In Defense of a Kind God
Offline I've noticed that atheists tend to be a glass half empty person when it comes to discussions on God. They put extreme focus on the negative, declaring God to be a brute, unjust, unloving, unmeriful Creator as it this perspective somehow validates the notion that God is a man-made construct.
I'm here to tilt things back a bit in the other directions. Over the weekend, I was reminded on just how GOOD God is when reflecting on the gifts of God. God has given us quite a lot to make it through this life without being completely miserable.
Here are a few in no particular order:
1. Gift of Sleep - Sleep is a wonderful invention. Not only does it allow our bodies to recharge and renew energies, sleep gives us an opportunity to shut off from the world. No matter how tough my life is, I can always look forward to 6-8 hours a night escaping from reality.
2. Laughter - God gave us this ability to have a physical release called laughter that for a moment, brings happiness and joy. Science can only explain the mechanism behind the act. There are well documented medical benefits to having a good laugh as well.
3. Taste buds - we have up to 8,000 taste buds designed to give us sensations of pleasure with certain tastes. God certainly didn't have to do this. Taste of food is not necessary to substain the human body. Taste doesn't matter to the digestive system. But we have taste to enjoy a wide variety of foods.
4. Sex - I don't think anyone will argue with this one. Sex is an amazing creation. Our society is obsessed with it. On a physical level, sex offers many benefits such as stress reduction and lower blood pressure. It also serves to bring an emotional bond to a couple on a level that can't be experienced any other way. However, whenevery you mess around with this powerful force outside God's requirements then the act has several consequences. Spread of STDS, for example.
Yeah, there are many negatives to this existence. I believe the introduction of sin is the root of these negatives, but God also gave us these gifts to help us make it through each day. Whenever I think about the gifts, I realize just how ridiculous the belief in evolution really is. We would have to be extremely lucky for random events to give us such great things to enjoy. Evolution may have determined the need for a food source, but not the need for taste buds.
- Login to post comments
Offline TWD39 wrote:You're the one claiming that the OT laws are still applicable, not me. Prove something for once starting with explaining why Matthew 5:17 supports your stance.
I'm claiming no such thing. I'm claiming both testaments are incoherent and contradict each-other. Matthew 5:17 reads:
"“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." -New international Version
Why say this if we are not to follow the Law? The capitalization makes it quite obvious that he is indeed referring to the old testament. If I'm wrong, tell me what he is referring to.
Thank you for proving you are ignorant about the Bible. Verse 18 explains it.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
The OT law was applicable until Jesus fullfilled it. He fullfilled it when He died on the cross and became the blood sacrifice payment to cover everyone's sins. Jesus met all the requirements of being completely sinless which no human being has ever done. Jesus met all the OT prophecies as well like
Isaiah 7:14
After the cruxification, the OT laws requiring complete obedience from humans was no longer needed. A new covent was born.
- Login to post comments
Offline I would challenge TWD39 to actually put his money where his mouth is.
So TWD39 if God actually commanded you to pick up a rock and crush an infant's skull because God knew that little baby was going to grow up and become the leader of an Islamic terrorist cell, woud'ja do it ?
A simple "yes" or "no" from you is all I require.
The question is irrelevant because I am a Gentile living under the new covenant which teaches love and forgiveness even for your enemies. Such a command would make me question the truth of the scriptures.
- Login to post comments
Offline ThunderJones wrote:Good post pauljohn.
Rather weak post actually.
I give him kudos for crafting a respectful reply void of profanity and insults unlike yourself, but most of his bold claims are insubstational particular his comments regarding the NT. I will address it directly tomorrow if I have time.
We will see where you go with your response.
Like all humans, until you demonstrate otherwise you will be treated in a respectful way. Your beliefs, not so much.
Until then, Waiting . . . . . .
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
- Login to post comments
Offline Vastet wrote:Too bad they are outnumbered by verses on torture, slavery, murder, genocide, infanticide, cruelty, and sheer stupidity. Just because your book has a few chapters talking about love does not dismiss the greater number of chapters on hate. Either you are the one who has yet to read the bible, or you are a very sick individual.
Thanks for the chuckle. So if the local news reports on a murder story, that means the news station approves and supports the crime? That is essentially what you are saying about God. The Bible simply reported the history as it REALLY happened. If the Bible was a work of fiction, I would think the authors would paint their heroes in a more glamorous light, especially if the goal is to convert people to a false religion.
No. The reason we think God supports the crimes of murder is because he commited and ordered his followers to commit them by the thousands, Mass slaughter of infants, and people.
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
- Login to post comments
Offline ProzacDeathWish wrote:I would challenge TWD39 to actually put his money where his mouth is.
So TWD39 if God actually commanded you to pick up a rock and crush an infant's skull because God knew that little baby was going to grow up and become the leader of an Islamic terrorist cell, woud'ja do it ?
A simple "yes" or "no" from you is all I require.
The question is irrelevant because I am a Gentile living under the new covenant which teaches love and forgiveness even for your enemies. Such a command would make me question the truth of the scriptures.
This isn't your enemies. God himself is telling you to kill your own son, just as he told Abraham to. BTW God loved Abraham so much because he was about to murder his own son for no reason other than that God told him to. Killing innocents is so kind, I know.
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
- Login to post comments
Offline Perhaps some of us have studied in parochial schools and have graduate degrees from Jesuit universities. Perhaps some of us have read and studied in minute detail the OT and the NT.
What the OT seems to be is a storytelling adventure. My opinion. Much never happened, including the supposed slaughter of the Amalekites you have been fighting about. There was no country of Israel at the time to do slaughtering. You don't have to take my word for it, research the population density of Palestine from Iron Age I through Iron Age II. Jerusalem was not a large city, Judah had low population density, especially compared to Samaria in the North ( I do not use Israel for that city state of the period). The 100s of thousands claimed in the OT are not possible for the time period.
Those are some bold claims. Too bad you don't present any hard evidence to back it up. The Bible does not read as merely a storytelling adventure. Great care was taken to preserve the translations, and multiple copies were produced. The Bible contains a book of laws for the Israelities in Leviticus. The Bible contains detailed geneologies. The Bible is a prophetic book with hundreds of fullfilled prophecies many about the coming of Christ. The Bible is dynamic demonstrating Christ from the very beginning. In Genesis 1:26, God says "let us" not "let me". Christ is part of that plural. Genesis 3:15 refers to Christ. It would be a really strange verse to include if the Bible was a work of fiction.
Furthermore, you have archaeological finds supporting the Bible. At the very least, you would have to claim that the fiction writers somehow add detailed knowledge of the inside workings of other ancient cultures. The story of Joseph gives us insight into the culture and law of Egypt for example. Biblical figures are record in other texts as well.
From wiki:
The main sources for identifying people from the Hebrew Bible are Assyrian and Babylonian inscriptions as well as seals and bullae (seal impressions) from the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. These date from the 9th century through the late 5th century BCE.
Note: fathers of biblical figures who have no important part in the biblical narrative are not listed separately. So while Baruch, son of Neriah is listed here, Neriah, Baruch's father is not.
- Ahab, king of Israel: Mentioned extensively in Kings and Chronicles. Identified in the contemporary Kurkh Monolith inscription of Shalmaneser III [1] which describes the Battle of Qarqar and mentions 2,000 chariots, 10,000 soldiers of Ahab the Israelite defeated by Shalmaneser.[2]
- Ahaz (Jehoahaz), king of Judah: Mentioned extensively in Kings, Chronicles and Isaiah as well as in Hosea 1:1 and Micah 1:1. Identified in the contemporary Summary Inscription of Tiglath-Pileser III which records that he received tribute from Jehoahaz the Judahite, as mentioned in 2 Kings 16:7-8 and 2 Chronicles 28:21.[3] Also identified in a contemporary clay bulla, reading of Ahaz [son of] Jotham king of Judah.[4] (A third bulla mentioning Ahaz as the father of Hezekiah is being investigated as a possible forgery.)
- Apries (Hophra), pharaoh of Egypt: Mentioned in Jeremiah 44:30. Identified in numerous contemporary inscriptions including those of the capitals of the columns of his palace.[5][6] Herodotus speaks of him in Histories II, 161-171.[7]
- Artaxerxes I of Persia is widely identified with Artaxerxes in the book of Nehemiah.[8][9] He is also found in the writings of contemporary historian Thucydides.[10] Scholars are divided over whether the king in Ezra's time was the same, or Artaxerxes II.
- Ashurbanipal (Asenappar/Sardanapalus), king of Assyria: Mentioned in Ezra 4:10. Identified in numerous contemporary inscriptions,[11] including those that tell of his conquest of Elam and Babylon which accords with Ezra 4:9-10 where people that he exiled from these regions are mentioned.[12] Diodorus Siculus (book II, 21) preserved a fanciful account of him by Ctesias. (See Sardanapalus in.[13])
- Baruch ben Neriah, a scribe in the time of Jeremiah. Two identical imprints of his seal were discovered in 1975 and 1996. They read 'to Berachyahu son of Neriyahu the scribe'.[14][15]
- Belshazzar, coregent of Babylon, son of king Nabonidus,[16] see Nabonidus Cylinder.
- Ben-hadad son of Hazael, king of Aram Damascus. He is mentioned in the Zakkur Stele.[17]
- Cyrus II of Persia, appears in many ancient inscriptions, most notably the Cyrus Cylinder.[18]
- Darius I, king of Persia, is mentioned in the books of Haggai, Zechariah and Ezra.[19][20] He is the author of the famous Behistun Inscription.
- Esarhaddon, son of Sennacherib, was king of Assyria. His name survives in his own writings, as well as in those of his son Ashurbanipal.[11][21]
- Evil Merodach, king of Babylon son of Nebuchadnezzar II. His name (Akkadian 'Amēl-Marduk') and title were found on a vase from his palace,[22] and on several cuneiform tablets.[23]
- Hazael, king of Aram Damascus. According to the Book of Kings, he was anointed by the prophet Elijah (1 Kings 19:15). Shalmaneser III of Assyria records that he defeated Hazael in battle and captured many chariots and horses from him.[24] Most scholars think that Hazael was the author of the Tel Dan Stele.[25]
- Hezekiah, king of Judah enacted religious reforms, countering the idol-worshipping of his predecessors (2 Kings 18:1-6). An account is preserved by Sennacherib of how he besieged 'Hezekiah, the Jew', who 'did not submit to my yoke', in his capital city of Jerusalem.[11] A bulla was also found bearing Hezekia's name and title.[26]
- Hoshea, king of Israel, was put into power by Tilgath-Pileser III, king of Assyria, as recorded in his 'Annals', found in Calah.[11]
- Jehoash, king of Israel, is mentioned in records of Adad-nirari III of Assyria as 'Jehoash of Samaria'.[27][28]
- Jehoiachin, King of Judah, was taken captive to Babylon after Nebuchadrezzar first captured Jerusalem (2 Kings 24:15). Texts from Nebuchadrezzar's Southern Palace record the rations given to "Jehoiachin king of the Judeans" (Ya'ukin sar Yaudaya).[29]
- Jehu, king of Israel; see: Black Obelisk[24]
- Johanan, high priest during the reign of Darius II. His name is found in Nehemiah 12:22,23 and also in a letter from the Elephantine Papyri[11]
- Manasseh, king of Judah, mentioned in the writings of Esarhaddon, who lists him as one of the kings who had brought him gifts and aided his conquest of Egypt.[11][21]
- Menahem, king of Israel is recorded in the annals of Tiglath-Pileser to have paid tribute to him.[11]
- Mesha, king of Moab, author of the Mesha Stele.[30]
- Merodach-baladan, king of Babylon is found in the Great Inscription of Sargon II in his palace at Khorsabat.[31]
- Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon is mentioned in numerous contemporary sources, including the inscription of the Ishtar Gate, which he built.[32]
- Necho, pharaoh of Egypt, mentioned in the writings of Ashurbanipal[11]
- Omri, king of Israel is mentioned on the Mesha Stele.[30]
- Pekah, became king of Israel after assassinating Pekahiah, his predecessor. (2 Kings 15:25). He is mentioned in the annals of Tiglath-Pileser III.[11]
- Rezin, king of Aram was a tributary of Tiglath-Pileser III of Assyria.[33] According to the bible, he was later put to death by Tiglath-Pileser (2 Kings 16:7-9).
- Sanballat, governor of Samaria the leading figure of the opposition which Nehemiah encountered during the rebuilding of the walls around the temple in Jerusalem. Sanballat is mentioned in the Elephantine Papyri.[11][34]
- Sargon II, king of Assyria besieged and conquered the city of Samaria and took many thousands captive, as recorded in the bible and in an inscription in his royal palace.[35] His name, however does not appear in the biblical account of this siege, but in Isaiah 20:1, in reference to his siege of Ashdod.
- Sennacherib, king of Assyria is the author of a number of inscriptions discovered near Nineveh.[36]
- Shalmaneser V, king of Assyria is mentioned on several royal palace weights found at Nimrud.[37] Another inscription was found that is thought to be his, but the name of the author is only partly preserved.[38]
- Taharqa, pharaoh of Egypt. Several sources mention him and fragments of three statues bearing his name were excavated at Nineveh.[39]
- Tattenai, governor of 'Beyond the River' (Hebrew: עֲבַר-נַהֲרָה, Ezra 5:6) during the reign of Darius I, is known from contemporary Babylonian documents.[40][41]
- Tiglath-Pileser III, king of Assyria exiled inhabitants of cities he captured in Israel (2 Kings 15:29). Numerous writings are ascribed to him and he is mentioned, among others, in an inscription by Barrakab, king of Sam'al[11] and also in the Assyrian king list.
- Xerxes I (Ahasuerus), king of Persia, is named in the books of Ezra and Esther.[40][42] Xerxes is known in archaeology through a number of tablets and monuments,[43] notably the 'Gate of All Nations' in Persepolis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biblical_figures_identified_in_extra-biblical_sources
As the Book of Matthew is plagiarized from the Book of Mark and was not written by a guy named Matthew, or a supposed disciple and most certainly is not Jesus talking at all, not to mention all of the purported events of fiction in regard to the nativity and early years, you fail at go with this. Matthew's copied and edited storytelling is not the Jesus talking. The character Jesus may or may not be a real person, it's impossible to verify at this point. I lean towards him being a desert prophet, that sometimes spent far too much time in the Sun. He was trying to bring his people back to the pure law of Moses, which included rebellion. Jesus was in a sense a rebel against established rule, namely the Romans. For the crimes he committed (alleged in the Gospels anyway) he would have been executed, no community service for insurrection in the Temple at the time.
If the Law was dumped, then why after John the Baptist is beheaded (and Jesus and his group seem to be fleeing) did he justify the stealing (taking if you want) of corn from the fields on the Sabbath as what David did with the show bread?
See also James 2:14-26 -which details that faith without works is pretty pointless as well. And works were part of the Law.
So you know for a fact that it is plagarized? Please share your concrete evidence. The fact that we have four gospels of similiar but not exact duplicates of the same stories is evidence to me that they were written by real eye witnesses. No two people tell the same story in the exact way.
As for the Law, it was not disregarded until after Jesus was crucified. This was symbolized by the tearing of the temple veil after His death. Now Christians don't have to physically enter a temple to commune with God.
See Hebrews 10:19–20.
Works is not a requirement of salvation. You can't work your way to heaven. But a reborn Christian will want to do works. If they don't then they have a dead faith. That's what James is talking about.
- Login to post comments
Offline Thanks for the chuckle.
It's only fair. You've been putting me into hysterical laughter sessions with almost every post you make. Glad I could return the favour.
So if the local news reports on a murder story, that means the news station approves and supports the crime?
When the reporter committed the murder at the behest of the news station in order to make news, you're damn skippy it does.
This is essentially what you're saying about god.
Also, the bible is not an accurate depiction of history just because it got a few things right.
Star Trek, more or less, accurately depicts the history of humanity and Earth up until the 19th century or so. That doesn't mean the events in Star Trek actually happened, or will happen.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
- Login to post comments
Offline
It's only fair. You've been putting me into hysterical laughter sessions with almost every post you make. Glad I could return the favour.
Hysterical laughter? I know I'm not that much of a comedian.
When the reporter committed the murder at the behest of the news station in order to make news, you're damn skippy it does. This is essentially what you're saying about god. Also, the bible is not an accurate depiction of history just because it got a few things right. Star Trek, more or less, accurately depicts the history of humanity and Earth up until the 19th century or so. That doesn't mean the events in Star Trek actually happened, or will happen.
No you are saying that just because man commited evil acts in the OT then that means it is ALL God approved. Men was sinful and the Bible reported the truth in all its ugly glory. And judging by recent events in Syria, it doesn't sound like they are much more civilized these days either.
It got more than just a few things right. It holds up to every standard of establishing historical fact vs historical fiction. How do you know aliens didn't really build the pyramids? Star Trek, OTOH, is a well established work of fiction. You can trace its origin. You have ZERO evidence that the Bible is fiction and the history of the Jews never happened.
- Login to post comments
Offline ProzacDeathWish wrote:I would challenge TWD39 to actually put his money where his mouth is.
So TWD39 if God actually commanded you to pick up a rock and crush an infant's skull because God knew that little baby was going to grow up and become the leader of an Islamic terrorist cell, woud'ja do it ?
A simple "yes" or "no" from you is all I require.
I'd be willing to wager that question is not going to be answered. Just like the bible, counterclaims get picked and chosen when debating with this type of narrow-minded ilk.
Lookie there, you lost the bet. haha I haven't dodged any of your questions, idiot.
- Login to post comments
Offline harleysportster wrote:ProzacDeathWish wrote:I would challenge TWD39 to actually put his money where his mouth is.
So TWD39 if God actually commanded you to pick up a rock and crush an infant's skull because God knew that little baby was going to grow up and become the leader of an Islamic terrorist cell, woud'ja do it ?
A simple "yes" or "no" from you is all I require.
I'd be willing to wager that question is not going to be answered. Just like the bible, counterclaims get picked and chosen when debating with this type of narrow-minded ilk.
Lookie there, you lost the bet. haha I haven't dodged any of your questions, idiot.
Now who is resorting to insults? Is that your good Christian morals finally coming out?
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
- Login to post comments
Offline Vastet wrote:
It's only fair. You've been putting me into hysterical laughter sessions with almost every post you make. Glad I could return the favour.
Hysterical laughter? I know I'm not that much of a comedian.
TWD39 wrote:
When the reporter committed the murder at the behest of the news station in order to make news, you're damn skippy it does. This is essentially what you're saying about god. Also, the bible is not an accurate depiction of history just because it got a few things right. Star Trek, more or less, accurately depicts the history of humanity and Earth up until the 19th century or so. That doesn't mean the events in Star Trek actually happened, or will happen.
No you are saying that just because man commited evil acts in the OT then that means it is ALL God approved. Men was sinful and the Bible reported the truth in all its ugly glory. And judging by recent events in Syria, it doesn't sound like they are much more civilized these days either.
It got more than just a few things right. It holds up to every standard of establishing historical fact vs historical fiction. How do you know aliens didn't really build the pyramids? Star Trek, OTOH, is a well established work of fiction. You can trace its origin. You have ZERO evidence that the Bible is fiction and the history of the Jews never happened.
Just because not all acts by man are god approved doesn't mean most of them weren't. God has apparently murdered billions if the Bible is to be believe. He has also commanded or personally committed wanton slaughter of innocent animals, even killing every innocent animal in the world along side man with the flood.
Was it really nessecary to kill every firstborn of Eygpt, even though the Pharaoh was forced by God into refusing him, and believed a lie by Abraham? The Bible is full of random extreme acts of murder and cruelty by God and ordered by him.
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
- Login to post comments
Offline We have great evidence that the translations and copying of the ancient text was handled with great care and detail so it's doubtful that these are just stories some desert dudes made up centuries later.
i didn't say anything about translation and copying. the original material could well be flawed, hoss. f-l-a-w-e-d. a bunch of propaganda. just like the romans used to say that the early christians literally drank blood and ate babies. just because somebody writes something doesn't mean it's true, regardless of if they're roman, hebrew, greek, or whatever.
Atheists once made the same bold claim about the Hitties. Oh they never existed because the Bible is the only record of them. Then archaelogy finally shut them up.
did i say the amalekites didn't exist?
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
- Login to post comments
Offline pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
Perhaps some of us have studied in parochial schools and have graduate degrees from Jesuit universities. Perhaps some of us have read and studied in minute detail the OT and the NT.
What the OT seems to be is a storytelling adventure. My opinion. Much never happened, including the supposed slaughter of the Amalekites you have been fighting about. There was no country of Israel at the time to do slaughtering. You don't have to take my word for it, research the population density of Palestine from Iron Age I through Iron Age II. Jerusalem was not a large city, Judah had low population density, especially compared to Samaria in the North ( I do not use Israel for that city state of the period). The 100s of thousands claimed in the OT are not possible for the time period.
Those are some bold claims.
No more bold then the assertions that the Bible is a true account of the non-existent country depicted.
Too bad you don't present any hard evidence to back it up.
I did say it was my opinion. My opinion is based on years of study and research.
Specifically, where would you like to start?
I have a thread that I started in early 2009 that deals with this subject. Another believer named Caposkia and I have been going through the OT from Genesis on. We are currently in 1 Kings. There I have presented plenty of arguments to show it is storytelling.
The Bible does not read as merely a storytelling adventure.
No, there are other reasons such as propaganda, control of the populace, creation of a historical backdrop for the 2nd century BCE Judeans. And more, but we'd need to specifically discuss each part and why we think it was written beyond storytelling.
Great care was taken to preserve the translations, and multiple copies were produced.
The following is courtesy of another poster, A_Nony_Mouse, he has some extreme views at times, he's rather anti-Zionist, but he has some major points on the OT:
Simply put - "The Letter of Aristas is a forgery, therefore the Septuagint is not a translation" Since it appeared late 3rd or early 2nd century BCE, it was created then.
See his web site here for the detail - http://www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html and specifically on the Septuagint - http://www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/septuagint-original.html
The Bible contains a book of laws for the Israelities in Leviticus. The Bible contains detailed geneologies.
So too are various Sumerian tablets. And?
There is the Code of Hammurabi, predating any date you'd like to assert for OT creation.
There is the Sumerian kings list, detailing many kings of Mesopotamia.
And, the point is?
The Bible is a prophetic book with hundreds of fullfilled prophecies many about the coming of Christ.
A very bold assertion. Do you want to discuss each one that you claim is a prophecy one at a time. I see no hard evidence here.
The Bible is dynamic demonstrating Christ from the very beginning. In Genesis 1:26, God says "let us" not "let me". Christ is part of that plural.
Nice guesswork. The us has been argued in many ways. As you point out, there have been many translations. It is just as likely that the us is the multiple gods as suggested in the book of Psalms 89:5-7 where in the Hebrew version or the Old Greek you have multiple gods.
Genesis 3:15 refers to Christ. It would be a really strange verse to include if the Bible was a work of fiction.
I did not use the word fiction, I used the word storytelling. Most of the time storytelling has some sort of basis, but the elaboration does include much of what you call fiction, though it may have been more likely to have been ignorance and misunderstanding in general.
Furthermore, you have archaeological finds supporting the Bible. At the very least, you would have to claim that the fiction writers somehow add detailed knowledge of the inside workings of other ancient cultures. The story of Joseph gives us insight into the culture and law of Egypt for example. Biblical figures are record in other texts as well.
No, the story of Abraham, Joseph and others gaining an audience with the pharaoh shows complete ignorance on ancient Egypt.
And specifically in the story of Joseph, what was the name of the pharaoh?
Block posting chunks of Wiki is really not providing verification or validation. Many posters here will completely ignore such as inadequate. Keep that in mind in the future.
From wiki:
The main sources for identifying people from the Hebrew Bible are Assyrian and Babylonian inscriptions as well as seals and bullae (seal impressions) from the kingdoms of Israel and Judah.
I didn't think we were questioning Assyria or Babylon, are we?
Also note - when you do block post from Wiki, at least change the color blue to white on the links. I copied the whole thing into wordpad and deleted all the formatting and links as it was awful to work with the way you posted it.
Thanks.
These date from the 9th century through the late 5th century BCE.
Note: fathers of biblical figures who have no important part in the biblical narrative are not listed separately. So while Baruch, son of Neriah is listed here, Neriah, Baruch's father is not.
Ahab, king of Israel: Mentioned extensively in Kings and Chronicles. Identified in the contemporary Kurkh Monolith inscription of Shalmaneser III [1] which describes the Battle of Qarqar and mentions 2,000 chariots, 10,000 soldiers of Ahab the Israelite defeated by Shalmaneser.[2]
Yet, further study of this leads to many questions in regard to errors made by the OT.
Did Shalmaneser really defeat the combined forces of the 11 kings, the text says 12, but that was typical Assyrian to mean an alliance? If so, why did he go right back home and stay there?
Ahaz (Jehoahaz), king of Judah: Mentioned extensively in Kings, Chronicles and Isaiah as well as in Hosea 1:1 and Micah 1:1. Identified in the contemporary Summary Inscription of Tiglath-Pileser III which records that he received tribute from Jehoahaz the Judahite, as mentioned in 2 Kings 16:7-8 and 2 Chronicles 28:21.[3] Also identified in a contemporary clay bulla, reading of Ahaz [son of] Jotham king of Judah.[4] (A third bulla mentioning Ahaz as the father of Hezekiah is being investigated as a possible forgery.)
Which inscription is this from? Since you presented the Wiki as your proof, you need to validate when the Wiki leaves out an independent source name and link. The link to Tiglath-Pileser III does not present the inscription.
Apries (Hophra), pharaoh of Egypt: Mentioned in Jeremiah 44:30. Identified in numerous contemporary inscriptions including those of the capitals of the columns of his palace.[5][6] Herodotus speaks of him in Histories II, 161-171.[7]
Artaxerxes I of Persia is widely identified with Artaxerxes in the book of Nehemiah.[8][9] He is also found in the writings of contemporary historian Thucydides.[10] Scholars are divided over whether the king in Ezra's time was the same, or Artaxerxes II.
Ashurbanipal (Asenappar/Sardanapalus), king of Assyria: Mentioned in Ezra 4:10. Identified in numerous contemporary inscriptions,[11] including those that tell of his conquest of Elam and Babylon which accords with Ezra 4:9-10 where people that he exiled from these regions are mentioned.[12] Diodorus Siculus (book II, 21) preserved a fanciful account of him by Ctesias. (See Sardanapalus in.[13])
Baruch ben Neriah, a scribe in the time of Jeremiah. Two identical imprints of his seal were discovered in 1975 and 1996. They read 'to Berachyahu son of Neriyahu the scribe'.[14][15]
Belshazzar, coregent of Babylon, son of king Nabonidus,[16] see Nabonidus Cylinder.
Ben-hadad son of Hazael, king of Aram Damascus. He is mentioned in the Zakkur Stele.[17]
Cyrus II of Persia, appears in many ancient inscriptions, most notably the Cyrus Cylinder.[18]
Darius I, king of Persia, is mentioned in the books of Haggai, Zechariah and Ezra.[19][20] He is the author of the famous Behistun Inscription.
Esarhaddon, son of Sennacherib, was king of Assyria. His name survives in his own writings, as well as in those of his son Ashurbanipal.[11][21]
Evil Merodach, king of Babylon son of Nebuchadnezzar II. His name (Akkadian 'Amēl-Marduk') and title were found on a vase from his palace,[22] and on several cuneiform tablets.[23]
Hazael, king of Aram Damascus. According to the Book of Kings, he was anointed by the prophet Elijah (1 Kings 19:15). Shalmaneser III of Assyria records that he defeated Hazael in battle and captured many chariots and horses from him.[24] Most scholars think that Hazael was the author of the Tel Dan Stele.[25]
Hezekiah, king of Judah enacted religious reforms, countering the idol-worshipping of his predecessors (2 Kings 18:1-6). An account is preserved by Sennacherib of how he besieged 'Hezekiah, the Jew', who 'did not submit to my yoke', in his capital city of Jerusalem.[11] A bulla was also found bearing Hezekia's name and title.[26]
Hoshea, king of Israel, was put into power by Tilgath-Pileser III, king of Assyria, as recorded in his 'Annals', found in Calah.[11]
Jehoash, king of Israel, is mentioned in records of Adad-nirari III of Assyria as 'Jehoash of Samaria'.[27][28]
Jehoiachin, King of Judah, was taken captive to Babylon after Nebuchadrezzar first captured Jerusalem (2 Kings 24:15). Texts from Nebuchadrezzar's Southern Palace record the rations given to "Jehoiachin king of the Judeans" (Ya'ukin sar Yaudaya).[29]
Jehu, king of Israel; see: Black Obelisk[24]
Johanan, high priest during the reign of Darius II. His name is found in Nehemiah 12:22,23 and also in a letter from the Elephantine Papyri[11]
Manasseh, king of Judah, mentioned in the writings of Esarhaddon, who lists him as one of the kings who had brought him gifts and aided his conquest of Egypt.[11][21]
Menahem, king of Israel is recorded in the annals of Tiglath-Pileser to have paid tribute to him.[11]
Mesha, king of Moab, author of the Mesha Stele.[30]
Merodach-baladan, king of Babylon is found in the Great Inscription of Sargon II in his palace at Khorsabat.[31]
Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon is mentioned in numerous contemporary sources, including the inscription of the Ishtar Gate, which he built.[32]
Necho, pharaoh of Egypt, mentioned in the writings of Ashurbanipal[11]
Omri, king of Israel is mentioned on the Mesha Stele.[30]
Pekah, became king of Israel after assassinating Pekahiah, his predecessor. (2 Kings 15:25). He is mentioned in the annals of Tiglath-Pileser III.[11]
Rezin, king of Aram was a tributary of Tiglath-Pileser III of Assyria.[33] According to the bible, he was later put to death by Tiglath-Pileser (2 Kings 16:7-9).
Sanballat, governor of Samaria the leading figure of the opposition which Nehemiah encountered during the rebuilding of the walls around the temple in Jerusalem. Sanballat is mentioned in the Elephantine Papyri.[11][34]
Sargon II, king of Assyria besieged and conquered the city of Samaria and took many thousands captive, as recorded in the bible and in an inscription in his royal palace.[35] His name, however does not appear in the biblical account of this siege, but in Isaiah 20:1, in reference to his siege of Ashdod.
Sennacherib, king of Assyria is the author of a number of inscriptions discovered near Nineveh.[36]
Shalmaneser V, king of Assyria is mentioned on several royal palace weights found at Nimrud.[37] Another inscription was found that is thought to be his, but the name of the author is only partly preserved.[38]
Taharqa, pharaoh of Egypt. Several sources mention him and fragments of three statues bearing his name were excavated at Nineveh.[39]
Tattenai, governor of 'Beyond the River' (Hebrew: עֲבַר-נַהֲרָה, Ezra 5:6) during the reign of Darius I, is known from contemporary Babylonian documents.[40][41]
Tiglath-Pileser III, king of Assyria exiled inhabitants of cities he captured in Israel (2 Kings 15:29). Numerous writings are ascribed to him and he is mentioned, among others, in an inscription by Barrakab, king of Sam'al[11] and also in the Assyrian king list.
Xerxes I (Ahasuerus), king of Persia, is named in the books of Ezra and Esther.[40][42] Xerxes is known in archaeology through a number of tablets and monuments,[43] notably the 'Gate of All Nations' in Persepolis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biblical_figures_identified_in_extra-biblical_sources
I was going to go through these, but since you posted it the way you did it would be too messy. If you like, we can do them one at a time and discuss their relationships and what it proves if anything in regard to the OT.
Do you want to do that?
So, I acknowledge that there were kings and city states in the world during the time period. That writers may have known of some of them should be obvious.
In regard to specifically Daniel, he has no clue in regard to who was the king, Nabonidus, why the Babylonians were quick to go over to Cyrus, and what really happened in the invasion. Nothing in regard to Nabonidus is included.
Do you want to get more specific and present this in a way given to discussion?
pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
As the Book of Matthew is plagiarized from the Book of Mark and was not written by a guy named Matthew, or a supposed disciple and most certainly is not Jesus talking at all, not to mention all of the purported events of fiction in regard to the nativity and early years, you fail at go with this. Matthew's copied and edited storytelling is not the Jesus talking. The character Jesus may or may not be a real person, it's impossible to verify at this point. I lean towards him being a desert prophet, that sometimes spent far too much time in the Sun. He was trying to bring his people back to the pure law of Moses, which included rebellion. Jesus was in a sense a rebel against established rule, namely the Romans. For the crimes he committed (alleged in the Gospels anyway) he would have been executed, no community service for insurrection in the Temple at the time.
If the Law was dumped, then why after John the Baptist is beheaded (and Jesus and his group seem to be fleeing) did he justify the stealing (taking if you want) of corn from the fields on the Sabbath as what David did with the show bread?
See also James 2:14-26 -which details that faith without works is pretty pointless as well. And works were part of the Law.
So you know for a fact that it is plagarized? Please share your concrete evidence. The fact that we have four gospels of similiar but not exact duplicates of the same stories is evidence to me that they were written by real eye witnesses. No two people tell the same story in the exact way.
Yes I know for a fact it was plagiarized. The nice words people use are Mark was source material, yet many verses are word for word. When an earlier manuscript is copied word for word and other text is added around it what would you call it? The dictionary calls it plagiarism. See Forged by Bart Ehhrman pp239-249.
See - http://www.bergen.edu/phr/bible/bible9.1_outline.pdf which also presents the detail in regard to what was copied if you don't like Ehrman.
As for the Law, it was not disregarded until after Jesus was crucified. This was symbolized by the tearing of the temple veil after His death. Now Christians don't have to physically enter a temple to commune with God.
Since you mentioned the veil tearing, I take it you are familar with the Passion stories?
If so, in regard to the Gospels we can go over the details of the multiple choice accounts of the Passion storytelling if you'd like, it's like a choose your own adventure book from the 1980s.
I see you had no response to the taking of corn on the Sabbath and the relationship Jesus indicated to the case with David.
See Hebrews 10:19–20.
More opinions from an unknown writer. You need to show this writer has some basis that his opinions are worthy of study or consideration. Asserting this unknown writer's opinion is nothing but that.
Works is not a requirement of salvation. You can't work your way to heaven. But a reborn Christian will want to do works. If they don't then they have a dead faith. That's what James is talking about.
I know what James was discussing. Do you not see the relationship to the Law here?
What is your level of understanding of Judaism?
Also, did you forget to address the request I made in regard to Mark 11:12-14?
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
- Login to post comments
Good post pauljohn.
Thanks!
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
Too bad they are outnumbered by verses on torture, slavery, murder, genocide, infanticide, cruelty, and sheer stupidity.
Just because your book has a few chapters talking about love does not dismiss the greater number of chapters on hate.
Either you are the one who has yet to read the bible, or you are a very sick individual.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Were you there when your god made creation? Then how do you know the bible isn't a lie?
Dumb ass theists get owned by their own arguments.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Absolutely good post PaulJohn!
TWD, still waiting on your explanation for Matthew 5:17.
Rather weak post actually.
I give him kudos for crafting a respectful reply void of profanity and insults unlike yourself, but most of his bold claims are insubstational particular his comments regarding the NT. I will address it directly tomorrow if I have time.
You're the one claiming that the OT laws are still applicable, not me. Prove something for once starting with explaining why Matthew 5:17 supports your stance.
Wow, what a great response.
Profanity? Where?
Insults? A few. Mostly because you are endorsing genocide.
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
Your argument is that god can be considered kind. The actions of your god, and scripture in the OT demonstrate the lack of kindness.
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
I'd be willing to wager that question is not going to be answered. Just like the bible, counterclaims get picked and chosen when debating with this type of narrow-minded ilk.
“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno
No way am I betting against that. : /
Especially since TWD has ignored many posts or parts of posts so far.
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
We are mostly fallibilists here and generally don't accept things to be true without detailed supporting hypotheses. And at no time do we insist that any truth is beyond being challenged and reinterpreted on the basis of new data.
As a result of this, your endless objective truth claims utterly unsupported by data of any kind are not going to wash with us. You insist the bible is true, that god is good, you even imply you know the mind of god. You tell us on the basis of no proof that we are
evil, you write off entire human populations as evil and deserving of death without any but the one-sided evidence of the OT authors. You appeal to every possible fallacy. You are a classic case of the Kruger-Dunning effect.
Since you want to claim you are a rationalist, please give us a coherent definition of god that is not simply a big list of undefinable assertions. Please define your god concept in the first instance. What are you talking about?
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
I'm claiming no such thing. I'm claiming both testaments are incoherent and contradict each-other. Matthew 5:17 reads:
"“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." -New international Version
Why say this if we are not to follow the Law? The capitalization makes it quite obvious that he is indeed referring to the old testament. If I'm wrong, tell me what he is referring to.
Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.
I bet you this will get answered quite eloquently.
I am amazed at how an undefined concept's vague properties can spark such an emotional debate. It's as though we're arguing about the shoe size of Big-Foot, or the number of teeth of the Loch Ness monster. It completely misses the point.
"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc
I would agree but half of this forum is devoted to that undefined concept and the discussion thereof so...
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
@TWD
Watch this if you don't understand why YOU need to prove God and the Bible and I do not need to prove it wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KayBys8gaJY&feature=autoplay&list=UUc_xdkOBgSYLmXTn-VSQ4uA&playnext=1
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
the only evidence we have of amalekites sacrificing children is found in the hebrew bible, and we have no evidence that those passages were written any earlier than a good 5 centuries after those mythical times supposedly took place. its called political propaganda. "they were a bunch of monsters, we have every right to be here," etc., etc.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
We have great evidence that the translations and copying of the ancient text was handled with great care and detail so it's doubtful that these are just stories some desert dudes made up centuries later. The dead sea scrolls can attest to that.
Atheists once made the same bold claim about the Hitties. Oh they never existed because the Bible is the only record of them. Then archaelogy finally shut them up.
Thanks for the chuckle. So if the local news reports on a murder story, that means the news station approves and supports the crime? That is essentially what you are saying about God. The Bible simply reported the history as it REALLY happened. If the Bible was a work of fiction, I would think the authors would paint their heroes in a more glamorous light, especially if the goal is to convert people to a false religion.