Relocate Israel 2

page: 14
16
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Oh, so you're correct because you merely told me that I'm wrong? Oh, okay, well I can debunk that by telling you that you're wrong. Simple enough. Thanks for that, I always thought arbitrary appeals to authority were irrelevant arguments. Debating is going to be so much easier now.



LOL. It's not wrong because "I told you so". It's wrong because the numbers don't add up and you are basing all your calculations on dates that patently false according written historical record, physical evidence, and the general consensus of the world's scholars.


So basically, you told me I'm wrong and you're right without sourcing anything whatsoever or showing the errors in the math. (AGAIN) Just stated this to be so, and expect us all to just agree because you said it? Then for a cherry on top you invoke the collective opinion of the consensus of the world's scholars. Really? have you researched what they all say? Is there a website where I can go that's specifically for any consensus's of scholars? Did this consensus get together and make a book I can pick up at Borders?

P.S. "General consensus of the world's scholars" = Argumentum ad populum.

edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


You don't do much reading, do you?

1. Here is the link to my previous post in this very thread where I walked you through the errors of logic and obvious inaccuracies surrounding the date of the "prophecy". www.abovetopsecret.com... As for "sources"...seriously pick up any ACADEMIC textbook or encyclopedia in existence. As for your request for a suggestion at Borders...you should be able to find what your looking for in any book on the subject under the section "History". Note: Accurate dates for the Babylonian occupation of present-day Israel might be a lot harder to find under the sections entitled "Punditry" and "Religious Nuttery"
A good place to start to get at least a working knowledge of how our collective history unfolded is to start with the "Columbia History of the World" as opposed to church newsletters. Here is a link. www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1331904386&sr=8-1

2. Argumentum ad populum = Is a vague appeal to the popular opinion of the MASSES in order to justify an argument. For example, "Everybody knows that Babylon did not conquer the Jews in 606BC" Citing a general CONSENSUS of ACADEMIC opinion is not Argumentum ad populum, as it is the very cornerstone of scientific and rational thought. Academic journals are peer reviewed IN ORDER to ESTABLISH A GENERAL CONSENSUS. Over time, a general consensus might change as new evidence presents itself. Likewise, even Argumentum ad populum is a PERFECTLY valid tool in debate IF it is used correctly and in the right context. For example, in instances of INDUCTIVE reasoning. In other words if you said something like "Approximately 90% of scholars think the Babylonian occupation of present day Israel occurred began in 597BC and ended in 538 BC...a period of only 59 years" this would build a strong or cogent argument on the basis of PROBABILITY, if not not PROOF.
The PROOF of this being true would be the matching Jewish and Babylonian written records to support these dates, the archeological evidence, the carbon dating, and the Persian written records which clearly indicate that all Jews were allowed to come back in 538 BC. This should be no surprise, since educated folk tend to believe things that are provable more than those which are not provable.

Unfortunately, I would imagine that you will not take the time to actually pick up the Columbia History of the World and/or look up what scientists think about the Babylonian Captivity as hard factual evidence that there was no "prophecy" may have serious implications for your religious beliefs and somebody has convinced you that you will go to "hell" if you think for yourself.




posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


I just went back again, (yes thanks for that link), and I cannot find a single source to any of your statements in that post either. SAME. Thing. I. HAVE. Been. Saying... *sigh*

Do you even know what the term "arbitrary" means?


Laymans Terms:


PROVIDE A DAMN SOURCE, AND FOR THE RECORD YOU ARE NOT ONE.

Finally are we clear???

edit on 16-3-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 



For example, "Everybody knows that Babylon did not conquer the Jews in 606BC" Citing a general CONSENSUS of ACADEMIC opinion is not Argumentum ad populum, as it is the very cornerstone of scientific and rational thought.


Do you realize how absurd that logic is? Has the "consensus of academic opinion" ever been wrong?? HAS SCIENCE EVER BEEN WRONG??

Especially true when speaking of "science" ^. hell, it took 50 years for the "science consensus" to accept that the speed of light isn't infinite.

50 YEARS.

But sure, let's invoke the collective opinion of people who collectively change that opinion with the seasons. gotacha, sounds like a good thing to me. Thank God Almighty he gave me life in this century, I don't have a clue how I could handle a flat Earth.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 



A good place to start to get at least a working knowledge of how our collective history unfolded is to start with the "Columbia History of the World" as opposed to church newsletters.


Ahhhh, I've discovered the error here in your rationale. I don't form my beliefs about the dating of the Babyloian captivity from "church newsletters". I don't even get my own church newsletters in the mail.


"He encamped against the city of Judah and on the second day of the month Adar he captured the city (and) seized (its) king. A king of his own choice he appointed in the city (and) taking the vast tribute he brought it to Babylon."


A.K. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles , vol. 5 of Texts from Cuneiform Sources, eds. A.L. Oppenheim, and others (1975), pg. 102.

Babylonian Chronicles


The Babylonians themselves recorded the exact date of of their capture of Judah. No church newsletters required.



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   
(That's how you legitimately source material.) ^^^^



posted on Mar, 16 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
(That's how you legitimately source material.) ^^^^

LOL!!!
Dude...you are awesome.

Your link to the "source" material goes to SOMEONE ELSE'S bibliography page. Nowhere on that page does it state that the Babylonian Captivity started in 606 BC. In fact, the author and one of the foremost Assyriogists in the world that you "cited", A.K. Grayson is the CO-AUTHOR of a book entitled: "The Cambridge Ancient History: Volume 3 Part 2; The Assyrian and Babylonian Empires and other States of the Near East, from the Eighth to the Sixth Centuries B.C."

Chapter 31 of that very same textbook developed by the Cambridge University History Department (one of the most prestigious in the entire world) is entitled: Chapter 31: The Babylonian Exile and the restoration of the Jews in Palestine, 586–c. 500 B.C. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No surprise really that the one of the finest Ancient History Departments and one of the most famed Assyriogist of all time happen to agree with pretty much every other institution of higher learning, high schools, and more or less any current encyclopedia you will ever pick up.
Here's your link: histories.cambridge.org...

Here's your citation:
The Cambridge Ancient History: Volume 3 Part 2;The Assyrian and Babylonian Empires and other States of the Near East, from the Eighth to the Sixth Centuries B.C., 1991. T. C. Mitchell, et al. (DOI)10.1017/CHOL9780521227179.014

Here's your complete list of chapters:
Babylonia in the shadow of Assyria (747–626 B.C.) by J. A. Brinkman
Assyria: Tiglath-Pileser III to Sargon II (744–705 B.C.) by A. K. Grayson
Assyria: Sennacherib and Esarhaddon (704–669 B.C.) by A. K. Grayson
Assyria 668-635 B.C.: the reign of Ashurbanipal by A. K. Grayson
The fall of Assyria (635–609 B.C.) by Joan Oates
Assyrian civilization by A. K. Grayson
Babylonia 605–539 B.C. by D. J. Wiseman
The culture of Babylonia: Neo-Babylonian society and economy by M. A. Dandamaev
The culture of Babylonia: Babylonian mathematics, astrology, and astronomy by Asger Aaboe
The culture of Babylonia: First-millennium Babylonian literature by Erica Reiner
The Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea
Israel and Judah from the coming of Assyrian domination until the fall of Samaria, and the struggle for independence in Judah (c. 750–700 B.C.) by T. C. Mitchell
Judah until the fall of Jerusalem (c. 700–586 B.C.) by T. C. Mitchell
The Babylonian Exile and the restoration of the Jews in Palestine (586–c. 500 B.C.) by T. C. Mitchell
Phoenicia and Phoenician colonization by W. Culican
Scythia and Thrace: The Scythians by T. Sulimirski and T. Taylor
Scythia and Thrace: Thrace before the Persian entry into Europe by G. Mihailov
Anatolia: The native kingdoms of Anatolia by M. Mellink
Anatolia: Anatolian languages by O. Masson
Egypt: the Twenty-fifth and Twenty-sixth Dynasties by T. G. H. James

In fairness, I know that you got your incorrect understanding of when AK Grayson thinks the Babylonians occupied Jerusalem from that LDS church newsletter website by John Pratt that you referenced back on14-3-2012 @ 12:14PM. Pratt blatantly misrepresented the contents of Grayson's work either intentionally or from sheer misunderstanding and used it to fabricate and/or justify this nonsensical yarn that he's peddling. This is precisely the reason why you people shouldn't rely on religious propaganda/newsletters as though they are credible academic sources. Unfortunately, when such information is delivered from someone whom an individual trusts/respects (such as a religious leader), people oftentimes are more likely to accept whatever they say without questioning it's validity. In reality...these are the sources of information that we should scrutinize MORE closely, since we know it's human nature to be biased towards those whom we already trust and allow to lead us. Don't get me wrong...the newsletter sure looks good w/ the footnotes and all, but Pratt has mislead you...badly.
Here's the link to your aforementioned "source" from John Pratt in case you forgot it. www.johnpratt.com...

So now what? Cambridge University, AK Grayson, and TC Mitchell and academia at large have it wrong? Pretty tough to say that now, since when you AK Grayson was your "source" when you thought he backed the 606BC idea. Add a couple more steps to the highly convoluted "calculations" spanning three different calendrical systems until you MAKE those numbers jive? Modify your beliefs to fit with the evidence and accept the idea that the "prophecy" might have only sort of fallen in a loose ballpark of the 20th century and was then hijacked for political and monetary gain? I promise Jesus won't send you to hell if you change your mind...he actually had a lot to say about religion being hijacked too.

There's no shame in learning



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Can't relocate a mythological place like "Israel" so the only solution is to internationalize the zone, disarm the Israelis and the Palestinians, provide an International Peacekeeping Force over all disputed lands.

Remove the thorns, the wounds will heal.





new topics
top topics
 
16
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join