The current edition of I, Claudius is a perfect match to the first edition. This demonstrates that Claudius actually wrote it.
Go back to your Bible and tell me where the Torah is mentioned in Judges or Kings And also tell me where it says the Torah was inside the Ark. (The Ark, of course, is mentioned.)
yeah, i know–the doper’s favorite moment is when he gets to jump all over someone’s beliefs.
only i never said i believe it. i just tried to answer the question. if you hate it or disagree, go change the wikipediapage. i’m simply trying to give james what he asked for–not what i think or believe.
You know, the word “traditionally” and “many believe that” can be added to statements to indicate that you are reporting, well, traditional thngs that many people believe. This helps to differentiate folklore from scholarship (although scholars *can *study folklore and learn many fascinating things about a people).
And I don’t think the book of Isaiah was written during the High Middle Ages.
i provided cites. argue them. it’s not like i just made all that up or anything.
literally two of the three cites are from fucking wikipedia. if you don’t think moses existed–go change it. if you disagree with the rest–GO CHANGE IT.
otherwise stop acting dickish because i quoted information from cites to answer someone’s question. goddamn.
it would be nice of you to provide cites to the historical information regarding the authorship of the bible.
it would appear the information i parroted from wikipedia is so grossly erroneous the Dope can’t quite deal with it.
plz help james by providing your cites and be kind enough to fix the authorship page off wikipedia to avoid anyone ever providing the information i did ever again.
I don’t deserve your defense in the matter, but I appreciate it.
Though, I’m engaging in conversation with adults, and expect to be treated the same way. They can insult me as much as they wish while I am the one picked out by moderation staff.
This pretty well defines serious science/scholarship. In some cases you can reach definite conclusions, but in most cases there is room for doubt, or known limitations to the measurement technique and tools.
So: “There is strong evidence that X is true.” means that X is probably true, and anyone who wants to convince others that it is not needs to supply better, or at least nearly equal evidence of that. The closest a legitimate scientist or scholar should ever come to making a definitive statement is “The evidence for X is overwhelming.” or similar.
Dex and Euty were not merrily covering their butts, they were being truthful. Opinions differ because scholars apply different weighting to various pieces of often conflicting evidence. Making a definitive statement will require the outright rejection of some evidence as false. There are many people that are OK with that, but they are not scientists or scholars, and the result is belief, not fact.
Would you like to give me evidence of some form of supernatural power that allows you to read my thoughts or intentions? I suppose I should’ve wrote “Names” instead of “Name” but I meant it on a book by book basis.
You all seem to be misreading what I had to say about that. I do NOT disagree with what Dex and Euty were saying, at all. I simply wanted to hear some other theorys or other evidence to something different.
But you seem to know much less about their religious beliefs. Jews believe the Messiah is going to be and do certain things (detailed in the Old Testament) and Jesus didn’t do those things. Your view about gods (which is also mine) does not mean you’re better informed about that. I think maybe you need to explain what you actually think here.
I have very little knowledge as to what this thread is actually about, I suppose. I am only knowledgeable about what is actually in the bible. I’ve read it thoroughly and have tried to understand as much of it as I am capable of.
My real intention on this thread was to learn… interactively, I suppose. To engage in conversation with people who know what they’re talking about rather than just google a bunch of research papers that have conflicting views. (Or be attacked for wording things poorly)
