tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3559910.post7903364398170146114..comments2024-02-17T19:58:47.311-05:00Comments on Textuality: Kuzari Principle Conclusion: How the Sinai Story Originated and DevelopedLarry Tannerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14642725101009530480noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3559910.post-15611531771159882832017-08-13T23:43:14.254-04:002017-08-13T23:43:14.254-04:00YoBit lets you to claim FREE CRYPTO-COINS from ove...<b><a href="http://btcx.syntaxlinks.com/r/YoBit" rel="nofollow">YoBit</a></b> lets you to claim <b>FREE CRYPTO-COINS</b> from over <b><i>100</i></b> unique crypto-currencies, you complete a captcha one time and claim as many as coins you want from the available offers.<br /><br />After you make about 20-30 claims, you complete the captcha and keep claiming.<br /><br /><b>You can press claim as much as 50 times per one captcha.</b><br /><br />The coins will <b>safe</b> in your account, and you can convert them to Bitcoins or Dollars.Bloggerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07287821785570247118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3559910.post-5153819027610527712012-02-01T02:14:43.564-05:002012-02-01T02:14:43.564-05:00The Kuzari argument is an argument by special plea...The Kuzari argument is an argument by special pleading and therefore a fallacy.<br />Essentially, it states: The general rule is that all religions are myth. People can make things up and they are believed, even though the claims are false. But Judaism is an exception; a mass revelation claim would not believed unless it were true. <br /><br />The pleading of special exception is not justified. One would either have to give other examples of similar claims that turned out to be true (which would contradict Judaism!) or somehow provide strong evidence that the distinction being made justifies breaking the "rule". Advocates of the argument do no such thing, other than say, "Sinai is different!"DrJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07330156581796629945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3559910.post-29399482993139637492012-01-22T09:37:59.055-05:002012-01-22T09:37:59.055-05:00Yehochonan,
Cassuto destroyed nothing. Sorry.
If...Yehochonan,<br /><br />Cassuto destroyed nothing. Sorry.<br /><br />If one accepts the DH fully, partially, or not at all, the take-away is this: the human origins and inspiration of the Bible are perfectly plausible and understandable. There's no reason whatsoever to offer divine-based theories.Larry Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14642725101009530480noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3559910.post-62250264995381330542012-01-22T06:22:54.917-05:002012-01-22T06:22:54.917-05:00With the Documentary Hypothesis destroyed by the l...With the Documentary Hypothesis destroyed by the late Umberto Cassuto, does your argument still stand? I noticed you depend on the Documentary Hypothesis a lot.Yehochananhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00351181243770256532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3559910.post-25317109226885754962011-08-05T12:07:27.570-04:002011-08-05T12:07:27.570-04:00abele derer -
Please go back and read the previou...abele derer -<br /><br />Please go back and read the previous posts I've written that lead up to this one. I'd also ask you to read this particular post more carefully. But I appreciate that you cannot accept this post.Larry Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14642725101009530480noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3559910.post-12246563151210244402011-08-05T10:58:32.487-04:002011-08-05T10:58:32.487-04:00Is this some sort of joke? You ignore option #1 be...Is this some sort of joke? You ignore option #1 because a) "the author presumes to know that actions and statements of both YHWH and Moses, and b) we have an unidentified storyteller and c) "there is no evidence that there was a real Moses." <br /><br />First, regarding your first critique how do you know that Moses wasn't the author? If he wrote the book (in the presence of the entire nation) -- as the book itself reports (Deuteronomy 31) -- then he could have easily known about the actions of YHWH and Moses. Then, you ask, why would he talk in the third person? Because he wasn't speaking english. In ancient Hebrew this was common practice. So we must at least presume that the entire book was written by Moses because to make up a story about a book written in the presence of an entire nation is difficult if not impossible.<br /><br />b) Regarding your second point that the storyteller is unidentified, see above.<br /><br />c) Regarding your third point, that there is no evidence for the real Moses. Even if this were true, this is insufficient to reject option 1. YOU WOULD HAVE TO BRING POSITIVE EVIDENCE THAT THIS MAN DID NOT LIVE, in order to cast doubt regarding his existence. Finally, we do have positive evidence of his existence: national tradition. Do you doubt the existence of Muhamed? Or does the Muslim tradition count more that your pristine Jewish tradition? Also, the Priest Gene implies that Moses' brother, Aaron, is a real person who did exist (I am not an expert in genetics, and there might be some scholarly dispute about the priest gene. I am just throwing it out there.)<br />(For future reading: See Who Really Wrote the Bible, by Howard C. Ford.)abele derernoreply@blogger.com