I love threads like this, its nice sometimes to just read and be firmly reminded that many many people are walking around this old planet of ours with absolutely zero concept of the scientific method, or for that matter even basic logic.
in addition to the links already provided I highly suggest abele dererread up on the following List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia
just jump on that wiki train and keep on riding.
Good to see you around, zev_steinhardt. I was wondering if you might stop by and see this thread.
Yes, one can think of long detailed arguments against the Kuzari principle, but then one realizes how futile they would be. Nothing is going to convince a True Believer like abele of the weightlessness of his arguments, which are nothing more than question begging and “well, you can’t prove it didn’t happen.” However nothing is needed to convince the vast majority of other people–including the vast majority of believing Jews–that these arguments are hilariously weak.
Ha ha! Irony.
Heh. My exact thought reading that line: “It seems that abele derer is suffering from an extreme case of irony deficiency”.
I would actually say that these posts meet and exceed the RDA for irony.
I originially decided not to post anymore, but I came back, because Bpelta had made some interesting points that demaded a response.
Now that I responded, I guess I will be gone for good.
Regarding Stienhart’s point, that as an orthodox jew, he doesn’t think there is evidence for the Sinai miracles, let me ask you: HOW SURE ARE YOU THAT THERE WAS A SECOND TEMPLE IN ISRAEL?
There may be archeological evidence and ancient manuscripts regarding the Second Temple. For the sake of the argument, ignore them for the moment.
Isn’t it possible that there never was a Temple in Jerusalem? Isn’t it possible that the Jews made up the whole idea of a Temple in Jerusalem, and they later instituted the commemorations of Tisha B’av and Chanukah? How likely is that scenaio, in your mind?
Indeed, critical1 has an amazing point (I am being sarcastic, of course). He/She has argued that people often suffer from cognitive biases. If so, how likely, Mr. Stienhardt, is it - in your mind - that it was due a cognitive bias that the Jews, in order to glorify themsevles, invented or evolved a myth about an ancient temple. Give me a number, please. How likely?
my suggestion was directed solely at you and not even slightly at anything you are trying to “prove”
Nobody suggested the Jews suffer from any kind of unique bias. It sounds like you’re trying to imply some other posters have anti-Semitic attitudes.
No, it’s not possible that there was no 2nd Temple in Jerusalem because we have proof that there was. If, however, we had only some kind of written claims that there was a Temple there before it was destroyed in 70 CE, but no archaeological evidence or corroborating documentary evidence, then we could not accept the 2nd Temple as a historical reality.
Incidentally, the mere existence of a Temple is several orders of magnitude less extraordinary than the claims of a sky god carving tablets on top of a mountain, so it’s not really much of an analogy. Claims of events which violate physical laws (i.e. claims that are literally, physically impossible) merit a default assumption of non-historicity that things which are actually possible do not, and require a much higher standard of evidence.
If you’re having problems staying away, I’m sure a mod would be happy to oblige and ban you so that you can’t return.
First of all, my name is spelled with a “d.”
That being said, there is a huge difference between the Second Bais HaMikdash and the Revelation at Sinai. The difference is exactly the stuff you want to ignore – the archaeological and contemporary evidence.
We know the Second Bais HaMikdash was there not just because Chazal (our Sages) have said it was there. We know it’s there because there is a whole host of evidence that it was there – from archaeological evidence, to contemporary writings of the time (such as the Talmud, Josephus, etc.), and other historical records (such as Roman records of the time period, the Arch of Titus and other such items.
The Revelation at Sinai, however, has one (and only one) source – the Torah. While that’s good enough for me as a matter of belief, I would not present it as a proof that the event happened. It’s far more likely to say that the Revelation was invented (even though I don’t believe that) than to say that the Second Temple was invented out of whole cloth.
So, is it possible that the Second Temple never existed? Yeah, I suppose so. It’s possible that mind-bending aliens came along and planted all the evidence of it and made everyone remember otherwise. But it’s not likely.
Zev Steinhardt
Oh, clearly. I suppose “irony deficiency” implies the opposite of what’s meant…it’s just that “irony-awareness deficiency” isn’t quite as evocative. 
And isn’t that ironic?
Dontcha think?
I was wondering this too, having read the first couple of pages, and skimmed the rest. Looks like it was never answered…interested as a JHU alum, when I was there, the Philosophy Dept was small - not my department, but I don’t recognize the name. That is not evidence it didn’t happen mind you, but I wonder why the smugness on Hunter hawk’s part…and why the Wiki Article listed in the OP or soon after was deleted round about the time this thread came up?
ignore, missed edit window, subscribing to thread
The reason why I decided not to post here anymore is not because I am bored by the topic or the fierce response that I have been getting. Rather, I am starting to realize that I am not going to convince anyone. If anything, I am just going to frighten some people that maybe, just maybe, they are wrong. But why should I want to frighten people? I am not a sadist (I hope!).
One final point I must mention is that Bpelta said that Constantine’s army has a vision of a cross. I responded that when under pressure and looking at the sun, it is common for people to hallucinate.
I did a bit more research and all the versions that I saw are clear that only constantine himself had a vision; not the entire army. If so, it is not relevant to our debate.
Yup-You are running away because we’re scared.
Riiiiiight.
Gotta love how abele derer decided not to respond to what I think were the only questions in the thread that were absolutely factually verifiable (the ones about Gottlieb’s tenure at Johns Hopkins).
Because I have a low tolerance for people who are disingenuous to that extent.
Damfino. FWIW, I had nothing to do with that.