Religion and evolution

[Amaris]

Here is an online link to, specifically, Thomas Paine's argument against Moses being the author of the first five books of the Old Testament.

www.ushistory.org/Paine/reason/reason18.htm

[cheyanne71]

thanks for that guys, that was the best debate ive seen on here for a while

Thanks Claire, will do my best

[cheyanne71]

and here is an argument for Moses Amaris:

www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i4/moses.asp

[Amaris]

cheyanne71 said:

and here is an argument for Moses Amaris:

www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i4/moses.asp

You see there is a problem for me as a non believer in the bible, because its the bible telling you that Moses was the author
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Pentateuch claims in many places that Moses was the writer, e.g. Exodus 17:14; 24:4–7; 34:27; Numbers 33:2; Deuteronomy 31:9, 22, 24.

Many times in the rest of the Old Testament, Moses is said to have been the writer, e.g. Joshua 1:7–8; 8:32–34; Judges 3:4; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 14:6; 21:8; 2 Chronicles 25:4; Ezra 6:18; Nehemiah 8:1; 13:1; Daniel 9:11–13.

In the New Testament, Jesus frequently spoke of Moses’ writings or the Law of Moses, e.g. Matthew 8:4; 19:7–8; Mark 7:10; 12:26; Luke 24:27, 44; John 5:46–47; 7:19. Jesus said that those who ‘hear not [i.e. reject] Moses’ would not be persuaded ‘though one rose from the dead’ (Luke 16:31). Thus we see that those churches and seminaries which reject the historicity of Moses’ writings often also reject the literal bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Other New Testament speakers/writers said the same thing, e.g. John 1:17; Acts 6:14; 13:39; 15:5; 1 Corinthians 9:9; 2 Corinthians 3:15; Hebrews 10:28
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have read of the JEDP hypothesis, but I particularly like Paines intellectual argument against Moses being the author and that dates back to the 1800s. But as I say I will look up other sources.

[cheyanne71]

You see there is a problem for me as a non believer in the bible, because its the bible telling you that Moses was the author

So why post Thomas Paine's site in order that I may read his reasoning as to why Moses was not the only author? Anything I post will be null and void due to your contention that you don't believe in what is written in the Bible anyway!

However, if you had read to the bottom of the post you would have seen this note (not from the bible)

Computer agrees: Genesis had only one author

The following quote comes from Omni magazine of August 1982:

‘After feeding the 20,000 Hebrew words of Genesis into a computer at Technion University in Israel, researchers found many sentences that ended in verbs and numerous words of six characters or more. Because these idiosyncratic patterns appear again and again, says project director Yehuda Radday, it seems likely that a sole author was responsible. Their exhaustive computer analysis conducted in Israel suggested an 82 percent probability that the book has just one author.’

[claire]

BANG! thats it my heads gone, you ladies are GOOD at this

[Amaris]

cheyanne71 said:

You see there is a problem for me as a non believer in the bible, because its the bible telling you that Moses was the author

So why post Thomas Paine's site in order that I may read his reasoning as to why Moses was not the only author? Anything I post will be null and void due to your contention that you don't believe in what is written in the Bible anyway!

Well the difference is I've read most of the bible, but have you read Thomas Paine? And no, your posts are not considered null & void if I see a good discussion in them against my belief.

However, if you had read to the bottom of the post you would have seen this note (not from the bible)

Computer agrees: Genesis had only one author

The following quote comes from Omni magazine of August 1982:

‘After feeding the 20,000 Hebrew words of Genesis into a computer at Technion University in Israel, researchers found many sentences that ended in verbs and numerous words of six characters or more. Because these idiosyncratic patterns appear again and again, says project director Yehuda Radday, it seems likely that a sole author was responsible. Their exhaustive computer analysis conducted in Israel suggested an 82 percent probability that the book has just one author.

Obviously I am no expert on analysis, but my personal feelings are, I don't place everything on a computer print out, these things can be manipulated by man.

[Amaris]

claire said:

BANG! thats it my heads gone, you ladies are GOOD at this

Awwwww Claire sorreeeee or do you need a bandage

Karma Claire for sticking ( no pun intended with the bandage thing!!) with us xxxxx

[cheyanne71]

Obviously I am no expert on analysis, but my personal feelings are, I don't place everything on a computer print out, these things can be manipulated by man.

I read what you had posted on Thomas Paine, was able to post a contradictory view but you are obviously closed to any idea that opposes your viewpoint by now claiming that extensive computer analysis can be manipulated by man. If the people conducting the analysis were neutral why on earth would they falsify any result?

[claire]

thanks amaris

[Amaris]

cheyanne71 said:

Obviously I am no expert on analysis, but my personal feelings are, I don't place everything on a computer print out, these things can be manipulated by man.

I read what you had posted on Thomas Paine, was able to post a contradictory view but you are obviously closed to any idea that opposes your viewpoint by now claiming that extensive computer analysis can be manipulated by man. If the people conducting the analysis were neutral why on earth would they falsify any result?

Firstly I would just like to point out that you are obviously as closed as you think I am to any idea that opposes your viewpoint.

Secondly this is from a website on Hebrew computer linguistics...


Hebrew Computational Linguistics: Past and Future Shuly Wintner Department of Computer Science University of Haifa

"This paper reviews the current state of the art in Natural Language Processing for Hebrew, both theoretical and practical. The Hebrew language, like other Semitic languages, poses special challenges for developers of programs for natural language processing: the writing system, rich morphology, unique word formation process of roots and patterns, lack of linguistic corpora that document language usage,all contribute to making computational approaches to Hebrew challenging. The paper briefly reviews the field of computational linguistics and the problems it addresses, describes the special difficulties inherent to Hebrew (as well as to other Semitic languages), surveys a wide variety of past and ongoing works and attempts to characterize future needs and possible solutions".

Which I think points out that there is ongoing work on being able to process the Hebrew language successfully, so maybe there were flaws in the analysis back in 1982.

Thirdly, there was this, "Research team at Hebrew University Jerusalem had computer analysis that showed the Bible Code to be true, but what wasn't reported at the time, other reporters found similar hidden codes in Moby Dick and any long piece of text".
So much for computer analysis.

[claire]

i remember the thing about moby dick, i think there must be a code to be found in any text no matter how long

[cheyanne71]

Which I think points out that there is ongoing work on being able to process the Hebrew language successfully, so maybe there were flaws in the analysis back in 1982.

which is somewhat different from accusations of 'manipulation'.

[Amaris]

cheyanne71 said:

Which I think points out that there is ongoing work on being able to process the Hebrew language successfully, so maybe there were flaws in the analysis back in 1982.

which is somewhat different from accusations of 'manipulation'.

Ok fair enough comment, but that doesn't mean I don't think that men are quite capable of manipulating results, after all computer programming is done by humans. I also think men will manipulate things for them to gain from it, and that's my problem with the bible.