If there is no God? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-30-2006, 12:32 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaryLLL
Again, an incorrect assertion brought about by ignorance. Science uses the scientific method. Hypothesis, experiments, and a final theory or paradigm which the evidence leads to. Science does not "prove" anything. It gives us paradigms to operate under until more evidence expands our understanding of the issue at hand.

Christianity has a 2000-2600 yr old book of legends and fables.



You can believe that if you like. It's romantic and appealing on a certain level. I would add that the story of Noah was taken from a Babylonian "myth" which was even older. The Judahites were taken into captivity by the Babylonians in the 6th century BC. Now, I am sure by that point, people had observed rainbows appearing in the sky all the time when the clouds and sun were just right. In fact, "rainbows" or prismatic effects appear in drops of dew on grass and on wet eyelashes as well, as every child knows. The idea that this one rainbow in a fable was more special than the uncountable other ones in the history of the planet was a theological construct of the early Iron Age, and has nothing to do with actually proving the existence of God. The story calls this colorful arch the bow of God, as if God was a really big archer. It's symbolic, God was laying down his weapon. It's not cold hard fact, it's a metaphor of hope.
Science is about proving probably causes. Sure, science is always changing, but there are constants as well. If science doesn't prove anything then how do we know about such things as the earth is round, the sky is blue, etc. etc. When science shows thing beyond a resonable doubt, they are generally accepted to be true. I will give the scientific evidence that the universe began in a latter post. (Let's just deal with that now).

What are you basing "Christianity has a 2000-2600 yr old book of legends and fables on?

You are right, the existence on God cannot be proven or disproven based on the rainbow, which was not the point I was trying to make, but that is besides the point here.

Noah and the flood is not a myth. The Jews had the Pentateuch (first 5 books of the Old Testament) way before they went to Babylon. Gensis is the real deal because other verisons contain elaborations that show corruption. Additionally, the Gensis account is the only one that gives the year of the flood and chronlogical dates relative for Noah's life. The Babylonian ship could not have saved anyone because of its shape-it was cubical and would not have survivied the seas.. The biblical ark was rectangluar-long, low and wide- so it would survive the rough waters. In the pagan accounts they say it rained for 7 days of rain, yet that amount of rain would not be enough for the devastation described. Also, the Babylonaian account claims the waters subsided in one day- just absurd. The waters would have had to rise at least 17,000 feet- the height of most mountians. How could 7 days of rain get to that height and then it only take 1 day for all the water to subside? Another way the Gensis account shows its reliability is that the hero-Noah- goes on to sin, where as the others exalt the hero. Only a truthful version would show the falibility of its hero.
Wausau74 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-30-2006, 12:34 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nankay
Quote: "Don't people like to base their beliefs on truth?"

I'd love to think so, but it is quite evident this is not so. When it comes to religion , I do not find much that is "True" ie: back by evidence.
You are right most do not base their beliefs on truth, but one would hope that if one is going to have beliefs that there would be a reason for the beliefs held.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 12:37 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyLittleWonders
This statement fascinates me. Where do you get the "evidence" for God's existence? Do you have scientific evidence for God's existance? Or is this basis purely on the Bible, without extra-Biblical support?

The evidence is extra-Biblical. Just because the Bible says something doesn't make it true, first the Bible has to be proven to be true. This is a step-by-step process, which I hope to show in this thread. Patience is required, though.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 12:39 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaryLLL
it does nothing to prove the Jewish or Xtian God is the right one.

Where is your evidence that your specific God exists?
This statment is assuming that there is one true God. That requires an acceptance that is truth. Should we start there-that there is only one truth? That truth, does indeed, exist?
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 12:41 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wednesday

Okay, by that logic we can just suppose the universe has no beginning.
That would be a common misunderstanding of the cosomological argument- it states that everything with a beginning needs a beginer- not that simply everything needs a beginner.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 12:44 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would like to know that those of you who want to know the evidence- where to start? I think it would be best to start with the fact that truth is knowable because without that then this whole discussion is a moot point for if truth is not knowable then no one can know anything. What do you say?

Also, I would really like to get back to the why God then evil question. I will do that. I have spent alot of time here this morning and DS needs me. I wil be back.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 12:52 PM
 
wednesday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 5,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
That would be a common misunderstanding of the cosomological argument- it states that everything with a beginning needs a beginer- not that simply everything needs a beginner.
I'm familiar with the cosmological argument. I took philosophy of religion in college and read all the classic arguments for and against existence of a deity (Aquinas, Paley, etc.). The problem with relying on the cosmological argument as evidence of a God lies with the basic premise about beginnings and beginners. You have to accept that as a solid truth or else the rest of the argument is irrelevant. My point is that the concept that the universe needs a beginning, but God does not need a beginning, is an unproven belief. Relying on that belief to support the rest of the argument therefore proves nothing at all.
wednesday is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 12:52 PM
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
Science is about proving probably causes. Sure, science is always changing, but there are constants as well. If science doesn't prove anything then how do we know about such things as the earth is round,
Well, you have a point. Some things are so obvious they are self-evident. Yet, it took science a long time to be allowed to say, the earth is round, the earth is a tiny sphere in a huge cosmos, not the center of creation, etc.

Quote:
the sky is blue, etc. etc.
The sky being blue is proved by science? Can't we all see this with our own eyes? BTW, nowhere in the Bible does it say the sky is blue. People have wondered why this observation is not in there. the specualte that eyes have evolved since the books were written. I don't know more than that.


Quote:
What are you basing "Christianity has a 2000-2600 yr old book of legends and fables on?
Religious scholarship, comparative religion scholarship, history, archeology and anthropology.

Quote:
You are right, the existence on God cannot be proven or disproven based on the rainbow, which was not the point I was trying to make, but that is besides the point here.
I wonder what your point was.

Quote:
Noah and the flood is not a myth. The Jews had the Pentateuch (first 5 books of the Old Testament) way before they went to Babylon.
We really do not know in what form the captive priests and scholars of the Jdahite people had their tales in. If in oral form, they were compiled in a way most suited to the exiled community at the time. Scholars specualte that the elaborate Torah laws were codified then b/c they Judahites did not have their Temple as a unifying tool, so needed to rely on writing dow n info instead. You might want to google "hypothesis theory" for more scholarly opinion on who wrote the Hebrew scriptures, how, why and when.

Quote:
Gensis is the real deal because other verisons contain elaborations that show corruption. Additionally, the Gensis account is the only one that gives the year of the flood and chronlogical dates relative for Noah's life.
Sorry, that does nothing to convince me of the historicity of the Flood tale or the existance of the Hebrew god.

Quote:
The Babylonian ship could not have saved anyone because of its shape-it was cubical and would not have survivied the seas.. The biblical ark was rectangluar-long, low and wide- so it would survive the rough waters. In the pagan accounts they say it rained for 7 days of rain, yet that amount of rain would not be enough for the devastation described. Also, the Babylonaian account claims the waters subsided in one day- just absurd. The waters would have had to rise at least 17,000 feet- the height of most mountians. How could 7 days of rain get to that height and then it only take 1 day for all the water to subside?
The amount of water described in the Bible tale would have crushed the earth. Do you also want us to believe in the "baby dinosaurs on the Ark" bit?

Quote:
Another way the Gensis account shows its reliability is that the hero-Noah- goes on to sin, where as the others exalt the hero. Only a truthful version would show the falibility of its hero.

Really? This is your extra-Biblical evidence of the existence of God and historicity of this tale?
DaryLLL is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 02:10 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wednesday
I'm familiar with the cosmological argument. I took philosophy of religion in college and read all the classic arguments for and against existence of a deity (Aquinas, Paley, etc.). The problem with relying on the cosmological argument as evidence of a God lies with the basic premise about beginnings and beginners. You have to accept that as a solid truth or else the rest of the argument is irrelevant. My point is that the concept that the universe needs a beginning, but God does not need a beginning, is an unproven belief. Relying on that belief to support the rest of the argument therefore proves nothing at all.

You are right- the cosmological argument does not prove God's existence. It is a tool to assist in the existence of God. If the universe has always existed then it is meaningless to ask who made the universe just as if God has always existed then it is meaningless to ask who made God. Therefore, it needs to be proven that the universe had a beginning-which the evidence does show this. But to begin any discussion on the beginning of anything we need to agree on one thing-absolute truth does exist. Without this basic foundation, and discussion will go in circles. Do you believe that absolute truth exists?

Also, wednesday and anyone else interested in the idea of human conscience and morality, an excellent book to read is What We Can't Not Know by J. Budziszewski. He teaches at the U of TX-Austin. Excellent book worth reading.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 02:12 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ds is up again... be back
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 02:46 PM
 
wednesday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 5,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
But to begin any discussion on the beginning of anything we need to agree on one thing-absolute truth does exist. Without this basic foundation, and discussion will go in circles. Do you believe that absolute truth exists?
I think the concept of "absolute truth" is a philosophical or metaphysical construct, to be honest. You'd have to define for me what you mean by "absolute truth" before I could say whether or not I believe in it, but my hunch is I wouldn't.
wednesday is offline  
Old 01-30-2006, 07:44 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
You are right- the cosmological argument does not prove God's existence. It is a tool to assist in the existence of God. If the universe has always existed then it is meaningless to ask who made the universe just as if God has always existed then it is meaningless to ask who made God. Therefore, it needs to be proven that the universe had a beginning-which the evidence does show this. But to begin any discussion on the beginning of anything we need to agree on one thing-absolute truth does exist. Without this basic foundation, and discussion will go in circles. Do you believe that absolute truth exists?

Also, wednesday and anyone else interested in the idea of human conscience and morality, an excellent book to read is What We Can't Not Know by J. Budziszewski. He teaches at the U of TX-Austin. Excellent book worth reading.
I wanted to add that by tool I meant that it, along with other arguments prove there is a God.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 02:46 AM
 
Tata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: in a little nook
Posts: 1,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
To Down_Under,

if you like Ursula K Le Guin's writing, you may be interested to know she is Taoist and her writing reflects her beliefs. She has a wonderful translation of the Tao Te Ching, more along the lines of the female gender than the male. Its full name is

Lao Tzu
Tao Te Ching
A Book About The Way And The Power Of The Way
A new English Version by
Ursula K Le Guin

The publisher is Shambhala

You may find yourself in it. You may not. But, there are no strings attached.

http://www.earlywomenmasters.net/tao/index.html

"To lose the sense of sacredness of the world is a mortal loss. To injure our world by excesses of greed and ingenuity is to endanger our own sacredness."    Ursula K. Le Guin
Tata is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 11:49 AM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaryLLL
Well, you have a point. Some things are so obvious they are self-evident. Yet, it took science a long time to be allowed to say, the earth is round, the earth is a tiny sphere in a huge cosmos, not the center of creation, etc.



The sky being blue is proved by science? Can't we all see this with our own eyes? BTW, nowhere in the Bible does it say the sky is blue. People have wondered why this observation is not in there. the specualte that eyes have evolved since the books were written. I don't know more than that.




Religious scholarship, comparative religion scholarship, history, archeology and anthropology.



I wonder what your point was.



We really do not know in what form the captive priests and scholars of the Jdahite people had their tales in. If in oral form, they were compiled in a way most suited to the exiled community at the time. Scholars specualte that the elaborate Torah laws were codified then b/c they Judahites did not have their Temple as a unifying tool, so needed to rely on writing dow n info instead. You might want to google "hypothesis theory" for more scholarly opinion on who wrote the Hebrew scriptures, how, why and when.



Sorry, that does nothing to convince me of the historicity of the Flood tale or the existance of the Hebrew god.



The amount of water described in the Bible tale would have crushed the earth. Do you also want us to believe in the "baby dinosaurs on the Ark" bit?




Really? This is your extra-Biblical evidence of the existence of God and historicity of this tale?
No that was not the extra-Biblical evidence. I said I would share that later. The amount of water would have crushed the earth. No, there were not baby dinosaurs on the ark. They drowned.

We know the sky is blue because of the way the light shows on the particles. Not just because we see it.

My point about the rainbow was in the last line- just because there is a scienctific reason for something doesn't automatically rule out God.

You keep saying I haven't convinced you. I am not here to convince you. Only to show the evidence. Only you can decided if you will change your mind or not.

And Moses actually hand a written language and he wrote the Pentatuch.

In order for you to think that anything is true-which you clearly do since you think that the Bible is NOT true there must be something that is-I wonder what that is. What is truth to you?
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 12:11 PM
 
dingogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oztralia
Posts: 1,739
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If you scroll down a bit, you'll see that the dinosaurs were able to fit on the ark:
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/dino_ark.html

(Although I was taught that the dinosaurs became extinct before man came on the scene)
dingogirl is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 12:33 PM
 
sunnmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: surrounded by love
Posts: 6,123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
In order for you to think that anything is true-which you clearly do since you think that the Bible is NOT true there must be something that is-I wonder what that is. What is truth to you?
Isn't it possible for the truth to be unknown?
sunnmama is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 02:02 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnmama
Isn't it possible for the truth to be unknown?
Is that a true statment or a statment about truth?
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 02:04 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dingogirl
If you scroll down a bit, you'll see that the dinosaurs were able to fit on the ark:
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/dino_ark.html

(Although I was taught that the dinosaurs became extinct before man came on the scene)

Wow- that is some new info. to me. Thanks. i will have to look into that more.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 02:08 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wednesday
I think the concept of "absolute truth" is a philosophical or metaphysical construct, to be honest. You'd have to define for me what you mean by "absolute truth" before I could say whether or not I believe in it, but my hunch is I wouldn't.

By absolute truth, I mean that if something is true it is true for everyone in everyplace for all time. Truth is telling it like it is.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 03:39 PM
 
sunnmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: surrounded by love
Posts: 6,123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
Is that a true statment or a statment about truth?
Huh?
sunnmama is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 03:44 PM
 
sunnmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: surrounded by love
Posts: 6,123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
By absolute truth, I mean that if something is true it is true for everyone in everyplace for all time. Truth is telling it like it is.
Ok, but isn't it possible that no human knows how "it is" with regard to the origin of the universe? That many think they know (creations stories, scientific theories), but they are actually wrong? Or at least not fully correct?
sunnmama is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 04:11 PM
 
DaryLLL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Sorry. I have lost interest in this apologia.
DaryLLL is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 04:43 PM
 
Itlbokay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaryLLL
The amount of water described in the Bible tale would have crushed the earth. Do you also want us to believe in the "baby dinosaurs on the Ark" bit?

And just how did they keep the lions from eating other animals? How about all the bugs, didn't it take them a long time to gather up so many different types, or did they survive the floods?

As a child, I would read the story of Noah and his Ark and couldn't help thinking how it just couldn't possibly be true. I had so many questions like the ones above. I never asked anyone my questions because I knew that unless they were there, they couldn't tell me for sure.
Itlbokay is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 04:43 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnmama
Huh?
Are you saying that truth is unknowable?
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 04:45 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnmama
Ok, but isn't it possible that no human knows how "it is" with regard to the origin of the universe? That many think they know (creations stories, scientific theories), but they are actually wrong? Or at least not fully correct?

That is the whole point of answering the question-is there an absolute truth.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 04:46 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaryLLL
Sorry. I have lost interest in this apologia.
That's fine. I hope there are no hard feelings here.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 05:42 PM
 
MyLittleWonders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Always learning something new.
Posts: 7,928
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
No, there were not baby dinosaurs on the ark. They drowned.

And Moses actually hand a written language and he wrote the Pentatuch.
First of all, why were the dinosaurs excluded from the ark? If theoretically speaking, every animal was allowed on, why were they discriminated against? That doesn't make any sense, if you hold that there were dinosaurs alive at that time. If you don't hold to a literal 6-day creation, then maybe your beliefs could account for the dinosaurs living and dying well before Noah came around.

Secondly, you may want to do some research into the origins of the Pentatuch and who wrote it. There is no way Moses could have finished the book of Deuteronomy, so there was at least one other hand in writing the five books. Also, if you give him authorship of Genesis, you have to somehow account for the hundreds of years separating the actual events and his writing of said events - a long stretch of oral history where much could be changed and modified.

 Me + dh = heartbeat.gif ds (7/01), ds (11/03), ds (6/06)
and dd born 11/21/10 - our T21 SuperBaby ribbluyel.gif heartbeat.gif
MyLittleWonders is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 05:59 PM
 
sunnmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: surrounded by love
Posts: 6,123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wausau74
Are you saying that truth is unknowable?
No, not necessarily. Just that, currently, it is likely unknown.
sunnmama is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 07:13 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyLittleWonders
First of all, why were the dinosaurs excluded from the ark? If theoretically speaking, every animal was allowed on, why were they discriminated against? That doesn't make any sense, if you hold that there were dinosaurs alive at that time. If you don't hold to a literal 6-day creation, then maybe your beliefs could account for the dinosaurs living and dying well before Noah came around.

Secondly, you may want to do some research into the origins of the Pentatuch and who wrote it. There is no way Moses could have finished the book of Deuteronomy, so there was at least one other hand in writing the five books. Also, if you give him authorship of Genesis, you have to somehow account for the hundreds of years separating the actual events and his writing of said events - a long stretch of oral history where much could be changed and modified.
In my haste to answer I do realize I was wrong about the dinosaurs. My mistake- just goes to show you to think before you speak.

Moses did write the Pentatuch. This is from the linked article, which deals with the Documentary Hypothesis by Doug Beaumont. I do have permission from him. http://souldevice.org/writings_dochyp.html

Positive Evidence

That Moses was indeed the author of the Pentateuch is established by the following facts:

Internal Evidence

(1) The Pentateuch itself testifies to Mosaic authorship (Ex. 17:14, 20:22-23:33, 34:10-26; Deut. 31:9, 24-26, 32:19-21; Num. 33:2; etc.). Any objective reading of the text will confirm this, and to dispute it is a criticism that cannot be leveled on any textual grounds.

(2) Other Old Testament books cite Moses as the author (Josh. 1:7, 8:31, 23:6; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 14:6; etc.).

(3) The New Testament names Moses as its author (Mk. 12:19; Jn. 1:17; Lk. 2:22; Acts 3:22; Heb. 9:19; etc.)

(4) Jesus Himself specifies Mosaic authorship (Mk. 12:26; Jn. 5:45-47).

External Evidence

(1) Jewish tradition claims that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

(2) Jewish philosopher Philo cites Moses as the author.

(3) The Jewish historian Josephus names Moses as the author. (4) The Church Fathers agreed with these Jewish historians and Jewish tradition (e.g. Melito, Cyril, Hilary, Augustine).

(4) There were things recorded that only an eyewitness could have known (e.g. Ex. 15:27; Num. 11:7-8). The very presence of this detail also argues against later authorship as fictional accounts would tend toward only important events and not small details.

(5) Customs lost for thousands of years until the advent of archeology were recorded in the Pentateuch that could not have been added later (e.g. Egyptian idioms / customs). Archeology has confirmed numerous details that would have been unknown to later writers. This really has been the proverbial nail in the Documentary Hypothesis’ coffin. Harrison writes, “all books written before 1940 about the themes of Old Testament history and archeology must be regarded as obsolete.” These, of course, would include every book that the originators of the Documentary Hypothesis had at their disposal and upon which their anti-historical theories were based.
Wausau74 is offline  
Old 01-31-2006, 07:15 PM
 
Wausau74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnmama
No, not necessarily. Just that, currently, it is likely unknown.
Are you saying that it is true that currently truth is likely unknown?
Wausau74 is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off