Important to Me: Kuzari Principle, or Proof From Mass Revelation

[abele_derer]

Israel in Egypt : The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, by James K. Hoffmeier, Oxford University Press, 1999

Pharaohs and Kings; A Biblical Quest, by David Rohl, Random House, 1996.

Kitchen, Kenneth, “The Patriarchal Age – Myth or History?,” Biblical Archaeological Review March-April, 1996.
From Gottlieb’s Chocolate Philosophy

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@abele_derer

Left Hand: Please show a long list of Rabbis who claimed that the Sinai events are an allegory, not the Genesis events.

abele: no. I don’t need to to refute this absurd principle, since its claim applies necessarily to Genesis as well.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@abele_derer

Diogenes: My point from Anakhenton was that the Egyptians tried to obscure history.

They weren’t trying to conceal history, they were just trying to deface Akhenaten. Who do you think they were trying to hide him from?

If so, why would they go out of their way to WRITE a shameful history?

Because it was their history. They did record defeats. You are misinformed about that.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@abele_derer

Israel in Egypt : The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition, by James K. Hoffmeier, Oxford University Press, 1999

Pharaohs and Kings; A Biblical Quest, by David Rohl, Random House, 1996.

Kitchen, Kenneth, “The Patriarchal Age – Myth or History?,” Biblical Archaeological Review March-April, 1996.
From Gottlieb’s Chocolate Philosophy

Summarize what you believe is the actual evidence, please, not a bibliography.

[The_Hamster_King]

@abele_derer

The proof is not from the fact that the Bible reports the miracles. The proof is from the fact that the Jews believe in the Bible, a Bible which describes that millions of their ancestors, each and every one of them, experienced miracles. You could write a novel, of course. But try writing a novel about a false national event - such as a volcano in New York City - and if you get the New Yorkers to believe it, you will have refuted the Kuzari principle. Until then, you got nothing.

Millions of Arabs believe that the Koran accurately describes miracles that occurred to their ancestors. Why does your standard of proof apply to the Torah, but not the Koran?

[Hunter_Hawk]

Okay, here’s a couple of slow-pitch questions for abele derer; I actually would be interested in the answers.

Gottlieb’s web site claims:

Rabbi Dr. Dovid Gottlieb went on to become Professor of Philosophy at Johns Hopkins University.

What were the years of his tenure at Johns Hopkins?
What were his specific title and department?
Why did he leave?
What were his publications while at Johns Hopkins?
(FWIW, I betcha a zillion dollars that abele derer refuses to answer, claims that it’s not relevant, and insinuates that this is an ad hominem attack.)

[Bpelta]

@abele_derer

2. Bpelta: How many Azteks were claimed to have been there? Was the Aztek ancestry 20 people or 25 people?

If you look up the history of the Aztecs, you’ll find that they were a military tribal power. And if you looked at the sources I referred to before, they record military battles. We’re talking at least thousands of people in the history, I saw one estimate somewhere of 10,000. I don’t know how many people exactly were there. “Thousands” is, I think, a sufficiently large number to fulfill the conditions of the Kuzari Principle as elaborated upon here.

[Hunter_Hawk]

@abele_derer

1. I will resist the urge to provide definitions. And the reason is this: unless I use a term in a vague, or indefinitive, sense, there is no need for me to define what I mean. Indeed, any words I use will them allow you to ask me to define what I mean by those words, and since the English language isn’t infinite, I will run out of definition. So, no, I will not define what I mean. We know, based on our experiences that a large group of people have never hallucinated for forty years straight. We know what the word “commemorated” means; we know what the word “event” means; and we know what the word “national” means. That you ask me to define it alarms me.

You might want to familiarize yourself with the concept of an operational definition.

Basic intro link: Operational definition - Wikipedia

[Steve_MB]

@abele_derer

The proof is from the fact that the Jews believe in the Bible, a Bible which describes that millions of their ancestors, each and every one of them, experienced miracles.

The Bible itself repeatedly states that the Hebrews did not believe – a prophet could hardly take a nap without waking up to discover that the people were drifting into idolatry and impiety and immorality and inanity yet again. Clearly, the “incontrovertable” miracles that everybody supposedly believed had happened to their ancestors didn’t make very much of an impression.

[FinnAgain]

and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Proof that Jesus is divine and all of Jewish theology is wrong.
…right?

[Der_Trihs]

Nah, everyone knows that zombies come in hordes. Jesus rises from the dead, naturally there’s going to be a whole pack with him.

[FinnAgain]

Yes, but they were divine zombies.

[Der_Trihs]

@FinnAgain

Yes, but they were divine zombies.

Well, there was the Miracle of the Loaves and Brains…

[Revenant_Threshold]

@abele_derer

3. The Hamster King: The proof is not from the fact that the Bible reports the miracles. The proof is from the fact that the Jews believe in the Bible, a Bible which describes that millions of their ancestors, each and every one of them, experienced miracles. You could write a novel, of course. But try writing a novel about a false national event - such as a volcano in New York City - and if you get the New Yorkers to believe it, you will have refuted the Kuzari principle. Until then, you got nothing.

I believe that I might have such an example; the original War of the Worlds radio broadcast. In this case, the national event is that, supposedly, an amount of people even in the millions heard the broadcast and believed it in some way to be either an actual news story or at least in some way accurate. That there was a huge reaction of terror and fear. Ask people today who have heard of it, and invariably they will agree that at the time massive amounts of people were genuinely taken in by it. And yet, looking back on it it’s been learned that actually responses of that nature were considerably more limited, certainly not within the sort of numbers that were originally claimed or that people tend to think happened now.

With the basis of a false national event - essentially mass panic - which is believed to have happened today, I think that might count as a counter-example of the Kuzari principle being false.

[Steve_MB]

@Revenant_Threshold

I believe that I might have such an example; the original War of the Worlds radio broadcast. In this case, the national event is that, supposedly, an amount of people even in the millions heard the broadcast and believed it in some way to be either an actual news story or at least in some way accurate. That there was a huge reaction of terror and fear. Ask people today who have heard of it, and invariably they will agree that at the time massive amounts of people were genuinely taken in by it. And yet, looking back on it it’s been learned that actually responses of that nature were considerably more limited, certainly not within the sort of numbers that were originally claimed or that people tend to think happened now.

With the basis of a false national event - essentially mass panic - which is believed to have happened today, I think that might count as a counter-example of the Kuzari principle being false.

And, in any case, the application of the Kuzari principle would “prove”, not only that there was indeed a mass panic, but that there was indeed a Martian invasion.

[dzero]

@Steve_MB

a prophet could hardly take a nap without waking up to discover that the people were drifting into idolatry and impiety and immorality and inanity yet again.

I thought that was really funny . . . because it’s true.

I had a prof in college who described the old testament as type of love story between god and Israel, with god basically playing the role of the abused spouse.

edit - so I don’t get charged with grinding my religious ax, I’m agnostic for all intents and purposes and have been everything from an occultist to evangelical to Buddhist.

[RitterSport]

@abele_derer

It’s a shame, because so many stunningly stupid things have been posted…

Ka-blammo! Darn it! Does anyone know where I can pick up a new cheap irony meter?

[Shot_From_Guns]

I’ve gotten a PM about this, so for anybody who’s confused about these posts:

@Shot_From_Guns

Didn’t “everybody” in Germany around WWII believe that Jews were the cause of the economic depression? That’s (a) national, (b) hallucination-proof, and (c) commemorated (if you consider shipping people off to death camps to qualify as “commemoration,” which I would).

@Shot_From_Guns

People had all kinds of *hearsay *evidence for Jewish depredations around the time of WWII. Just as you have all kinds of *hearsay *evidence for the Exodus.

My analogy is that the (false) justifications given for the Holocaust are as “accurate” as the Kusari Defense, and therefore if you use the Kuzari Defense to legitimate the events of Exodus as historically true, you must also accept that all of the claims about Jews (that they were the cause of Germany’s loss in WWII, that they were the cause of the economic depression, that they ate Christian babies, whatever) were just as “true,” which is both ridiculous and offensive.

I am *not *making comparisons to the evidence for the Holocaust itself, since we have not only people who experienced it personally (versus an ancient written history based on an oral tradition that was older still), but incontrovertable physical evidence.

[Strassia]

@abele_derer

There are so many points that I simple cannot respond to all of them. It’s a shame, because so many stunningly stupid things have been posted.

1. Strassia: How do you know that the Old Testament is “translations of translations.” You use the same words used by Sam Harris, but he used them for the New Testament, not the old.
   .

I am referring to the fact that in the U.S., a large percentage of people who believe the Bible to be a literal account of facts only read the King James Version. That version was compiled in England in the early 1600s. From Wikki:

For their Old Testament, the translators used a text originating in the editions of the Hebrew Rabbinic Bible by Daniel Bomberg (1524/5),[100] but adjusted this to conform to the Greek LXX or Latin Vulgate in passages to which Christian tradition had attached a Christological interpretation.[101] For example, the reading “They pierced my hands and my feet” was used in Psalm 22:16 (vs. the Masoretes’ reading of the Hebrew “like lions [they maul] my hands and feet”[102]). Otherwise, however, the Authorized Version is closer to the Hebrew tradition than any previous English translation – especially in making use of the rabbinic commentaries, such as Kimhi, in elucidating obscure passages in the Masoretic Text;[103] earlier versions had been more likely to adopt LXX or Vulgate readings in such places.

So it may be more accurate to call it an interpolation of multiple translations. The point is that it seems miracles are less convincing than old books. Of as Steve MB said:

@Steve_MB

The Bible itself repeatedly states that the Hebrews did not believe – a prophet could hardly take a nap without waking up to discover that the people were drifting into idolatry and impiety and immorality and inanity yet again. Clearly, the “incontrovertable” miracles that everybody supposedly believed had happened to their ancestors didn’t make very much of an impression.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

In point of fact, most Orthodox Jews read their Bibles in the original Hebrew. It’s true that the KJV is a translation from Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, and does contain some interpolations, but the translation factor isn’t so much an issue as the great number of variations and copy errors in manuscript lines, and the fact that we have no orginal, autograph manuscripts for anything in the Bible.