
March 11th, 2003, 10:34 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: [OT] Plato\'s Pub and Philosophical Society
Quote:
Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
"The mention of the name Cyrus in Isaiah is most certainly an indication that one of 2 things occured:
1) The book was indeed written after the events took place (or even while they were taking place).
2) The book was altered after the events that were a safe bet to predict occured so that the necessary details would be correct."
Nice preconception there Fyron. It might actually support his argument, so therefore it has to be wrong.
Phoenix-D
|
No, it "has to be wrong" because logical reasoning tells you that real prophesy is impossible. You simply can not see into the future. You can make guesses, but you can not see what will undoubtedly happen. As the name supposedly prophesized appears accurate, something fishy had to have taken place for it to appear accurate (that, or Isaiah was a really good guesser, but it is very improbable that he would have been able to guess the name Cyrus).
Quote:
This is a completely unwarranted statement. The bible is not the Gilgamesh epic, or the tales of Hercules. The 'mythic' aspects are pretty much limited to the first book or so. Once you get past the creation story and the parting of the red sea you'll find a rather detailed account of the movers and shakers of the ancient jewish world. It describes the bloody history of a tribe of nomads that eventually settled down, usually through the perspective of the most influential political/religious leader at the time.
|
I know what the Bible is. There is more to it than just the tale of the Hebrew people. Or are you specifically choosing to ignore the New Testament? There is plenty in it that has nothing to do with that tribe of nomads.
[quote]The books of the bible (both oral and then written) were passed down as historical records not mere folklore. Just because a lot of their decisions were made based upon what would seem to be bad acid trips does not mean that the bible is a book of fairy tales. If it was it would be a much more interesting read and wouldn't have so many "begat's" in it.[/b]Ok... you do not know what the term mythology means. It has absolutely nothing to do with fairy tales. I guess I will have to repeat myself: mythology is a collection of tales that define the moral values of a culture. Hmm... the Bible is a collection of tales, which Jews and Christians essentially get their moral values from. Therefore, Bible = mythology.
The Odyssey was passed down as historical record. Does that make everything it says historical fact? No way. Most religious texts/tales were passed down as historical record. The Bible is nothing special in this regard. It has parts based on reality, and parts that are fictional, dramatized for effect.
Quote:
By the way Fyron, I seem to remember you mentioning that you don't even own a bible. Is that true?
|
Without a doubt. But does that make a difference? No. There are plenty of Online copies of the Bible available for free.
Quote:
If so, are you sure that you know what you are actually arguing about?
|
Yes, I am quite sure.
Quote:
Grossly misinformed statements like the above quote would seem to indicate that you have some kind of aVersion to religion itself, rather than a specific problem with the bible (a book that you appear to be quite unfamiliar with).
|
You have grossly misinterpreted my statements. My statements are still quite accurate, and they stand.
I am unfamiliar with the nitty-gritty details of the Bible, but that does not really matter much for this debate. I do not know the nitty-gritty details of other manuscripts, such as the Constitution. But, I know what it is about. Would you say I am quite unfamiliar with it, just because I don't own a copy of it, and I don't read it very often? I would hope not.
[ March 11, 2003, 08:49: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]
|