation. If he wants to refer to them as "supernatural aspects" or "beyond presently known science" fine, but his wording "distortion" and "propaganda" show a definite unprofessional bias.

Burden of proof?
The same reason that, if somebody told me he walked to work this morning, I'd tend to believe him, while if he told me he flapped his arm and flew all the way, I'd probably discount it until he provides some very good evidence?

 

[joobz]

So you have no problem with someone who claims to be a academic basically saying these statements by Luke are true because I believe they are possible, but these other statements by Luke are a "distortion" and "propaganda" because I do not believe supernatural events can occur. Can't you see how his own "personal" beliefs on the supernatural and not cold analyzation of the writing are causing him to use derogatory wording. That is a bias and not cold rational analyzation. If he wants to refer to them as "supernatural aspects" or "beyond presently known science" fine, but his wording "distortion" and "propaganda" show a definite unprofessional bias.

Why do you assume his rejection of supernatural events* isn't based upon the cold analyzation of the evidence? Or lack thereof?

*assuming he does.

 

[joobz]

I said that is what he is "basically saying" or in other words implying and I stand by that statement.

So you are basically admitting that you are completely wrong, or at least implying that. Got it.

A post made of refined win, mined from the mountains of pwnage.

 

[eccles]

I am now able to upload images

And not only that, I now have the signature I want.



This image comes from the tomb KV 9
Location Valley of the Kings East Valley, Thebes West Bank, Thebes.

Book of the Earth, part A, scene 7: ithyphallic figure in water clock.

And of course is the God, MIN.

Now I can crop the image for my avatar.

Incidently I have 3 thick A4 books from the Theban Mapping Project covering all the tombs in the Valley of the Kings. I have printed some of the images for each tomb.

 

[joobz]

And not only that, I now have the signature I want.

[URL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_338944a84affe3200e.jpg[/URL]

This image comes from the tomb KV 9
Location Valley of the Kings East Valley, Thebes West Bank, Thebes.

Book of the Earth, part A, scene 7: ithyphallic figure in water clock.

And of course is the God, MIN.

Now I can crop the image for my avatar.

Incidently I have 3 thick A4 books from the Theban Mapping Project covering all the tombs in the Valley of the Kings. I have printed some of the images for each tomb.

[URL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/338944a84b1c273aac.png[/URL]

I've enjoyed your posts so far. I look forward to learning more from you.

 

[Akhenaten]

And not only that, I now have the signature I want.



This image comes from the tomb KV 9
Location Valley of the Kings East Valley, Thebes West Bank, Thebes.

Book of the Earth, part A, scene 7: ithyphallic figure in water clock.

And of course is the God, MIN.

Now I can crop the image for my avatar.

Incidently I have 3 thick A4 books from the Theban Mapping Project covering all the tombs in the Valley of the Kings. I have printed some of the images for each tomb.

You know who's in KV55 don't you? *


* maybe. I'm not sure what teh Bible says about it, but Doc knows about these things, so he might share with us.

 

[eccles]

Thank you joobz. I try to please and look after my flock as a Minister of the First Church of Atheism

 

[paximperium]

Thank you joobz. I try to please and look after my flock as a Minister of the First Church of Atheism

The High Heretic Priest of the True Temple of Atheism(Reformed) ie. Truthism, says your church has corrupted the works of the prophets of atheism. As a Truthist, I have to ask why are you leading your flock towards Hitler and Stalin?

 

[eccles]

You know who's in KV55 don't you? *

YOU? No. you're not dead yet.

BORIS KARLOF!

It was supposed to be the tomb of Akhenaten or Queen Tiye.
Quote from the Theban Mapping Project:

"The tomb may originally have contained a number of burials brought from Amarna and later redistributed in other tombs. The mummy of Queen Tiye, for instance, may have been placed in KV 55 and later in the Amenhetep II cache (KV 35)."

I must check my facts after the mistake about Constantine's Mother.

 

[eccles]

"As a Truthist, I have to ask why are you leading your flock towards Hitler and Stalin? "

No, I am leading my flock towards "His Holiness", Dave Allen, the late, great Irish Commedian who used to take the mickey out of the "Holy" Roman Catholic Church.



He was "paid" by the Vatican: the No. Two Account.

Here are some of his most famous quotes:

"Am I the Irish comedian with half a finger? No, I'm the Irish comedian with nine and a half fingers."

"I don't go out of my way to be outrageous, I just go out of my way to look at things."

"I'm an Atheist...thank God."

"Goodnight, thank you, and may your God go with you"

 

[eccles]

I have here some images of the Walled City of Jerusalem:





Here are images of the Giza Pyramids. All these are taken from my Twin Otter with the MS FS2004 Flight Simulator.





I doubt if the terrain around the Pyramids is correct, but it is only CGI. It is still exicting to be ablt to "fly" anywhere in any country. Cape Canaveral is brilliant.