Originally posted by queeq
I just thought we were kidding around. I wasn't 'out to get him'. Didn't get the impression he was too. I think you sensed hostility where there was none. Shak is not DK.
Ohhhhh...I get it...You thought that because I put down "pwnt" you thought that I was implying that he beat you in an argument?
lol...dude....not even close...
It is hard to put into words what I meant by that...but it was intended to glorify how bad ass his whitty post was...not say that he beat you. He "owned" with that reply.
own=pwn
owned=pwned=pwnt.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Divine intervention is a product of the human imagination, is a more reasonable definition of divine intervention. I can prove that humans have a well developed imagination. If you say that divine intervention is anything real, you would have to prove there is a divine that is intervening, and that cannot be done. Therefore, to look at a book and say that archaeological finds supports a divine intervention ignores the fact that god cannot be proved. If there is no god (bible god) then all of the archaeological finds in the world would never support a divine intervention.The argument in this thread is circular logic.
We cannot prove God does exist, we cannot prove God doesn't exist. One may argue that the burden of proof may rely on the other (as expected in any argument) but as neither can prove either way, for both parties it must come down to a matter of faith and/or experience (Which proves to be a very troubling concept that many atheists will be quick to deny)
Therefore it is pointless to base belief of divine intervention in Biblical scripture purely on historical finds that may or may not back up their beliefs, but if we assume their beliefs to be true then it's entirely understandable why people would attempt to do so as the historical evidence would prove to be a fun bonus that could do nothing but serve to provide a form of validity to their claims.
Originally posted by queeq
Then again, hsitorical evidence for the Bible is not JUST used to look for proof of divine intervention. In fact, very few scholars in that field apply that as a requirement.
Exactly.
I am just fascinated by the small mundane things that are discovered that don't necessarily prove "divine intervention".....I like the other things discovered...like little things...such as a form of the name "Goliath" found on a bowl that dates several decades before the supposed "David and Goliath" story. It doesn't prove ANYTHING divine. The bible had a name in it that skeptics brushed off as inaccurate but was later found to be closer to an accurate name. (The name was the equivalent of Goliath but it was not "Goliath" it the ancient Palestinian language, if that even makes sense.)
It is that stuff that I like to read about...not because it proves the bible to be divine...but because it proves the bible to be a historical piece of work that could hold information about many great historical discoveries.
Yeah, that's an interesting find which again points to a certain reality behind these stories. Goliath is not a semitic name, it's probably Lydian. They already knew that from linguistic studies. The inscription with Goliath's name is quite Lydian in it's spelling. So even though the Bible uses the semtic version of the name (which happens, e.g. Vienna is originally Wien), it's always been fairly clear where the name roughly originated. So the find confirms some form of realia.
At teh same site they also foud an inscription, and mind you local epigraphical material is very rare in Israel, that says RPA, which seems to hark back to the singular of the word Rephaim, a word often (but prolly mistakenly) translated in our languages as "giant". Goliath was of the Rapha (singular)... so another cute tidbit.
Doesn't prove anything, but still... and both inscriptions were found at the site the Bible says was Goliath's hometown...
If you were someone who highly doubted the Bible as truth, but figure some of the mentioned criterion could possibly be of real historical individuals, then I would mark a "giant" of a man to be noteworthy and you would more likely find a sign or a trail of his records as opposed to some nincompoop Jonah and the Whale. lol, where is the remains of this whale? he must have had oxygen filters of some sort, or human breatholes for whomever was to be caught in it's belly.
Interesting.
Originally posted by queeq
Yeah, that's an interesting find which again points to a certain reality behind these stories. Goliath is not a semitic name, it's probably Lydian. They already knew that from linguistic studies. The inscription with Goliath's name is quite Lydian in it's spelling. So even though the Bible uses the semtic version of the name (which happens, e.g. Vienna is originally Wien), it's always been fairly clear where the name roughly originated. So the find confirms some form of realia.At teh same site they also foud an inscription, and mind you local epigraphical material is very rare in Israel, that says RPA, which seems to hark back to the singular of the word Rephaim, a word often (but prolly mistakenly) translated in our languages as "giant". Goliath was of the Rapha (singular)... so another cute tidbit.
Doesn't prove anything, but still... and both inscriptions were found at the site the Bible says was Goliath's hometown...
I know you could have looked this information up and just reported it as your own words...but it seems like you are credible. I don't understand why Devil King doubts. On a message board, you can tell if someone is lying about their credentials or not and it does not appear that you are lying. You knew EXACTLY what I was talking about it MUCH greater detail in what appears to be information off the top of your head. Yes, I knew that Goliath was NOT an original semitic name but rather a translation/version of that name from another language...but I didn't know the details on how it ended up as "Goliath" which you have detailed. I'm satisfied that you are who you say you are.
Anyway, YES!!! This is the kind of stuff I am talking about....very much what I was referring to. This stuff is just awesome to read about.
I don't know if Jonah stayed in the belly of a whale for three days...maybe it was PIS(lol!) and he was just swallowed and shortly there after spit out...because that's possible. Just like the height of Goliath being "inflated" into a really tall person from the earlier texts saying he was like 7 ft or something...it could have ended up being exaggerated.