Holes - Modern Biblical Scholarship 1
Uploader Comments (Xoroaster)
All Comments (22)
-
@reyjacobs Xerxes and Artaxerxes are mentioned as well. Daniel has a Seleucid Kings list in chapter 11. It's figurative, but its pretty much all there.
At first, I thought maybe Judaism was a version of Zoroastrianism. And that may still be. But their texts indicate two possibilities there. It could indicate Zoroastrian influence, but it could also indicate "Nostalgia". If they were putting together their history for the Septuagint, the Greek influence would have been marginalized.
-
Not only did Thucidydes live through that war, he was also a victim of the plague in Athens (which he survived) which he describes in horrid detail. That's a far cry from any claim to validity for any of the biblical works.
-
@AuntieDiluvian hehe, very true. ;-D
-
@Xoroaster It's not pointless until the last christian stops believing it - we have to debunk it, and if that means bringing all the holes in it to light, keep on.
-
@AuntieDiluvian I'm beginning to think that is true. Biblical scholarship began from a point of these books being authored early, and it still requires those early dates to be a part of Modern scholarship. I think we should just start over. It's mostly pointless.
-
interesting! I am reading a book at the moment that advocates the end of biblical scholarship, because it's pointless. It's written by a biblical scholar!
-
Another fine exert with excellent narration. You should be on the radio, but don't sell out there. Maybe audible books or something. You have the voice.
I agree, you have a great voice
InnocuousRemark 8 months ago 2
@InnocuousRemark Hey, thank you! ;-D
Xoroaster 8 months ago
Glad you are back and hope this means most of the drama is settled.
Excellent decision for your next topic and I can't wait for more, as always.
XandarsMeteor 8 months ago
@XandarsMeteor Ah, the drama goes on. Luckily, it's mostly someone else's problem, I'm just giving assistance.
Thanks mate! ;-D
Xoroaster 8 months ago