Defending the absurd results in an absurd defense.
Posted: 29 December 2008 06:32 AM   [ Ignore ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  110
Joined  2007-10-05

On another forum someone calculated the number of deaths caused by god in the Torah and Tanakh. In an attempt to defend the Torah and Tanakh some of the posters were trying to break the deaths down into various categories such as those caused by god’s command vs those caused by direct actions of god. That is rich. That really improves the situation doesn’t it.

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-many-has-god-killed.html

Then there are those that argue over what percentage of the OT compiled by Josiah came from mythology vs. oral tradition. Well let’s see. Archaeology, geology, paleontology, stratigraphy, etc indicate that most of the things Josiah wrote about never happened. Given this why does it make any difference where Josiah gathered his fictional materials?

Recently there has been much debating on other forums about the possible existence of David. What will that really change if it turns out that he did or did not exist? The defenders of the Torah and Tanakh have once again resorted to arguing about the equivalent of “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.”

 Signature 

“Most of the Israelites did not come from outside Canaan - they emerged from within it. There was no mass Exodus from Egypt…no violent conquest of Canaan. The early Israelites were - irony of ironies - themselves originally Canaanites!

The conquest of Canaan by Joshua could not have happened [as] described in the Bible. Most of the towns…either weren’t inhabited, didn’t exist or were conquered at wildly different times.” —Finkelstein and Silberman

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed