There is no such thing as an event that has been “experienced by an entire nation.”
That is what he does. I have made a number of counters he simply chooses to ignore them …
Wasn’t the existence of the Temple “experienced by an entire nation?”
(BTW, let’s stay in this thread)
Give me short list of your objections.
I suppose that’s why his Pascal’s wager thread turned into an abele derer’s wager thread and then that turned into yet another Kuzari thread.
Why is it important if other nations have nationally-commemorated events?
Unless you’ve got signed affidavits from everyone in that nation, nope. Have you considered looking up the definitions of “event” “entire” and “nation”?
To be a bit clearer: The existence of the Temple was believed to have been seen by the entire nation. I am surprised you don’t ask me to define the word “Temple,” since you think that asking for a definition makes you sound as if you actually care about the definition.
The fact that the prophets chide the populace is the biggest proof of the truth of the Bible. Why? Because they don’t chide the population for not believeing in the miracles. Why? Why do they focus on every sin but belief? Because everyone believed, good to the last drop.
Then why didn’t they observe the commandments, which you say good sense requires them to do? You already tried this argument four times, I think. Do you have any clue why it’s not convincing anybody?
Also, you have to realize how strong the influence of the surrounding societies were. Everyone believed that if you don’t worship “the gods” you are utter, utter toast.
The Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Phillistines and everyone else were all in agreement on this matter. It’s very hard to stand up to surrounding influences and believe in an unseen God. That’s why some people could not control themselves and they bowed to foreign gods.
Also, you have to realize the purpose of the prophets. They were not sent by God be a mister-nice-guy like some sort of Jesus who says “love, love, love.”
God sent them to attack the nation, verbally, and to focus on their faults, each and every one of them. They weren’t sent to kiss up to us.
Isaiah starts off his book “How dare you nation of Israel trample my courtyard.” That means people visited the Temple. But they did it with an empty heart.
At least one of us seems to. You believe that “the entire nation” saw the temple, but you have no evidence outside of your belief that this is true, and besides…
Screw your hijack-let’s get back to the actual topic.
Pascal’s Wager seems to have been devised for those who would change their religious beliefs if they read a Chick Tract. I cannot belief that this is the reasoning Pascal himself used to come to any conclusion regarding his own beliefs.
None of those points are proofs for the historicity of Exodus. At most, they are proofs that the Biblical author(s) had some knowledge of Egyptian history. The third point is especially unconvincing, because there is no reason to assume that the stories were newly composed at the time of redaction.
Now, back to the “Kuzari proof”. I feel a lot of your interlocutors are talking past you and not addressing your exact points, so let me give it a try.
- There is no need for a huge group of people to suddenly convince themselves that they have a tradition of exodus and mass revelation from their ancestors. Rather, a small group of people can believe it, and slowly spread the idea to others by explaining that it was forgotten by most of the nation at some point in the past. This would be especially easy if they used ideas which were vaguely familiar as part of old myths. I don’t see why this is is any more difficult than an empty tomb event witnessed by hundreds and now believed, perhaps, by billions.
In point of fact, there are thousands of Baalei Teshuva (“returnees” to Orthodoxy) who celebrate the Pesach Seder every year, believe in the exodus as a historical event, and teach their children about it but never told about it by their own parents. If the Kiruv (Orthodox outreach) movement was completely successful, the vast majority of Jews would believe in the exodus and mass revelation despite having no personal family tradition.
- The Kuzari argument also fails when you consider the huge amount of uncertainty in the Torah Sh’Baal Peh (rabbinic traditions) about what exactly happened. If “you can’t falsely convince a huge number of people that their ancestors witnessed something which they didn’t,” why do some rabbinic authorities believe God said 2 commandments and Moses said the rest, and some believe He said all 10, for example? If the first position is correct, then those who believe the second must disprove the Kuzari argument, right?
I am not proving that the entire nation saw the temple. You are missing the point of the argument ENTIRELY.
All I am showing is that if a nation believes that the entire nation experienced a phenominon - whether or not the entire nation actually experienced that phenominon - there is evidence that the phenominon took place.
Belief: People believe that millions of their ancestors saw the temple. Fact: all scholars agree that there was a temple in jerusalem.
Belief: People believe that millino of their ancestors ate manna for 14,600 days. Fact: ???
We don’t know. And I never claimed that I know. All I am saying is that I have evidence which has never shown itself to be fallible for that fact.
What does this have to do with Pascal’s Wager?
Accoding to abele derer (and the Old Testament), there is: The exodus and revelation at Sinai. That’s his point.
I will have to be brief, because I don’t have too much time right now. See you guys tomorrow.
- So you claim that the Jews were experts in Egyptian history, but they forgot their own history?
- I don’t care if you think that the story could have evolved over time. Show me, please, one case of a false event evolving over time. Unless an angel told you that national history can evolve, you will have keep your unsupported intuitions to yourself.
- Regarding the Ten commandmnet/ two commandment debate, you aren’t meeting your burden of proof. Let’s assume that God only spoke the first two, and you are showing that people can be convinced that God actually spoke ten. Doesn’t that show that national history can be false? No. It only means that you can increase the number of times that a certian miracle took place. If two miracles took place, you can convince people that ten took place. But how do you know that you can go from zero, which is your argument? Or, more specifically, how do you know that you can go from zero to 14,600?
Obviously. Nobody else accepts this terminology because - and you can see this by reviewing the thread - abele derer believes it only applies to the exodus story. Every example proposed by other posters is rejected out of hand, and the only other examples abele derer proposes are events like the Civil War or the Holocaust, which are supported by mountains of evidence that dwarf this alleged proof for the exodus story.
Nobody said anything about expertise. You’re using another strawman argument.
The story that Columbus discovered America was mentioned upthread.
:rolleyes:
I see little reason for the Old Testament Israelites to have much confidence in Yahweh, on account of Yahweh being sadistic, capricious, vindictive, and malicious: the very definition of a bad father, both to the Israelites and to the world in general. He abandons them over and over for “faithlessness,” but it seems to me that their “sins” were due to his deliberately putting them into situations where they were damned if they did, damned if they didn’t (consider his [del]punishment[/del] cruel persecution of Israel because David conducted a census) or because He – Yahweh – blatantly and repeatedly broke his promises to them.
There’s a young woman in my life I sometimes call my stepdaughter, though she really isn’t (I never married her mother). I love her. Sometimes she does things I think foolish or self-destructive, just as the Israelites sometimes broke the commandments by worshipping other gods. But if she were to, I dunno, start dating someone like Scott Peterson, and I was thus in fear for her safety, I wouldn’t abandon her to suffering, as Yahweh abandoned the Hebrews to years of bondage and massacres in Egypt (or the repeated conquests by foreign powers once they had their own nation). No, I wouldn’t abandon her, because I LOVE her.
And I’m a jackass. Shouldn’t God be something better than me?