• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The Exodus and Astrology

Nyx

New member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
444
There's absolutely nothing to balance. You're mentioning theology and theologists, while I'm refering to archaelogists and hence, real scientists (not biased bigots).

The two fields have nothing in common. To be bluntly honest, mentioning the likes of Hengel, Bauckham or Boyd is simply ridiculous, it just shows you didn't understand the question Victor asked.

You're just two centuries too late. After Kant, metaphysics and theology have become completely obsolete, or at least, they were expelled out of the rational world.

Denial, denial...
So theologists and historians of religion are biased bigots, eh? That's a sweeping, unfounded generalization.

Are you aware of Georges Lemaître or John Polkinghorne

Science and theology are not mutually exclusive.

Clearly Kant, and everything after, in the vein of Kant, has not solved any problems, but merely brought on more questions. Science sees the the trees and not the forest. It cannot be any other way.

This issue is deep, but starts there.
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Science and theology are not mutually exclusive.

O yes, they are. And every other explaination is just plain demagogy, ignorance, or a lack of true epistemological knowledge.

Or maybe it's something you don't want to hear, a possibility you don't want to consider?

Rather than wasting your time with biased bigots that are almost unheard of outside the USA or the christian communities, have you ever heard of Hume, Spinoza, Husserl, Wittgenstein, Russel, Bachelard, Popper, Lakatos, Feyerabend, Kuhn, Koyré... ?

Shall I continue the list?

Modern epistemology is precisely the heiress of the teachings of Kant, and there are no contemporary epistemological thoughts outside the Kantian spirit.
 

Blackmail!

Gotta catch you all!
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
3,020
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
Science sees the the trees and not the forest.

Empty catch phrase.

Science doesn't "see" anything, unless you can prove your trees are falsifiable. Science for instance constructs abstract models of reality, and tries to determine which one is less false than the other. :devil:


Anyway, we're far from the original debate.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
It's nice to read your replies but what is extraordinary in all this is that it is Israeli archaeologists who have found that the Exodus didn't' occur.

Just think, they made this finding while employed by the Israeli government and while working in Israel. And as you know, a founding story of modern Israel is the Exodus.

So to declare the Exodus didn't occur is extraordinary.

And it is an enormous tribute to the integrity and courage of the Israeli archaeologists, just as it is an enormous tribute to intellectual freedom in the State of Israel.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
And the Exodus is not just a founding story of Israel, it is also a founding story of the United States.

For we are told, the Pilgrims fled persecution in England just as the Jews fled persecution in Egypt. And just as the Jews found their promised land in Israel so the Pilgrims found their promised land in America.

And we all give thanks on Thanksgiving Day.

What is most interesting is to compare the history of America with Australia.

For Australia no such founding story.

Why is this? America has the founding story of the Exodus but Australia doesn't?

And the answer is very simple. America was founded by religion, while Australia was founded by the Enlightenment.
 

Nyx

New member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
444
O yes, they are. And every other explaination is just plain demagogy, ignorance, or a lack of true epistemological knowledge.

Or maybe it's something you don't want to hear, a possibility you don't want to consider?

Rather than wasting your time with biased bigots that are almost unheard of outside the USA or the christian communities, have you ever heard of Hume, Spinoza, Husserl, Wittgenstein, Russel, Popper, Lakatos, Feyerabend, Kuhn, Koyré...

Shall I continue?
Hah, many from the camp you are arguing for could always be called biased bigots, but, again, I do not think it is wise to generalize here. There are a multitude of shades of grey.

You gave an impassioned response...no doubt driven by what would seem to point to your belief in materialism. That is the war being waged at the moment :believers v. materialists. Do not kid yourself to think it started with Kant, it has been going on ever since belief in worshiping something was around. Without belief in God there would be no atheism. Naturally, there will always be those who oppose and given their extensively reasoned arguments.

I care not to argue on this point for I have concluded the argument for God is compelling after hearing both sides. So compelling, in fact, I have chosen to take a leap of faith and believe in God. When comparing what each side of these arguments have done for humanity in the way of progress, the answer gets interesting.


Demagoguery? This could be accused of anyone trying to put forth their beliefs... which is all we really have here, beliefs... so leap one way or the other, but, ultimately, faith is the key word.

In no way are the writings or people I listed representative of any sort of demagoguery. Assuming makes an ASS out of U and ME!


It seems that I keep having this God/religion discussion over and over again, but not one atheist has been able to convince me otherwise. Of course, you can try if you wish.


The way the universe seems to be set up points to a Creator. So, if there is a Creator... you have supernatural and natural... Creator and Creation. That leads the way for discussion on everything else.


I'm sorry if this response seems disjointed. I have only put down the thoughts that immediately came to me, but this argument is so deep and complex.

John Templeton Foundation

EDIT:

Also, as I suspected, for the Jews it does not matter if Exodus did not happen.

Thoughts from a Rabbi:

Did the Exodus Really Happen? Rabbi David Wolpe on the Passover story - Beliefnet.com
 

Nyx

New member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
444
Also, Jennifer made some very informative posts earlier, but I have not seen you reply to anything she said...
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
I have chosen to take a leap of faith and believe in God.

In fact you take a further leap of faith and believe in America.

So you have chosen a double trance - the trance of America which is anchored in the trance of religion. And one trance reinforces the other.

So America is like an addiction - it is meta cognitive loop nestled within a cognitive loop. It is called, "The American Dream".

So, the American Dream is very hard to wake up from, particularly if you are an American.

And fortunately you are talking to members in independent countries who have never fallen asleep in the American Dream.

So it is inevitable we will disturb your slumbers.

And it is slowly becoming obvious you slumber in an intellectual slum.
 

Nyx

New member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
444
In fact you take a further leap of faith and believe in America.

So you have chosen a double trance - the trance of America which is anchored in the trance of religion. And one trance reinforces the other.

So America is like an addiction - it is meta cognitive loop nestled within a cognitive loop. It is called, "The American Dream".

So, the American Dream is very hard to wake up from, particularly if you are an American.

And fortunately you are talking to members in independent countries who have never fallen asleep in the American Dream.

So it is inevitable we will disturb your slumbers.

And it is slowly becoming obvious you slumber in an intellectual slum.

You're telling me what I believe, and what I have choosen? Really? I never said anything about America or believing in the American Dream. I can tell you with confidence I have rallied against it, resisting a spoon fed reality.

America may have been founded on religious principles (further inquiry proves this to be highly questionable anyway), but that has nothing to do with (or maybe should say, is of no importance) the economics that drive this country, and the entire world at this point. The teachings of Christ are in direct opposition to this "culture of death".
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
The teachings of Christ are in direct opposition to this "culture of death".

Please! Jesus taught, "Take no thought for the morrow", and if we followed His teachings, we would all be dead. And of course that is what Jesus thought. He thought the world was coming to end in His lifetime or that of His followers. But after two thousand years, we know He was a little out.

But still we are fascinated by the end of the world. Why, I have just seen a movie called 2012 all about the end of the world. And people in your part of the world keep rabbiting on about the Rapture at the end of the world.

So two thousand years ago Jesus was fascinated by the end of the world, just as we are today.

But really, people talk about the end of the world to inspire fear to motivate us to serve their interests.

And fear is the great motivator.

Why, it was Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469-1527) who taught us is it is better for a Prince to be feared than loved.

So we can expect a Prince to tell us about the end of the world.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,189
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
That's incorrect. There have been Egyptian and at least one other artifact that I know of which indicate the existence of that "realm." A ancient slab boasting of an Egyptian triumph specifically refers to a victorious battle against "the House of David." There is more scholarly and archaeological work that indicates the existence as well. So while a complete absence of plausibility would fit your philosophy, it won't be that easy.

I feel like we're arguing extremities here. The question isn't "Is it 100% true all the Bible stuff is historical or is it 100% true it's not?", it's "what amount of evidence can reasonably be expected to be around in support of Biblical historicity, and can we find it?" ... and so far we've got a major issue where (I believe) at this point the various incarnations Jericho has been dated a century off the Biblical record and there is very very scant evidence of any direct Biblical support, and it's not even clear a kingdom of David/Solomon's size existed in the time frame it needs to have existed in.

But I don't feel comfortable committing to that or arguing it, because I don't feel I have studied enough of the variety of sources to be reasonable sure. However, that's what my preliminary overview has suggested so far.

It's funny to me that you can ask a religious believer what evidence there is of the Bible historically and they'll immediately tell you "Oh, archeology supports the Bible and says it's true"... but if you ask them for the specific evidence, almost all of them will have nothing to say. Only a small percentage even have an inkling of what data is out there, even in support of their faith, let alone against it. Then again, many unbelievers don't really seem to have much specific idea either.

it's like a battle of general assumptions.

It's nice to read your replies but what is extraordinary in all this is that it is Israeli archaeologists who have found that the Exodus didn't' occur.

Just think, they made this finding while employed by the Israeli government and while working in Israel. And as you know, a founding story of modern Israel is the Exodus.

So to declare the Exodus didn't occur is extraordinary.

Despite the generalization within this argument, I agree it's one of the larger "road signs" to me that the position that Exodus didn't occur needs to be taken seriously and not just sloughed off; I always naturally give more weight to people who voice arguments that seem to run against their personal interests... because they must know SOMETHING compelling, and there's less chance they are being dragged along by inner bias.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
If we ask any astronomer, they will tell us astrology is untrue.

* The visionary English astrophysicist and astronomer Dr Percy Seymour threw his hat into the ring by publishing Astrology: The Evidence of Science, appearing in April 1989. In his groundbreaking book – Dr Seymour, a chartered member of the Institute of Physics and Fellow member of the Royal Astronomical Society, explained his revolutionary theories of "celestial harmonics" in regard to why he felt astrology may work in the first place. He proposes astrology works by some type of magnetic field interaction.

An Astronomer's Magnetic Theory of Astrology and
How Planetary Motion Orchestrates Solar Activity and Geomagnetism:
Dr. Percy Seymour Interview
 

Take Five

Supreme Allied Commander
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
925
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
1w9
There is a lot I want to refute here, but I think there is one root problem that branches out to all other elements of this debate.

Because some Christians today interpret the Bible literally, and because for centuries most did, people with a certain unfriendly attitude toward religion use the fact that recent findings have (convincingly) called into question the historical validity of the Bible in order to discredit entirely all belief systems related to the Bible. That is absolutely wrong, and unfortunate.

Although, there are certainly groups of Christians that are biblical literalists and some others who are awaiting the end of the world, this is not even close to the majority of Christians. So while archaeological findings that indicate historical inaccuracies in the Bible may be a huge problem for the fundamentalist minority, it does not in any way pose a major problem for other Christians. I can tell you from experience that we Catholics don't consider this issue to be of a dangerous concern. For our theology, whether or not the texts are historically accurate is not central. And that's the point--the Bible is not a history textbook, so nothing in this thread takes away from it's theological valor.

People are basing their evaluations of the Bible on criteria that are not central to the Bible's purpose. To say all belief is unfounded just based on what Finkelstein and others say, is probably not the wisest of decisions.

That was the major issue I had in mind.

Further, the scholars who have argued against the historical inaccuracy of the Exodus story are not all Israeli. They also don't always say that Exodus never happened in any way, shape, or form. What seems to be a prevalent idea is that Hyksos, Semites from Egypt, moved to Canaan, and Canaanites were already there. The issue is that the Hyksos were not a huge group that came all at once under a central leader, that the historical events differ in degree from the biblical portrayal. That being said, there is likely some historical validity to the Exodus story. Think. Why would an ancient people record in their writings that they were slaves? That makes them look weak. Making your own nation look weak is not what happens in ancient "history," which is not the same discipline of history that we are familiar with.

I'm not saying that minimalists have no persuasiveness at all. I'm saying that what they say is not always correct, that there are non-minimalists scholars, and that even within the minimalist field there is disagreement.

Another point. Theology, as a discipline, is clearly not irrelevant. Nor are theologians all biased bigots. That is an absurd generalization.

Another point. It is not clear that America was founded on religion. Some colonies were chartered by religious sects emigrating from england, sure. Other colonies, like Virginia, were made for business and trade. Other colonies were simply proprietary, like Maryland. In addition, how do you account for the fact that some Founding Fathers, like Jefferson, were deists? To say America was founded on religion is highly questionable. Regardless of that, many in the US do not base politics on religion today.
 

JFNI

New member
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
56
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w3
People don't necissarly believe what is true. They believe what is true to them.And for me, astrology is true. I quite enjoy it and find it sufficient. The deeper you get into it, the more you realize that.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
People don't necissarly believe what is true. They believe what is true to them.And for me, astrology is true. I quite enjoy it and find it sufficient. The deeper you get into it, the more you realize that.

If something is true, surely it is true for everybody?
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
To say America was founded on religion is highly questionable. Regardless of that, many in the US do not base politics on religion today.

Why do almost all of your politicians publicly call upon God, when if our politicians publicly called upon God, they would be laughed at?
 

Nyx

New member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
444
Why do almost all of your politicians publicly call upon God, when if our politicians publicly called upon God, they would be laughed at?

Seriously? You honestly think they care or are holy, humble people? Politicians?

You seem to have much to learn. Christianity is a very complex subject... and the people you speak of invoking God publicly are most likely fundamentalist loons who don't represent anything legitimate about the faith.
 

Take Five

Supreme Allied Commander
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
925
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Why do almost all of your politicians publicly call upon God, when if our politicians publicly called upon God, they would be laughed at?

Victor, please.

There is nothing genuinely religious about the politicians' words. "God bless America" is more like a meaningless catch phrase that only offends atheists, who for some reason want everyone and everything to follow their rules. What politicians say and what they mean are two different things.

Even granted that the politicians are genuine in such rhetoric, since when does referencing God imply religion? A belief in God is not exclusive to one creed, or even to Christianity.

I don't know how things work in Australia, but it is rather obvious that you aren't really up to snuff on understanding the history, culture, and politics of the US.
 
Top