The mercy of god

[Stu]

Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 08 2010,21:17)

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,19:51) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 08 2010,08:08) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,00:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 01 2010,21:53) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 01 2010,21:30) Of course the exodus never actually happened, so maybe the numbers are irrelevant. Stuart are you sure it didn't happen? You can't prove a negative, so there is no relevant answer to your question, however there is no archeological evidence for any such event as the alleged exodus.  The “burden of proof” lies on the person making the claim. If you need the exodus myth to be true, it is you who must at least supply evidence.  There is no evidence for what is an absurd story if taken literally.  It is Jewish people working at a university in Tel Aviv who have done the archeology, so you can hardly say there is any bias at play here. Stuart I asked you are “YOU” sure it didn't happen and I guess your answer is no and you can't prove it didn't either. You made the claim it did not happen I didn't even make a claim I asked you are “You” sure “YOUR” claim is true. So, how could you shift the burden to me? Wouldn't it be better to say that “you don't know if such an event occured”? wouldn't that be the best answer you could have gave? No, the best answer is the one I gave in short form, which lengthens to: There is no evidence to support your assertion that there was such a thing as the exodus described in the Judeo-christian book of mythology.  Therefore the burden of proof lies with you: unless you provide unambiguous evidence, then your assertion is as easily dismissed as it was to make it. If you don't accept the concept of the burden of proof, then you would find me open to making all sorts of untrue accusations about you and then insisting that you show us they are wrong. As it happens, all the accusations I have made about you have been supported by the enormous amount of clear evidence available online.  I accept the burden of proof, why can't you? Stuart Hi Stuart, I provided the evidence for this as well, but you keep calling evidence your unwilling to accept ambiguous? God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Remember Ed, you would think that the writings of Arthur Conan Doyle were evidence of the actual existence of Sherlock Holmes, as many do!

Stuart

[Ed J]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,21:20)

Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 08 2010,21:17) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,19:51) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 08 2010,08:08) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,00:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 01 2010,21:53) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 01 2010,21:30) Of course the exodus never actually happened, so maybe the numbers are irrelevant. Stuart are you sure it didn't happen? You can't prove a negative, so there is no relevant answer to your question, however there is no archeological evidence for any such event as the alleged exodus.  The “burden of proof” lies on the person making the claim. If you need the exodus myth to be true, it is you who must at least supply evidence.  There is no evidence for what is an absurd story if taken literally.  It is Jewish people working at a university in Tel Aviv who have done the archeology, so you can hardly say there is any bias at play here. Stuart I asked you are “YOU” sure it didn't happen and I guess your answer is no and you can't prove it didn't either. You made the claim it did not happen I didn't even make a claim I asked you are “You” sure “YOUR” claim is true. So, how could you shift the burden to me? Wouldn't it be better to say that “you don't know if such an event occured”? wouldn't that be the best answer you could have gave? No, the best answer is the one I gave in short form, which lengthens to: There is no evidence to support your assertion that there was such a thing as the exodus described in the Judeo-christian book of mythology.  Therefore the burden of proof lies with you: unless you provide unambiguous evidence, then your assertion is as easily dismissed as it was to make it. If you don't accept the concept of the burden of proof, then you would find me open to making all sorts of untrue accusations about you and then insisting that you show us they are wrong. As it happens, all the accusations I have made about you have been supported by the enormous amount of clear evidence available online.  I accept the burden of proof, why can't you? Stuart Hi Stuart, I provided the evidence for this as well, but you keep calling evidence your unwilling to accept ambiguous? God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Remember Ed, you would think that the writings of Arthur Conan Doyle were evidence of the actual existence of Sherlock Holmes, as many do! Stuart

Hi Stuart,

How can I remember, if I never heard of Arthur Conan Doyle?
And besides this fact, what point are you trying to make?

Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17)
יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā  hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm!
Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 08 2010,17:18)

.                           quran = Babylon Rev.18:2: And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. (Psalm 124:7 – Psalm 125:3) .

Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.Psalm 40:5-7

Ed if you require what God does not require, then you have a foul spirit and a babylon nature. God said SACRIFICES HE DOES NOT REQUIRE. Are you right or is GOD RIGHT?

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,19:51)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 08 2010,08:08) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,00:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 01 2010,21:53) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 01 2010,21:30) Of course the exodus never actually happened, so maybe the numbers are irrelevant. Stuart are you sure it didn't happen? You can't prove a negative, so there is no relevant answer to your question, however there is no archeological evidence for any such event as the alleged exodus.  The “burden of proof” lies on the person making the claim. If you need the exodus myth to be true, it is you who must at least supply evidence.  There is no evidence for what is an absurd story if taken literally.  It is Jewish people working at a university in Tel Aviv who have done the archeology, so you can hardly say there is any bias at play here. Stuart I asked you are “YOU” sure it didn't happen and I guess your answer is no and you can't prove it didn't either. You made the claim it did not happen I didn't even make a claim I asked you are “You” sure “YOUR” claim is true. So, how could you shift the burden to me? Wouldn't it be better to say that “you don't know if such an event occured”? wouldn't that be the best answer you could have gave? No, the best answer is the one I gave in short form, which lengthens to: There is no evidence to support your assertion that there was such a thing as the exodus described in the Judeo-christian book of mythology.  Therefore the burden of proof lies with you: unless you provide unambiguous evidence, then your assertion is as easily dismissed as it was to make it. If you don't accept the concept of the burden of proof, then you would find me open to making all sorts of untrue accusations about you and then insisting that you show us they are wrong. As it happens, all the accusations I have made about you have been supported by the enormous amount of clear evidence available online.  I accept the burden of proof, why can't you? Stuart

I asked you were you CERTAIN you told me previously that you could not be CERTAIN abot anything therefore from your own words you admit that you do not KNOW.

Stop playing! You know that you do not know so why not just admit that you do not know.

[Stu]

Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 09 2010,00:04)

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,21:20) Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 08 2010,21:17) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,19:51) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 08 2010,08:08) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,00:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 01 2010,21:53) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 01 2010,21:30) Of course the exodus never actually happened, so maybe the numbers are irrelevant. Stuart are you sure it didn't happen? You can't prove a negative, so there is no relevant answer to your question, however there is no archeological evidence for any such event as the alleged exodus.  The “burden of proof” lies on the person making the claim. If you need the exodus myth to be true, it is you who must at least supply evidence.  There is no evidence for what is an absurd story if taken literally.  It is Jewish people working at a university in Tel Aviv who have done the archeology, so you can hardly say there is any bias at play here. Stuart I asked you are “YOU” sure it didn't happen and I guess your answer is no and you can't prove it didn't either. You made the claim it did not happen I didn't even make a claim I asked you are “You” sure “YOUR” claim is true. So, how could you shift the burden to me? Wouldn't it be better to say that “you don't know if such an event occured”? wouldn't that be the best answer you could have gave? No, the best answer is the one I gave in short form, which lengthens to: There is no evidence to support your assertion that there was such a thing as the exodus described in the Judeo-christian book of mythology.  Therefore the burden of proof lies with you: unless you provide unambiguous evidence, then your assertion is as easily dismissed as it was to make it. If you don't accept the concept of the burden of proof, then you would find me open to making all sorts of untrue accusations about you and then insisting that you show us they are wrong. As it happens, all the accusations I have made about you have been supported by the enormous amount of clear evidence available online.  I accept the burden of proof, why can't you? Stuart Hi Stuart, I provided the evidence for this as well, but you keep calling evidence your unwilling to accept ambiguous? God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Remember Ed, you would think that the writings of Arthur Conan Doyle were evidence of the actual existence of Sherlock Holmes, as many do! Stuart Hi Stuart, How can I remember, if I never heard of Arthur Conan Doyle? And besides this fact, what point are you trying to make? Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17) יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā  hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm! Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Not the most brilliant admission to make, Ed.

Honest, I'll give you that. Did you ever read any Sherlock Holmes? Did you ever look at the name of the author on the cover?

Stuart

[Stu]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 09 2010,02:02)

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,19:51) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 08 2010,08:08) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,00:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 01 2010,21:53) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 01 2010,21:30) Of course the exodus never actually happened, so maybe the numbers are irrelevant. Stuart are you sure it didn't happen? You can't prove a negative, so there is no relevant answer to your question, however there is no archeological evidence for any such event as the alleged exodus.  The “burden of proof” lies on the person making the claim. If you need the exodus myth to be true, it is you who must at least supply evidence.  There is no evidence for what is an absurd story if taken literally.  It is Jewish people working at a university in Tel Aviv who have done the archeology, so you can hardly say there is any bias at play here. Stuart I asked you are “YOU” sure it didn't happen and I guess your answer is no and you can't prove it didn't either. You made the claim it did not happen I didn't even make a claim I asked you are “You” sure “YOUR” claim is true. So, how could you shift the burden to me? Wouldn't it be better to say that “you don't know if such an event occured”? wouldn't that be the best answer you could have gave? No, the best answer is the one I gave in short form, which lengthens to: There is no evidence to support your assertion that there was such a thing as the exodus described in the Judeo-christian book of mythology.  Therefore the burden of proof lies with you: unless you provide unambiguous evidence, then your assertion is as easily dismissed as it was to make it. If you don't accept the concept of the burden of proof, then you would find me open to making all sorts of untrue accusations about you and then insisting that you show us they are wrong. As it happens, all the accusations I have made about you have been supported by the enormous amount of clear evidence available online.  I accept the burden of proof, why can't you? Stuart I asked you were you CERTAIN you told me previously that you could not be CERTAIN abot anything therefore from your own words you admit that you do not KNOW. Stop playing! You know that you do not know so why not just admit that you do not know.

Firstly tell me what certainty has to do with knowing things.

Secondly, perhaps you could have a go at answering my question: I can accept the burden of proof, can you?

Stuart

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,18:56)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 09 2010,02:02) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,19:51) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 08 2010,08:08) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,00:10) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 01 2010,21:53) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 01 2010,21:30) Of course the exodus never actually happened, so maybe the numbers are irrelevant. Stuart are you sure it didn't happen? You can't prove a negative, so there is no relevant answer to your question, however there is no archeological evidence for any such event as the alleged exodus.  The “burden of proof” lies on the person making the claim. If you need the exodus myth to be true, it is you who must at least supply evidence.  There is no evidence for what is an absurd story if taken literally.  It is Jewish people working at a university in Tel Aviv who have done the archeology, so you can hardly say there is any bias at play here. Stuart I asked you are “YOU” sure it didn't happen and I guess your answer is no and you can't prove it didn't either. You made the claim it did not happen I didn't even make a claim I asked you are “You” sure “YOUR” claim is true. So, how could you shift the burden to me? Wouldn't it be better to say that “you don't know if such an event occured”? wouldn't that be the best answer you could have gave? No, the best answer is the one I gave in short form, which lengthens to: There is no evidence to support your assertion that there was such a thing as the exodus described in the Judeo-christian book of mythology.  Therefore the burden of proof lies with you: unless you provide unambiguous evidence, then your assertion is as easily dismissed as it was to make it. If you don't accept the concept of the burden of proof, then you would find me open to making all sorts of untrue accusations about you and then insisting that you show us they are wrong. As it happens, all the accusations I have made about you have been supported by the enormous amount of clear evidence available online.  I accept the burden of proof, why can't you? Stuart I asked you were you CERTAIN you told me previously that you could not be CERTAIN abot anything therefore from your own words you admit that you do not KNOW. Stop playing! You know that you do not know so why not just admit that you do not know. Firstly tell me what certainty has to do with knowing things. Secondly, perhaps you could have a go at answering my question:  I can accept the burden of proof, can you? Stuart

I asked you were you “Certain” you knew.

What do you mean you can accept the burdrn of proof when you already admitted “you can't prove a negative”

It's not really even a challenge debating with you anymore it's rather like talking to ED or should I say EXACTLY like talking to ED which is reminiscent of a cattle call try as you may they only hear noises but they do not understand

[Ed J]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,18:54)

Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 09 2010,00:04) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,21:20) Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 08 2010,21:17) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,19:51) No, the best answer is the one I gave in short form, which lengthens to: There is no evidence to support your assertion that there was such a thing as the exodus described in the Judeo-christian book of mythology.  Therefore the burden of proof lies with you: unless you provide unambiguous evidence, then your assertion is as easily dismissed as it was to make it. If you don't accept the concept of the burden of proof, then you would find me open to making all sorts of untrue accusations about you and then insisting that you show us they are wrong. As it happens, all the accusations I have made about you have been supported by the enormous amount of clear evidence available online.  I accept the burden of proof, why can't you? Stuart Hi Stuart, I provided the evidence for this as well, but you keep calling evidence your unwilling to accept ambiguous? God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Remember Ed, you would think that the writings of Arthur Conan Doyle were evidence of the actual existence of Sherlock Holmes, as many do! Stuart Hi Stuart, How can I remember, if I never heard of Arthur Conan Doyle? And besides this fact, what point are you trying to make? Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17) יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā  hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm! Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Not the most brilliant admission to make, Ed. Honest, I'll give you that.  Did you ever read any Sherlock Holmes?  Did you ever look at the name of the author on the cover? Stuart

Hi Stuart,

How is admitting that I don't know something, not very brilliant?
Is brilliance (to you) based on how many novels have been read?
No
No

Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Stu]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 09 2010,19:04)

I asked you were you “Certain” you knew. What do you mean you can accept the burdrn of proof when you already admitted “you can't prove a negative”

Asking how certain one is, especially in this context where we are really considering the nature of the word “certain” is a category error. Certainty is boolean. You are either certain or not. I am not, because there no way of determining a certain answer.

I am certain about mathematics (at least to the extent that I can do mathematics), but that is the only area in which it is possible to be certain. 1+1=2 because 2 is actually defined in terms of the addition of two 1s.

“You can't prove a negative” means that you cannot exhaust all possibilities. You could claim that all cows eat grass, but all you would need to do to disprove it would be to find a cow that did not eat grass, and to demonstrate that this particular cow had never eaten grass. Even if you found all the cows on earth and observed them eat grass, you still cannot account for the possibility that there might be non-grass eating cows on other planets.

“The burden of proof” means that if you are going to make a positive statement then you should be prepared to support it with evidence (although not necessarily proof, because there is no such thing except in mathematics).

I've snipped your egotistical last comment BD and ignored it, instead supplying you with a lesson in philosophy that rather negates the notion that discussion with me is something you could call a trivial matter. If it is as such, I expect you will either agree that my statement about philosophy is accurate, or be able to give a philosophical argument against it.

Stuart

[Stu]

Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 09 2010,19:30)

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,18:54) Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 09 2010,00:04) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,21:20) Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 08 2010,21:17) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 08 2010,19:51) No, the best answer is the one I gave in short form, which lengthens to: There is no evidence to support your assertion that there was such a thing as the exodus described in the Judeo-christian book of mythology.  Therefore the burden of proof lies with you: unless you provide unambiguous evidence, then your assertion is as easily dismissed as it was to make it. If you don't accept the concept of the burden of proof, then you would find me open to making all sorts of untrue accusations about you and then insisting that you show us they are wrong. As it happens, all the accusations I have made about you have been supported by the enormous amount of clear evidence available online.  I accept the burden of proof, why can't you? Stuart Hi Stuart, I provided the evidence for this as well, but you keep calling evidence your unwilling to accept ambiguous? God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Remember Ed, you would think that the writings of Arthur Conan Doyle were evidence of the actual existence of Sherlock Holmes, as many do! Stuart Hi Stuart, How can I remember, if I never heard of Arthur Conan Doyle? And besides this fact, what point are you trying to make? Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17) יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā  hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm! Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Not the most brilliant admission to make, Ed. Honest, I'll give you that.  Did you ever read any Sherlock Holmes?  Did you ever look at the name of the author on the cover? Stuart Hi Stuart, How is admitting that I don't know something, not very brilliant? Is brilliance (to you) based on how many novels have been read? No No Ed J http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

You are just trying to avoid the point, Ed. Shall I shift the analogy? You would take the writing of JK Rowling as evidence that children can levitate objects by pointing sticks at them and mumbling.

I'm sorry but this is basic stuff Ed. Do try to keep up!

Stuart

[Ed J]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,20:19)

Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 09 2010,19:30) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,18:54) Not the most brilliant admission to make, Ed. Honest, I'll give you that.  Did you ever read any Sherlock Holmes?  Did you ever look at the name of the author on the cover? Stuart Hi Stuart, How is admitting that I don't know something, not very brilliant? Is brilliance (to you) based on how many novels have been read? No No Ed J http://www.holycitybiblecode.org You are just trying to avoid the point, Ed.  Shall I shift the analogy?  You would take the writing of JK Rowling as evidence that children can levitate objects by pointing sticks at them and mumbling. I'm sorry but this is basic stuff Ed.  Do try to keep up! Stuart

Hi Stuart,

I'm unfamiliar with that one as well.

Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Stu]

Have you ever read any fiction? Apart from the bible, I mean.

Stuart

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,20:14)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 09 2010,19:04) I asked you were you “Certain” you knew. What do you mean you can accept the burdrn of proof when you already admitted “you can't prove a negative” Asking how certain one is, especially in this context where we are really considering the nature of the word “certain” is a category error.  Certainty is boolean.  You are either certain or not.  I am not, because there no way of determining a certain answer. I am certain about mathematics (at least to the extent that I can do mathematics), but that is the only area in which it is possible to be certain.  1+1=2 because 2 is actually defined in terms of the addition of two 1s. “You can't prove a negative” means that you cannot exhaust all possibilities.  You could claim that all cows eat grass, but all you would need to do to disprove it would be to find a cow that did not eat grass, and to demonstrate that this particular cow had never eaten grass.  Even if you found all the cows on earth and observed them eat grass, you still cannot account for the possibility that there might be non-grass eating cows on other planets. “The burden of proof” means that if you are going to make a positive statement then you should be prepared to support it with evidence (although not necessarily proof, because there is no such thing except in mathematics). I've snipped your egotistical last comment BD and ignored it, instead supplying you with a lesson in philosophy that rather negates the notion that discussion with me is something you could call a trivial matter.  If it is as such, I expect you will either agree that my statement about philosophy is accurate, or be able to give a philosophical argument against it. Stuart

So basically you are not CERTAIN about the exodus and cannot PROVE your view about it. Also keep in mind I did not assert anything all I did was ask you were you sure it didn't happen, go back and check where I chimed in at.

You could have just said you do not know but yet you still keep playing games.

[Ed J]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,21:53)

Have you ever read any fiction? Apart from the bible, I mean. Stuart

Hi Stuart,

The Bible isn't Fiction. (Click Here)

Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17)
יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā  hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm!
Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[bodhitharta]

I know it was fun hijacking this thread guys but this thred is about the Mercy of God not proving the exodus

[Stu]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 09 2010,22:59)

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,20:14) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 09 2010,19:04) I asked you were you “Certain” you knew. What do you mean you can accept the burdrn of proof when you already admitted “you can't prove a negative” Asking how certain one is, especially in this context where we are really considering the nature of the word “certain” is a category error.  Certainty is boolean.  You are either certain or not.  I am not, because there no way of determining a certain answer. I am certain about mathematics (at least to the extent that I can do mathematics), but that is the only area in which it is possible to be certain.  1+1=2 because 2 is actually defined in terms of the addition of two 1s. “You can't prove a negative” means that you cannot exhaust all possibilities.  You could claim that all cows eat grass, but all you would need to do to disprove it would be to find a cow that did not eat grass, and to demonstrate that this particular cow had never eaten grass.  Even if you found all the cows on earth and observed them eat grass, you still cannot account for the possibility that there might be non-grass eating cows on other planets. “The burden of proof” means that if you are going to make a positive statement then you should be prepared to support it with evidence (although not necessarily proof, because there is no such thing except in mathematics). I've snipped your egotistical last comment BD and ignored it, instead supplying you with a lesson in philosophy that rather negates the notion that discussion with me is something you could call a trivial matter.  If it is as such, I expect you will either agree that my statement about philosophy is accurate, or be able to give a philosophical argument against it. Stuart So basically you are not CERTAIN about the exodus and cannot PROVE your view about it. Also keep in mind I did not assert anything all I did was ask you were you sure it didn't happen, go back and check where I chimed in at. You could have just said you do not know but yet you still keep playing games.

Yeah, those “games” I keep playing are called epistemology, the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature and limitations of knowledge.

You need a crash course in epistemology. Without it you will continue to repeat the mistakes you have made here on this page, and actually on many pages across the internet.

Stuart

[Stu]

Quote (Ed J @ Sep. 10 2010,14:57)

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,21:53) Have you ever read any fiction? Apart from the bible, I mean. Stuart Hi Stuart, The Bible isn't Fiction. (Click Here) Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17) יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā  hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm! Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

I know of more than one atheist whose favourite activity in a library is to move the bible from the “reference” section to the fiction section.

The Judeo-christian book of bronze age / early iron age mythology is historical fiction. There definitely is a place called Jerusalem, there could well have been a Jewish preacher called Jesus (or more likely there were dozens of them), but people did not walk on water or walk again after they had been executed by the Romans. When fictional characters are engaged in a fictional narrative against a real historical background, it is called historical fiction.

Stuart

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Stu @ Sep. 10 2010,18:02)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 09 2010,22:59) Quote (Stu @ Sep. 09 2010,20:14) Quote (bodhitharta @ Sep. 09 2010,19:04) I asked you were you “Certain” you knew. What do you mean you can accept the burdrn of proof when you already admitted “you can't prove a negative” Asking how certain one is, especially in this context where we are really considering the nature of the word “certain” is a category error.  Certainty is boolean.  You are either certain or not.  I am not, because there no way of determining a certain answer. I am certain about mathematics (at least to the extent that I can do mathematics), but that is the only area in which it is possible to be certain.  1+1=2 because 2 is actually defined in terms of the addition of two 1s. “You can't prove a negative” means that you cannot exhaust all possibilities.  You could claim that all cows eat grass, but all you would need to do to disprove it would be to find a cow that did not eat grass, and to demonstrate that this particular cow had never eaten grass.  Even if you found all the cows on earth and observed them eat grass, you still cannot account for the possibility that there might be non-grass eating cows on other planets. “The burden of proof” means that if you are going to make a positive statement then you should be prepared to support it with evidence (although not necessarily proof, because there is no such thing except in mathematics). I've snipped your egotistical last comment BD and ignored it, instead supplying you with a lesson in philosophy that rather negates the notion that discussion with me is something you could call a trivial matter.  If it is as such, I expect you will either agree that my statement about philosophy is accurate, or be able to give a philosophical argument against it. Stuart So basically you are not CERTAIN about the exodus and cannot PROVE your view about it. Also keep in mind I did not assert anything all I did was ask you were you sure it didn't happen, go back and check where I chimed in at. You could have just said you do not know but yet you still keep playing games. Yeah, those “games” I keep playing are called epistemology, the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature and limitations of knowledge. You need a crash course in epistemology.  Without it you will continue to repeat the mistakes you have made here on this page, and actually on many pages across the internet. Stuart

Why do you keep accusing me of what you keep doing it was you who said that something did not happen and previously it was also you who said they could not actually “Know”.

you don't seem to understand epistemology yourself for me to deny that the exodus occured would mean that I must consider Jewish history as Unreliable, I am not willing to be so bold as to deny an entire group of people who claim to have witnessed an event as a Nation.

Did the underground railroad exodus occur for black slaves? If you agree to that then you will see that the greater context is the concept of Exodus itself.

Sometimes you miss the point trying to make “a” point, this in my opinion makes you philosophically weak.

[Stu]

BD

Quote

Why do you keep accusing me of what you keep doing it was you who said that something did not happen and previously it was also you who said they could not actually “Know”.

I did not say this could not be known. I did claim the alleged biblical exodus never happened. Not only is the exodus story not plausible, there is no archeological evidence for it, in a situation where you would expect to find an enormous amount of evidence. Your knowledge should be the provisional conclusion that it did not happen. If someone found new evidence that contradicted that previous conclusion then you would be forced to reconsider. As there is no such evidence despite extensive investigation, it is not reasonable to say there was an exodus. You cannot prove the exodus never happened, but that does not mean that it did happen.

There is obviously a great deal of material available on this, but I don’t think the Wikipedia entry is an unreasonable summary:

More than a century of archaeological research has discovered nothing which could support the narrative elements of the book of Exodus. The four centuries sojourn in Egypt, the escape of well over a million Israelites from the Delta, or the three months journey through the wilderness to Sinai. The Egyptian records themselves have no mention of anything recorded in Exodus, the wilderness of the southern Sinai peninsula shows no traces of a mass-migration such as Exodus describes, and virtually all the place-names mentioned, including Goshen (the area within Egypt where the Israelites supposedly lived), the store-cities of Pithom and Rameses, the site of the crossing of the Red Sea (or, more commonly among modern Biblical scholars, the Sea of Reeds), and even Mt Sinai itself, have resisted identification.

Perhaps you could have a go at telling us where Mt. Sinai is.

Quote

you don't seem to understand epistemology yourself for me to deny that the exodus occured would mean that I must consider Jewish history as Unreliable, I am not willing to be so bold as to deny an entire group of people who claim to have witnessed an event as a Nation.

I am so bold, as are many Jewish scholars. An intelligent reading of that history is consistent with the position that there was no exodus. The books traditionally attributed to “Moses” were written by at least five different people. They are not verifiable history, they are political allegory.

Your epistemology is centred in the idea that an angel spoke absolute truth to an illiterate dark age prophet. That way of knowing apparently trumps science. I’ll take science thanks.

Quote

Did the underground railroad exodus occur for black slaves? If you agree to that then you will see that the greater context is the concept of Exodus itself.

Can we stay on topic here? We are discussing the apparently mythical biblical exodus.

Quote

Sometimes you miss the point trying to make “a” point, this in my opinion makes you philosophically weak.

So you are saying that there is value in considering an event which never happened, to have actually happened? What philosophical “strength” does that represent?

Stuart

[bodhitharta]

If you cannot prove that the exodus didn't happen claiming that it didn't happen is simply inflammatory at best.

What is the deeper philosophical context you are attempting to place the dialogue in? If the Exodus never happened what would that mean? Would the event prove to you that God does indeed exist if it were proven to be true?

[Author]

Posts