Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 23 ... 47
Send Topic Print
How gullible are some people? (Read 49394 times)
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #300 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:38pm
 
NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 6:52am:
The issue of Jesus' historicity is just one in a line of alleged historical figures whose historicity is also in question.

But there is none more poignant and relevant today for a nation than the current debate over the historicity of Moses.

For Israelis (Jews) his existence would be a very convenient truth, if they can lay the deepest claim to the land they call Israel... He was its 'founding father', as important to them as Mohammed is to Muslims.

However, no archaeological (or any scientific) evidence has ever been uncovered to prove or suggest that he ever existed and nearly every Israeli archaeologist accepts he probably didn't.

Forget the miracles, There appears to have been no Exodus from Egypt, no record at all of Rammesses II emancipating the Jews, then changing his mind and chasing them through the desert.




Well there was some evidence of historicity.

http://www.phouka.com/pharaoh/pharaoh/dynasties/dyn15/03yacubher.html

15th (or 14th) Dynasty Pharoah: Yacubhor.  (Jacob?)
Quote:
Yakubhar -- an Aramain name related to Jacob -- is nearly unknown an has left only a few scarab seals found mostly in Egypt. A few were found in Palestine, and a single one was found in Nubia. Otherwise, he is merely a nebulous figure that may or may not fit into the chronology of the 15th Dynasty. The only mention of his name is in the king lists written over a millennia after his death.

Some groups have used the similarity of his name to Jacob to postulate that the Hyksos kings were the Israelites, in an attempt to "prove" the biblical story of Exodus and slavery in ancient Egypt.


Most historians consider that the Hyksos kings came from Canaan.

Yakubhar means protected of Horus. Horus is the Latin name of the Ancient Egyptian Har. An alternative form is Yak Baal, where Baal means "lord" in Canaanite.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Mandy_oz
New Member
*
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 41
Gender: female
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #301 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:44pm
 
We have people today that say the moon landings didn't happen or the holocaust. They happily explain away all the evidence with zeal if not credibility. The further you go back, the harder it gets to prove anything.  That does not mean though that the beliefs or history that is claimed is not correct, only that it cannot be proved or disproved.

I think Piltdown Man demonstrated in dramatic form just how silly and easily fooled people are when the outcome suits them.

Bring on a time machine where we can see the actual history.  The interesting thing is how few minds that would actually change.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Quantum
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3373
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #302 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:06pm
 
Life_goes_on wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:16pm:
There's nothing like somebody who is trying to convince you that something is real despite a complete and utter lack of evidence of that thing's existence.


This discussion moved along way from whether Jesus the man was real or not many pages ago. Certainly since people like John started writing their own version of history and then expecting people to prove them wrong.

If people want to claim that the historically recorded Jesus in the history books that look at that time are wrong, then the onus is on them to show why all these book and historians are wrong.

If people want to claim that the gospels we have today have been substantially changed over the years (even though those very gospels are copies made in the second century), then the onus is on them to show what changes have been made, and explain how someone forged all these dated copies over one and a half thousand years latter that look like 2nd century copies that has tricked archaeologist since.

If someone wants to completely re right all history regarding Christianity, then they better show some consistency in all other parts of history as well. Totally ludicrous to raise the bar of proof so high for Jesus or any church matter, and then lower it down to normal levels regarding any other historical figure. History is simply a waste of time when there is no set frame work to filter information with. People who insist there is not enough proof for Jesus would quickly find many historical people and events being removed as well if they were to maintain the same standard.

So far a group of people who have a history of mocking anything or anyone Christian (John, Spot, Pecca) have claimed the history books are wrong without giving any evidence at all. Instead they think it is everyone else job to prove the history books are right. They have also shown to have no knowledge of the time period in question or history in general, but expect their I know Jesus didn't exist and anyone who thinks so is just a Christian idiot type response to be a valid argument.

This is now just a group of atheist who have no interest is the discussion but are simply looking to provoke a response for the fun of it. One has to wonder why anyone who doesn't believe in anything would spend their time trying to convince others they are wrong, especially when they know bugger all about the information they claim to dispute. (The Romans changed Horus to Jesus and King James changed the Gospels in secret with the Vatican... Roll Eyes This is "It_is_the_light" type insane BS).            

 

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mandy_oz
New Member
*
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 41
Gender: female
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #303 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:16pm
 
Quantum wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
Life_goes_on wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:16pm:
There's nothing like somebody who is trying to convince you that something is real despite a complete and utter lack of evidence of that thing's existence.


This discussion moved along way from whether Jesus the man was real or not many pages ago. Certainly since people like John started writing their own version of history and then expecting people to prove them wrong.

If people want to claim that the historically recorded Jesus in the history books that look at that time are wrong, then the onus is on them to show why all these book and historians are wrong.

If people want to claim that the gospels we have today have been substantially changed over the years (even though those very gospels are copies made in the second century), then the onus is on them to show what changes have been made, and explain how someone forged all these dated copies over one and a half thousand years latter that look like 2nd century copies that has tricked archaeologist since.

If someone wants to completely re right all history regarding Christianity, then they better show some consistency in all other parts of history as well. Totally ludicrous to raise the bar of proof so high for Jesus or any church matter, and then lower it down to normal levels regarding any other historical figure. History is simply a waste of time when there is no set frame work to filter information with. People who insist there is not enough proof for Jesus would quickly find many historical people and events being removed as well if they were to maintain the same standard.

So far a group of people who have a history of mocking anything or anyone Christian (John, Spot, Pecca) have claimed the history books are wrong without giving any evidence at all. Instead they think it is everyone else job to prove the history books are right. They have also shown to have no knowledge of the time period in question or history in general, but expect their I know Jesus didn't exist and anyone who thinks so is just a Christian idiot type response to be a valid argument.

This is now just a group of atheist who have no interest is the discussion but are simply looking to provoke a response for the fun of it. One has to wonder why anyone who doesn't believe in anything would spend their time trying to convince others they are wrong, especially when they know bugger all about the information they claim to dispute. (The Romans changed Horus to Jesus and King James changed the Gospels in secret with the Vatican... Roll Eyes This is "It_is_the_light" type insane BS).            

 

   


The Dead Sea Scrolls and other documents have long since proven the accuracy of the bible as it has been passed down over millennia. It is in fact rather remarkable in that fact. To state that isn't true is simply wrong. You can state your opinion that the biblical claims are not correct but you cannot claim that it isn't  the same as originally written.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 29478
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #304 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:19pm
 
You're all just to serious. Really!  Grin
Back to top
 

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 74446
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #305 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:25pm
 
Mandy_oz wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:44pm:
We have people today that say the moon landings didn't happen or the holocaust. They happily explain away all the evidence with zeal if not credibility. The further you go back, the harder it gets to prove anything.  That does not mean though that the beliefs or history that is claimed is not correct, only that it cannot be proved or disproved.

I think Piltdown Man demonstrated in dramatic form just how silly and easily fooled people are when the outcome suits them.

Bring on a time machine where we can see the actual history.  The interesting thing is how few minds that would actually change.


so it cannot be proven?

finally, someone who speaks some truth
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
Mandy_oz
New Member
*
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 41
Gender: female
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #306 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:32pm
 
John Smith wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:25pm:
Mandy_oz wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:44pm:
We have people today that say the moon landings didn't happen or the holocaust. They happily explain away all the evidence with zeal if not credibility. The further you go back, the harder it gets to prove anything.  That does not mean though that the beliefs or history that is claimed is not correct, only that it cannot be proved or disproved.

I think Piltdown Man demonstrated in dramatic form just how silly and easily fooled people are when the outcome suits them.

Bring on a time machine where we can see the actual history.  The interesting thing is how few minds that would actually change.


so it cannot be proven?

finally, someone who speaks some truth


Don't exalt too much.  being unprovable also means the claim that Jesus didn't exist is unprovable as well.  And while no side can lay claim to absolute proof, those who claim Jesus existed have the substantially better argument while your side mainly just claims 'no proof'.

A jury would side with the 'Jesus existed' claim every time as the preponderance of evidence is on that side.  I doubt the defence could even make a 'reasonable doubt' claim.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 74446
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #307 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:35pm
 
Quantum wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
This discussion moved along way from whether Jesus the man was real or not many pages ago. Certainly since people like John started writing their own version of history and then expecting people to prove them wrong. If people want to claim that the historically recorded Jesus in the history books that look at that time are wrong, then the onus is on them to show why all these book and historians are wrong. If people want to claim that the gospels we have today have been substantially changed over the years (even though those very gospels are copies made in the second century), then the onus is on them to show what changes have been made, and explain how someone forged all these dated copies over one and a half thousand years latter that look like 2nd century copies that has tricked archaeologist since. If someone wants to completely re right all history regarding Christianity, then they better show some consistency in all other parts of history as well. Totally ludicrous to raise the bar of proof so high for Jesus or any church matter, and then lower it down to normal levels regarding any other historical figure. History is simply a waste of time when there is no set frame work to filter information with. People who insist there is not enough proof for Jesus would quickly find many historical people and events being removed as well if they were to maintain the same standard. So far a group of people who have a history of mocking anything or anyone Christian (John, Spot, Pecca) have claimed the history books are wrong without giving any evidence at all. Instead they think it is everyone else job to prove the history books are right. They have also shown to have no knowledge of the time period in question or history in general, but expect their I know Jesus didn't exist and anyone who thinks so is just a Christian idiot type response to be a valid argument. This is now just a group of atheist who have no interest is the discussion but are simply looking to provoke a response for the fun of it. One has to wonder why anyone who doesn't believe in anything would spend their time trying to convince others they are wrong, especially when they know bugger all about the information they claim to dispute. (The Romans changed Horus to Jesus and King James changed the Gospels in secret with the Vatican...  This is "It_is_the_light" type insane BS).             



now that you've had your rant how about you try being honest for once?  Did I say that the story of Jesus came from Hoirus?

John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 9:10am:
another factor that everyone seems to forget is that the story if Jesus is very similar to the many of the stories of Horus, and Egyptian god 1000yrs before Jesus. Both born of a virgin, both performed miracles, both sons of gods, both resurrected and many many more similarities


where did I say Jesus was Horus?I merely pointed out various similarities and also pointed out that the Roman S.O.P. was to adopt and adapt existing religions into their own whenever they conquered an area. How about you stop pretending you are an Oracle of knowledge and finally admit that you cannot definitely prove that the story of the biblical Jesus was real.
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 74446
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #308 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:38pm
 
Quantum wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
This discussion moved along way from whether Jesus the man was real or not many pages ago. Certainly since people like John started writing their own version of history and then expecting people to prove them wrong.


Not at all ... my request has always been that you prove that the evidence is irrefutable.

You seem to develp theories in your own imagination, and then argue against your own theories. .. its really rather simple

Provide irrefutable proof that the biblical Jesus existed
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 74446
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #309 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:39pm
 
Mandy_oz wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:32pm:
John Smith wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:25pm:
Mandy_oz wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:44pm:
We have people today that say the moon landings didn't happen or the holocaust. They happily explain away all the evidence with zeal if not credibility. The further you go back, the harder it gets to prove anything.  That does not mean though that the beliefs or history that is claimed is not correct, only that it cannot be proved or disproved.

I think Piltdown Man demonstrated in dramatic form just how silly and easily fooled people are when the outcome suits them.

Bring on a time machine where we can see the actual history.  The interesting thing is how few minds that would actually change.


so it cannot be proven?

finally, someone who speaks some truth


Don't exalt too much.  being unprovable also means the claim that Jesus didn't exist is unprovable as well.  And while no side can lay claim to absolute proof, those who claim Jesus existed have the substantially better argument while your side mainly just claims 'no proof'.

A jury would side with the 'Jesus existed' claim every time as the preponderance of evidence is on that side.  I doubt the defence could even make a 'reasonable doubt' claim.


I've never claimed that he didn't exist ... as to your claim of a Jury ... I'm not so sure.
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
Quantum
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3373
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #310 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:54pm
 
John Smith wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:38pm:
Quantum wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
This discussion moved along way from whether Jesus the man was real or not many pages ago. Certainly since people like John started writing their own version of history and then expecting people to prove them wrong.


Not at all ... my request has always been that you prove that the evidence is irrefutable.

You seem to develp theories in your own imagination, and then argue against your own theories. .. its really rather simple

Provide irrefutable proof that the biblical Jesus existed


Why the hell should I or need to?

See, now you are starting to believe your own BS when you accused me of having B&B as a sock.

I have never claimed the evidence to be irrefutable, so why should I have to prove that the evidence is? I have maintained that there is evidence and that the evidence is accepted on the same standards as other historical people. I have also maintained that this evidence is accepted by most mainstream historians. We never have irrefutable proof for anything is history and I never claimed that we did. 

The evidence is more than sufficient for myself. If you want "irrefutable proof" go find it yourself.      
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #311 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 8:20pm
 
Mandy_oz wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:44pm:
I think Piltdown Man demonstrated in dramatic form just how silly and easily fooled people are when the outcome suits them.



Didn't it have machining marks on it or something?  I guess some clowns will believe anything. It's called confirmation bias.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
NorthOfNorth
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #312 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 9:09pm
 
muso wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 6:38pm:
NorthOfNorth wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 6:52am:
The issue of Jesus' historicity is just one in a line of alleged historical figures whose historicity is also in question.

But there is none more poignant and relevant today for a nation than the current debate over the historicity of Moses.

For Israelis (Jews) his existence would be a very convenient truth, if they can lay the deepest claim to the land they call Israel... He was its 'founding father', as important to them as Mohammed is to Muslims.

However, no archaeological (or any scientific) evidence has ever been uncovered to prove or suggest that he ever existed and nearly every Israeli archaeologist accepts he probably didn't.

Forget the miracles, There appears to have been no Exodus from Egypt, no record at all of Rammesses II emancipating the Jews, then changing his mind and chasing them through the desert.




Well there was some evidence of historicity.

http://www.phouka.com/pharaoh/pharaoh/dynasties/dyn15/03yacubher.html

15th (or 14th) Dynasty Pharoah: Yacubhor.  (Jacob?)
Quote:
Yakubhar -- an Aramain name related to Jacob -- is nearly unknown an has left only a few scarab seals found mostly in Egypt. A few were found in Palestine, and a single one was found in Nubia. Otherwise, he is merely a nebulous figure that may or may not fit into the chronology of the 15th Dynasty. The only mention of his name is in the king lists written over a millennia after his death.

Some groups have used the similarity of his name to Jacob to postulate that the Hyksos kings were the Israelites, in an attempt to "prove" the biblical story of Exodus and slavery in ancient Egypt.


Most historians consider that the Hyksos kings came from Canaan.

Yakubhar means protected of Horus. Horus is the Latin name of the Ancient Egyptian Har. An alternative form is Yak Baal, where Baal means "lord" in Canaanite.

So no convincing record of slavery, Moses' existence, his  relationship to Rammesses, Exodus, flight from the capricious Pharoah, 40 years wandering in the desert nor entry into Canaan.

Not that any of this would matter to an Orthodox Jew (or any observant Jew)... Cultural mythological tradition is paramount in these circumstances not scientifically provable historicity.

Same goes essentially for Christians with Jesus, Buddhists with Siddharta, Hindus with Shiva and Muslims with Muhammed...

Back to top
 

Conviction is the art of being certain
 
IP Logged
 
NorthOfNorth
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #313 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 9:36pm
 
Quantum wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 11:39am:
This is just ignorant myth. What the hell does king James (Protestant), the Vatican (Catholic), and the original manuscripts (The Catholic church does not have all of them locked in their vault) have to do with each other?      

Quite a lot actually. The Vulgate and the Vetus Latina (what you are calling the Vatican) and the King James version are translations of the original Greek texts.

From what I have read of the King James version was far ad away the most scholarly (and poetic) attempt at a faithful and honest translation from the Greek. However, even the Protestant translators were not averse to modifying the text for (at the time) modern readers. The reuse of the old French word 'Host' replaced the more directly accurate translation 'army' (as in 'host of angels') which sounded more moderate, less militaristic, than 'army of angels'

Was it originally 'It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle' or ''It is easier for a rope to pass through the eye of a needle' ?

Back to top
 

Conviction is the art of being certain
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 74446
Gender: male
Re: How gullible are some people?
Reply #314 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 9:37pm
 
Quantum wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:54pm:
John Smith wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:38pm:
Quantum wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 7:06pm:
This discussion moved along way from whether Jesus the man was real or not many pages ago. Certainly since people like John started writing their own version of history and then expecting people to prove them wrong.


Not at all ... my request has always been that you prove that the evidence is irrefutable.

You seem to develp theories in your own imagination, and then argue against your own theories. .. its really rather simple

Provide irrefutable proof that the biblical Jesus existed


Why the hell should I or need to?

See, now you are starting to believe your own BS when you accused me of having B&B as a sock.

I have never claimed the evidence to be irrefutable, so why should I have to prove that the evidence is? I have maintained that there is evidence and that the evidence is accepted on the same standards as other historical people. I have also maintained that this evidence is accepted by most mainstream historians. We never have irrefutable proof for anything is history and I never claimed that we did. 

The evidence is more than sufficient for myself. If you want "irrefutable proof" go find it yourself.      


just as I though ... you couldnt prove anything.

By the way, if you don't want to be held to account for someone elses argument, don't jump on  and defend the stupid things they say.
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 19 20 21 22 23 ... 47
Send Topic Print