100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: What the American Media Won't Tell You About Israel | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Yes, I have known people who are alcoholic who get disability from the State just for that alone. They spend their entire check on rent, food, and alcohol and just lay around getting drunk, not going to any treatment or anything.
Basically the State pays them to stay drunk. Does that seem smart to you? Some chronic drunks just end up in jail and they get free dental and health care in there, meals and a roof over their heads. Working sober people struggle enough to support themselves when dysfunctional people, drunks and druggies, who can't face responsibility are housed and fed. And bankers foreclose on homes of the working people and throw them into the street and thousands of homes stand empty while the homeless have to find a soup kitchen or shelter or a bottle of boose. Its a freaking insane asylum, this world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There you have it, so why rave on about it? Why indeed. Its simple. Christians, Jews, and Muslims base their entire insane bloody religions on the Bible and they all depend on the existence of a character that most probably is entirely FICTION. Why rave on about it? BECAUSE IT IS ALL A LIE. You don't know their existence is a lie, so your rant is just that, a rant. I know. I know a lie when I see it. Please repeat this if you voted for Obama! I vote Libertarian. I'm shocked, I did too!  And Bestinshow, you know WHY Israel keeps taking Gaza from Palestine? In the 1960s and 1970s Palestine used Garza's high ground to fire artillery into Israel. Now they fire rockets. Also Gaza has been a staging ground since the 1960s for terrorist activity in Israel. There was an incident which made Egypt slam the boarder to Palestine shut on Palestine because Israel had proof weapons were coming through Egypt and had it not stopped Egypt and Israel would have been at each other again and Israel was pretty clear then if they went for Egypt they were using ALL WEAPONS AT THEIR DISPOSAL which meant clearly they would have used nukes anyways! Israel was nuke capable since the 1970s and even then they had their own small nukes in the late 1960s. it seems thanks to cold war tensions we seen fit to supply Israel a few little goodies in case Russia got ideas. they went in as Pershing II missiles but wound up becoming Jericho missiles once Israel got the idea how to manufacture for themselves. Now with this aside Gaza overlooks Israel. It is strategic ground and nothing more. Israel will not let Palestine hold a high ground advantage over them in any way! Now when they repeatedly attack Israel without provocation. Don't give me that occupying forces crap. Israel does what they do to protect themselves and I am stunned after almost 60 years of this animosity crap from Palestine and local Arabs Israel has not wiped Palestine from the map yet and end this charade! it takes two sides to make peace, not one. Time and time again Israel has tried to lay the Olive Branch of Peace down only to have it taken and tossed aside with hollow promises of peace one day to be shattered the next by Palestinians launching an unprovoked attack! BTW, nice way to rub in our working class non union noses that you get a paid vacation and we don't. You are aware the higher you sit in a high chair the farther the fall down when something knocks a leg from the high chair you are sitting on out from under you! Karma can be really nasty to us all! most union people are well paid, guaranteed benefits, and cannot get fired for anything without the three strikes, and any trained monkey could do 90% of the work they do... have you noticed most union people don't ever say what they do exactly, they just say how great the union is while sitting back and being as lazy as possible? what disease? there's a disease that turns people into drunks? You may or may not know that alcoholism is classified as a disease, I am not sure what my opinion is on this since I have always been a moderate drinker. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it is classified as a disease. But I suspect it is a symptom of a disease. I wonder when they will do the same to meth heads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Sun 12/16/12 11:20 AM
|
|
Enough about drunks and attempts to deny Jewish heritage,
now back to the topic of why there was war in Gaza... November 22, 2012 8:00 P.M. Why Was There War in Gaza? Hamas considers all of Israel occupied, illegitimate, a cancer, a crime against humanity. By Charles Krauthammer full story here: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/333904/why-was-there-war-gaza-charles-krauthammer# Why was there an Israel–Gaza war in the first place? Resistance to the occupation, say Hamas and many in the international media. What occupation? Seven years ago, in front of the world, Israel pulled out of Gaza. It dismantled every settlement, withdrew every soldier, evacuated every Jew, leaving nothing and no one behind. Except for the greenhouses in which the settlers had grown fruit and flowers for export. These were left intact to help Gaza’s economy — only to be trashed when the Palestinians took over. Israel then declared its border with Gaza to be an international frontier, meaning that it renounced any claim to the territory and considered it an independent entity. In effect, Israel had created the first Palestinian state ever, something never granted by fellow Muslims — neither the Ottoman Turks nor the Egyptians who brutally occupied Gaza for two decades before being driven out by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War. Israel wanted nothing more than to live in peace with this independent Palestinian entity. After all, the world had incessantly demanded that Israel give up land for peace. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mightymoe
on
Sun 12/16/12 11:21 AM
|
|
There you have it, so why rave on about it? Why indeed. Its simple. Christians, Jews, and Muslims base their entire insane bloody religions on the Bible and they all depend on the existence of a character that most probably is entirely FICTION. Why rave on about it? BECAUSE IT IS ALL A LIE. You don't know their existence is a lie, so your rant is just that, a rant. I know. I know a lie when I see it. Please repeat this if you voted for Obama! I vote Libertarian. I'm shocked, I did too! And Bestinshow, you know WHY Israel keeps taking Gaza from Palestine? In the 1960s and 1970s Palestine used Garza's high ground to fire artillery into Israel. Now they fire rockets. Also Gaza has been a staging ground since the 1960s for terrorist activity in Israel. There was an incident which made Egypt slam the boarder to Palestine shut on Palestine because Israel had proof weapons were coming through Egypt and had it not stopped Egypt and Israel would have been at each other again and Israel was pretty clear then if they went for Egypt they were using ALL WEAPONS AT THEIR DISPOSAL which meant clearly they would have used nukes anyways! Israel was nuke capable since the 1970s and even then they had their own small nukes in the late 1960s. it seems thanks to cold war tensions we seen fit to supply Israel a few little goodies in case Russia got ideas. they went in as Pershing II missiles but wound up becoming Jericho missiles once Israel got the idea how to manufacture for themselves. Now with this aside Gaza overlooks Israel. It is strategic ground and nothing more. Israel will not let Palestine hold a high ground advantage over them in any way! Now when they repeatedly attack Israel without provocation. Don't give me that occupying forces crap. Israel does what they do to protect themselves and I am stunned after almost 60 years of this animosity crap from Palestine and local Arabs Israel has not wiped Palestine from the map yet and end this charade! it takes two sides to make peace, not one. Time and time again Israel has tried to lay the Olive Branch of Peace down only to have it taken and tossed aside with hollow promises of peace one day to be shattered the next by Palestinians launching an unprovoked attack! BTW, nice way to rub in our working class non union noses that you get a paid vacation and we don't. You are aware the higher you sit in a high chair the farther the fall down when something knocks a leg from the high chair you are sitting on out from under you! Karma can be really nasty to us all! most union people are well paid, guaranteed benefits, and cannot get fired for anything without the three strikes, and any trained monkey could do 90% of the work they do... have you noticed most union people don't ever say what they do exactly, they just say how great the union is while sitting back and being as lazy as possible? what disease? there's a disease that turns people into drunks? You may or may not know that alcoholism is classified as a disease, I am not sure what my opinion is on this since I have always been a moderate drinker. lol, the drinkers classified it as a disease, nobody with any sense did... oh, the poor drunks, they have a disease... it's called lack of willpower and trying to hide behind the drunk mask. does that same compulsion to educate me force your moderate drinking too? you may have been infected with the alcohol disease... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bestinshow
on
Sun 12/16/12 11:29 AM
|
|
There you have it, so why rave on about it? Why indeed. Its simple. Christians, Jews, and Muslims base their entire insane bloody religions on the Bible and they all depend on the existence of a character that most probably is entirely FICTION. Why rave on about it? BECAUSE IT IS ALL A LIE. You don't know their existence is a lie, so your rant is just that, a rant. I know. I know a lie when I see it. Please repeat this if you voted for Obama! I vote Libertarian. I'm shocked, I did too! And Bestinshow, you know WHY Israel keeps taking Gaza from Palestine? In the 1960s and 1970s Palestine used Garza's high ground to fire artillery into Israel. Now they fire rockets. Also Gaza has been a staging ground since the 1960s for terrorist activity in Israel. There was an incident which made Egypt slam the boarder to Palestine shut on Palestine because Israel had proof weapons were coming through Egypt and had it not stopped Egypt and Israel would have been at each other again and Israel was pretty clear then if they went for Egypt they were using ALL WEAPONS AT THEIR DISPOSAL which meant clearly they would have used nukes anyways! Israel was nuke capable since the 1970s and even then they had their own small nukes in the late 1960s. it seems thanks to cold war tensions we seen fit to supply Israel a few little goodies in case Russia got ideas. they went in as Pershing II missiles but wound up becoming Jericho missiles once Israel got the idea how to manufacture for themselves. Now with this aside Gaza overlooks Israel. It is strategic ground and nothing more. Israel will not let Palestine hold a high ground advantage over them in any way! Now when they repeatedly attack Israel without provocation. Don't give me that occupying forces crap. Israel does what they do to protect themselves and I am stunned after almost 60 years of this animosity crap from Palestine and local Arabs Israel has not wiped Palestine from the map yet and end this charade! it takes two sides to make peace, not one. Time and time again Israel has tried to lay the Olive Branch of Peace down only to have it taken and tossed aside with hollow promises of peace one day to be shattered the next by Palestinians launching an unprovoked attack! BTW, nice way to rub in our working class non union noses that you get a paid vacation and we don't. You are aware the higher you sit in a high chair the farther the fall down when something knocks a leg from the high chair you are sitting on out from under you! Karma can be really nasty to us all! most union people are well paid, guaranteed benefits, and cannot get fired for anything without the three strikes, and any trained monkey could do 90% of the work they do... have you noticed most union people don't ever say what they do exactly, they just say how great the union is while sitting back and being as lazy as possible? what disease? there's a disease that turns people into drunks? You may or may not know that alcoholism is classified as a disease, I am not sure what my opinion is on this since I have always been a moderate drinker. lol, the drinkers classified it as a disease, nobody with any sense did... oh, the poor drunks, they have a disease... it's called lack of willpower and trying to hide behind the drunk mask. does that same compulsion to educate me force your moderate drinking too? you may have been infected with the alcohol disease... No Mighty it was not the drunks who classified alcoholism as a disease but the medical community. Like I said I am not sure my opinion on this but lets try to get back on topic in this thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sun 12/16/12 11:32 AM
|
|
Enough about drunks and attempts to deny Jewish heritage, now back to the topic of why there was war in Gaza... Why? I thought you pro-Zionists were "getting tired" of the discussion. Why don't we all just let it go? Personally, I just don't care about it anymore. You can have it. Why is no one interested in talking about the genocide in Turkey and how the Turkey government forced Christian Armenians to turn in all their guns before they began mass murder upon them? I've been accused of only speaking out against the current tyranny going on in the middle east but when I mention the persecution of Christians in Turkey no body is the slightest bit interested. So lets all just put a halt to the discussions of Israel now because all you can to with any argument is yell "anti-semitism." Here is the genocide that inspired Hitler to start his own campaign against the Jews. http://mingle2.com/topic/show/342309 |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Sun 12/16/12 12:52 PM
|
|
Not selling anything? I beg to differ. Of course you would. I'm trying to explain to you how ancient history works. Logical Fallacy? (That is always your escape.) It's not an escape when it's accurate. You just have no idea of what constitutes a logical fallacy, nor why they are invalid. Before running your mouth, it might be advisable to investigate them a little. You can learn about them here: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/introtof.html "If ignorance is your choice I won't get in your way?" "...Vile and puerile games quite offensive?" And all because I state that don't believe that King David or Abraham were real characters because there is no sufficient evidence? Think about what you are saying. Unlike some, I do think about what I'm saying. The motivation behind the efforts to discredit the existence of biblical figures is quite repellant. The evidence that these people would require to prove the existence of these figures would never be available owing to a myriad of circumstances too numerous to list here. It is then rather convenient to dismiss their existence. I'm trying to illustrate that using your criteria (that is, dismissing the literary evidence) in confirming the existence of ancient historical figures, many names would fall by the wayside. So to state they didn't exist because someone doesn't believe in the historical aspects of a document is rather illogical. Christopher Hitchens sums it up well: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" You think this is a game? Really? Then it is advisable that you don't continue to play. Only certain individuals play vile and puerile games and I'll do what I like. Thank you for your concern, though. It matters to me that there are three vile and bloody religions based on characters in the Bible who probably never existed. "Probably never existed" is merely an assumption and that is the whole point. A belief that someone never existed is not actually good enough for ancient historians. Lies bother me especially when they are peddled to the public at large as truth. I agree, hence my current stance. I liked fairy tales as much as the next person when I was a child but I think its time humanity grew up. Agreed, that is why the anti-semitic motivation for this argument is so abhorrent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sun 12/16/12 01:41 PM
|
|
Not selling anything? I beg to differ. Of course you would. I'm trying to explain to you how ancient history works. Logical Fallacy? (That is always your escape.) It's not an escape when it's accurate. You just have no idea of what constitutes a logical fallacy, nor why they are invalid. Before running your mouth, it might be advisable to investigate them a little. You can learn about them here: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/introtof.html "If ignorance is your choice I won't get in your way?" "...Vile and puerile games quite offensive?" And all because I state that don't believe that King David or Abraham were real characters because there is no sufficient evidence? Think about what you are saying. Unlike some, I do think about what I'm saying. The motivation behind the efforts to discredit the existence of biblical figures is quite repellant. The evidence that these people would require to prove the existence of these figures would never be available owing to a myriad of circumstances too numerous to list here. It is then rather convenient to dismiss their existence. I'm trying to illustrate that using your criteria (that is, dismissing the literary evidence) in confirming the existence of ancient historical figures, many names would fall by the wayside. So to state they didn't exist because someone doesn't believe in the historical aspects of a document is rather illogical. Christopher Hitchens sums it up well: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" You think this is a game? Really? Then it is advisable that you don't continue to play. Only certain individuals play vile and puerile games and I'll do what I like. Thank you for your concern, though. It matters to me that there are three vile and bloody religions based on characters in the Bible who probably never existed. "Probably never existed" is merely an assumption and that is the whole point. A belief that someone never existed is not actually good enough for ancient historians. Lies bother me especially when they are peddled to the public at large as truth. I agree, hence my current stance. I liked fairy tales as much as the next person when I was a child but I think its time humanity grew up. Agreed, that is why the anti-semitic motivation for this argument is so abhorrent. You should educate yourself on what a Semite is and stop using this out of date improper slur of a defense every time you come across anyone who disagrees with your nonsense. Not everything is about Israel. This has to do with three very bloody and illogical Abrahamic religions who all base their illogical wars and laws on characters that may have never even existed written about over 2000 years ago. It is time that humanity GREW UP and stopped believing in fantasy and myth. It is time to put away such childish notions and learn to live together as equal HUMAN BEINGS. Literary evidence is not strong evidence in my opinion. As far as I am concerned, it is fairy tale and myth. I don't much care about what you think is a "logical fallacy" or what you think is "reasonable." Perhaps you lack reasoning skills. Perhaps you do not have the same information that I have on the subject. (And kindly show a decent amount of respect in your discussions and stop speaking to me as if I am stupid. Give me any good or logical reason why three totally different religions should depend on the existence of a questionable character in an ancient religious script thousands of years old. The Bible is not a history book and it should not be treated like one. What I hate are people who attempt to sell Bible Myth as historical information and fact. Then, they create cults around that information, none of which agree, then they begin to slaughter each other over their disagreements. I have a solution. If they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Abraham and King David were real people they should declare them fictional. Also, the Vatican should unlock its doors and give freedom of information of all their deep dark secrets to the public. I'll bet that will shut a lot of people up for good on the subject. The truth will come out eventually. It is time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not selling anything? I beg to differ. Of course you would. I'm trying to explain to you how ancient history works. Logical Fallacy? (That is always your escape.) It's not an escape when it's accurate. You just have no idea of what constitutes a logical fallacy, nor why they are invalid. Before running your mouth, it might be advisable to investigate them a little. You can learn about them here: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/introtof.html "If ignorance is your choice I won't get in your way?" "...Vile and puerile games quite offensive?" And all because I state that don't believe that King David or Abraham were real characters because there is no sufficient evidence? Think about what you are saying. Unlike some, I do think about what I'm saying. The motivation behind the efforts to discredit the existence of biblical figures is quite repellant. The evidence that these people would require to prove the existence of these figures would never be available owing to a myriad of circumstances too numerous to list here. It is then rather convenient to dismiss their existence. I'm trying to illustrate that using your criteria (that is, dismissing the literary evidence) in confirming the existence of ancient historical figures, many names would fall by the wayside. So to state they didn't exist because someone doesn't believe in the historical aspects of a document is rather illogical. Christopher Hitchens sums it up well: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" You think this is a game? Really? Then it is advisable that you don't continue to play. Only certain individuals play vile and puerile games and I'll do what I like. Thank you for your concern, though. It matters to me that there are three vile and bloody religions based on characters in the Bible who probably never existed. "Probably never existed" is merely an assumption and that is the whole point. A belief that someone never existed is not actually good enough for ancient historians. Lies bother me especially when they are peddled to the public at large as truth. I agree, hence my current stance. I liked fairy tales as much as the next person when I was a child but I think its time humanity grew up. Agreed, that is why the anti-semitic motivation for this argument is so abhorrent. You should educate yourself on what a Semite is and stop using this out of date improper slur of a defense every time you come across anyone who disagrees with your nonsense. Not everything is about Israel. This has to do with three very bloody and illogical Abrahamic religions who all base their illogical wars and laws on characters that may have never even existed written about over 2000 years ago. It is time that humanity GREW UP and stopped believing in fantasy and myth. It is time to put away such childish notions and learn to live together as equal HUMAN BEINGS. Literary evidence is not strong evidence in my opinion. As far as I am concerned, it is fairy tale and myth. I don't much care about what you think is a "logical fallacy" or what you think is "reasonable." Perhaps you lack reasoning skills. Perhaps you do not have the same information that I have on the subject. (And kindly show a decent amount of respect in your discussions and stop speaking to me as if I am stupid. Give me any good or logical reason why three totally different religions should depend on the existence of a questionable character in an ancient religious script thousands of years old. The Bible is not a history book and it should not be treated like one. What I hate are people who attempt to sell Bible Myth as historical information and fact. Then, they create cults around that information, none of which agree, then they begin to slaughter each other over their disagreements. I have a solution. If they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Abraham and King David were real people they should declare them fictional. Also, the Vatican should unlock its doors and give freedom of information of all their deep dark secrets to the public. Clearing throat.... Like the Catholic Church destroying the Great Library of Alexandria did us any favors... ALL of our written history from when we first began writing GONE just like that.... Hmmmmm... so YOUR lack of education in some areas accounts for? Are you an Archeologist? Are you a Sociologist? Are you a historian? If I ask ten historians if King David existed and nine of them said yes and one said I don't have clear evidence... and then I ask ten Rabbis who all say he did. and then I ask antiquitarians who collect objects of historical importance if King David did and they break out objects attributed to him like swords with his emblem on them (which have been found mind you!) and they say he existed, and along comes one lay person such as yourself who says "I don't see any evidence other than the bible King David existed so he doesn't or never existed," is not empirical by any means. That is not a scientific outlook at this situation. there is a lot to the story of Jesus that is self serving. His body could very well have been stolen by his own in an attempt to make a deity of a man in a way the locals at the time would believe! trust me on this, for what little I have seen of the Scripture of Judas it paints Mary as Apostle #1 (something the Catholic Church could not have!) and spelled out the whole thing about God putting Jesus up to his crucifixion was indeed made up by his apostles to further his message. Everyone loves a martyr. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Sun 12/16/12 02:04 PM
|
|
You should educate yourself on what a Semite is and stop using this out of date improper slur of a defense every time you come across anyone who disagrees with your nonsense. Not everything is about Israel. I know what a Semite is and I know the meaning of anti-semitic. Your redefining of the term is inconsequential. My nonsense?  I'm not the one making irrational assumptions based on absolutely nothing. Nor do I redefine words from their accepted use in order to satisfy my conscience. This has to do with three very bloody and illogical Abrahamic religions who all base their illogical wars and laws on characters that may have never even existed written about over 2000 years ago. I know how many interpret it and efforts to irrationally dismiss biblical figures without any evidence won't change people's belief systems. Literary evidence is not strong evidence in my opinion. It is not strong , but in a lot of cases it's all there is. To dismiss it without supporting evidence is unprofessional. As far as I am concerned, it is fairy tale and myth. So be it. It is possible but an unknown. I don't much care about what you think is a "logical fallacy" or what you think is "reasonable." That is clear. Accuracy is not a factor in your debating style. Perhaps you lack reasoning skills. In light of your example, I doubt it. Perhaps you do not have the same information that I have on the subject. You would have nothing that could be considered evidence. (And kindly show a decent amount of respect in your discussions and stop speaking to me as if I am stupid. Give me cause. You rave on about a subject with absolutely no proof or background education in the field, and you denigrate those who have worked hard to attain this knowledge, and you want respect? Give me any good or logical reason why three totally different religions should depend on the existence of a questionable character in an ancient religious script thousands of years old. The Bible is not a history book and it should not be treated like one. It contains elements of history. Ancient historiography is not like modern historical writing. One has to discern the details from the fantasy. This is a degree that takes years and a lay person doesn't really understand the concepts. What I hate are people who attempt to sell Bible Myth as historical information and fact. Then, they create cults around that information, none of which agree, then they begin to slaughter each other over their disagreements. You make the common mistake of assuming that, as the Bible contains elements of myth, therefore, it follows that it is completely false. This is erroneous. I have a solution. If they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Abraham and King David were real people they should declare them fictional. Well, that is hardly rational and employing that technique would erase many historical figures not linked to Israel. Also, the Vatican should unlock its doors and give freedom of information of all their deep dark secrets to the public. I'll bet that will shut a lot of people up for good on the subject. The truth will come out eventually. It is time. Well, I doubt that will illuminate this subject. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Education" is not all that it is cracked up to be. If educational institutions stem from a lie from the very beginning, people will tend to just go along with tradition and the crowd of ignorance.
Where it comes to the existence of King David, or Abraham, no historian can honestly say for sure one way or another. They can only have an opinion. To have an opinion that goes along with all of their peers I'm sure is self serving for them. If you can't really know one way or another and you are attacked for having an apposing opinion, especially apposing the church or the general establishment, you will realize it would be better to pick a winning side of the debate. There are many reasons to cave in and agree that Abraham and King David were actually real persons. After all, three major religions DEPEND ON THIS ASSUMPTION. Therefore all three will defend and agree with each other on the idea that these were real people or risk their religions all falling apart. Not being attached to any of these religions, I am able to form an independent opinion based on evidence. To claim that a few fragments suggest someone named "David" or to claim that a sword proves it belonged to King David are in my opinion, desperate attempts to legitimize their irrational beliefs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Sun 12/16/12 02:17 PM
|
|
"Education" is not all that it is cracked up to be. If educational institutions stem from a lie from the very beginning, people will tend to just go along with tradition and the crowd of ignorance. That is just an illogical statement based on a specious assumption. The opposite occurs, because without education, ignorance and superstition flourishes. Tradition? That is erroneous as well. Ancient historians aren't locked in the 19th century. More advances in knowledge have been made in the last fifty years than compared to the previous centuries since the Rennaisance. Where it comes to the existence of King David, or Abraham, no historian can honestly say for sure one way or another. True, but to dismiss their existence with no cause is unprofessional. They can only have an opinion. No, they only have the literary evidence and the archaeological evidence to support the socio-economic conditions of the period. Absolute evidence is unattainable. To have an opinion that goes along with all of their peers I'm sure is self serving for them. That is ridiculous as the way to make a name for oneself in this area is to provide new discoveries and hypotheses based on rational evaluation of the evidence. If you can't really know one way or another and you are attacked for having an apposing opinion, especially apposing the church or the general establishment, you will realize it would be better to pick a winning side of the debate. An opposing opinion based on absolutley nothing is merely inconsequential. There are many reasons to cave in and agree that Abraham and King David were actually real persons. After all, three major religions DEPEND ON THIS ASSUMPTION. Therefore all three will defend and agree with each other on the idea that these were real people or risk their religions all falling apart. Not being attached to any of these religions, I am able to form an independent opinion based on evidence. To claim that a few fragments suggest someone named "David" or to claim that a sword proves it belonged to King David are in my opinion, desperate attempts to legitimize their irrational beliefs.  I'm not attached to any religion, nor spiritual in any way, but I can't see a logical and legitimate argument in your case. If anything, quite the opposite, but then, you have no education in this field and it is understandable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Education" is not all that it is cracked up to be. If educational institutions stem from a lie from the very beginning, people will tend to just go along with tradition and the crowd of ignorance. That is just a illogical statement based on a specious assumption. The opposite occurs, because without education, ignorance and superstition flourishes. Where it comes to the existence of King David, or Abraham, no historian can honestly say for sure one way or another. True, but to dismiss their existence with no cause is unprofessional. They can only have an opinion. No, they only have the literary evidence and the archaeological evidence to support the socio-economic conditions of the period. Absolute evidence is unattainable. To have an opinion that goes along with all of their peers I'm sure is self serving for them. That is ridiculous as the way to make a name for oneself in this area is to provide new discoveries and hypotheses based on rational evaluation of the evidence. If you can't really know one way or another and you are attacked for having an apposing opinion, especially apposing the church or the general establishment, you will realize it would be better to pick a winning side of the debate. An opposing opinion based on absolutley nothing is merely inconsequential. There are many reasons to cave in and agree that Abraham and King David were actually real persons. After all, three major religions DEPEND ON THIS ASSUMPTION. Therefore all three will defend and agree with each other on the idea that these were real people or risk their religions all falling apart. Not being attached to any of these religions, I am able to form an independent opinion based on evidence. To claim that a few fragments suggest someone named "David" or to claim that a sword proves it belonged to King David are in my opinion, desperate attempts to legitimize their irrational beliefs. I'm not attached to any religion, nor spiritual in any way, but I can't see a logical and legitimate argument in your case. If anything, quite the opposite, but then, you have no education in this field and it is understandable. You have no idea what my education is. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If educational institutions stem from a lie from the very beginning . . . That is one person's assumption. The assumption can be false. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You have no idea what my education is. No, but clearly it is not in the field of ancient history and classical literature. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You have no idea what my education is. No, but clearly it is not in the field of ancient history and classical literature. You are assuming again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If educational institutions stem from a lie from the very beginning . . . That is one person's assumption. The assumption can be false. Note the word IF. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sun 12/16/12 02:23 PM
|
|
I have found so many so called "educated people" just seem to have been deprived of their ability to think for themselves. And why should they? They are told what to believe and they are told what to think.
There are cases where they are told and taught wrong, but if they disagree, they will flunk. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You have no idea what my education is. No, but clearly it is not in the field of ancient history and classical literature. You are assuming again. Not really. It is obvious from the evidence presented. |
|
|
|
|
