jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (113 posts)

Historic Hittites

  1. aka-dj profile image79
    aka-djposted 6 years ago

    All too often the Bible is ridiculed as nonsense, and that it has ZERO historical value.

    I don't believe that for one moment, but, so many people always ask for proof. Of course, when it's offered, it too is dismissed. But, here i go, yet again, trying. big_smile

    The Hittites were inly ever mentioned in the Old Testament, but had no histaoric basis outside of that. Not until recently, that is.

    Evidence:   http://www.specialtyinterests.net/hittites.html

    Let me have it with both barrels! cool
    Tell me what nonsense this is, also!

    1. recommend1 profile image71
      recommend1posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Over 60 excavation campaigns have been conducted but much work still needs to be done. While interesting finds were made, so far archaeologists were unable to find the royal tombs or the cemetery of Hattusha. Until these are found, there is a painful lack of confirmation of lengthy king lists touted to be accurate

      So - from the lead you supply it says that the inflated and imaginary claims of some missionary in 1800+something that the tablets he saw represent the Hittite empire are still yet to be proven.   

      Did you actually read this stuff before you put it up as some kind of support for your argument ?

      1. dingdondingdon profile image59
        dingdondingdonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Not only this, but some parts of the Bible being historically accurate doesn't make the entire document true. If I travel forward two thousand years into the future with a copy of Harry Potter and say, "Look, there's a train in this book! Just like there was in those days! As foretold in the Prophecy!" it doesn't mean wizards actually exist.

        1. aka-dj profile image79
          aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You hit the nail on the head.
          The question that comes to mind then, is,
          "just how much of it's historical accuracy needs to be validated, before the rest can be taken as fact, true, accurate, or reliable"?
          20%, 30%, 50%? I doubt there would be more than 50% of all it's contents that would fall in the category of verifiable via archaeology.

          1. iantoPF profile image85
            iantoPFposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You make a good point. To put your percentages another way, What percentage of the Bible must be shown to be inaccurate before the whole thing could be shown as historically inaccurate; 80% 70% or 50% ?

          2. fadedsnow profile image61
            fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Even if 20-50% of material in the bible can be proven as authentic, you would still have 50-80% BS such as magic, zombies, and Gods. Harry Potter is a book with bona fide places written into the story line, does this mean it’s the genuine?

            1. aka-dj profile image79
              aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Please feel free to base your life and eternal destiny on Harry Potter.

              I am quite content to base mine on the Bible!

              1. getitrite profile image81
                getitriteposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                There is no difference.  Both are equally absurd.  But feel free to desperately believe that your delusion is somehow superior to other fairytales. smile

                1. aka-dj profile image79
                  aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Thank you for your permission. Not that I needed it, but it's nice to see you acknowledge my God given right to do just that.
                  I guess you don't need my permission to base your life on anything you want, so I won't waste my time.
                  Oh, and thanks for the ridicule. That helps our relationship immensely! hmm

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                    Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    dj - if you don't want to be ridiculed - why start threads like this? Clearly - you did not know there are references to Hittites outside the bible, you did not even bother reading the article you linked to and then offered this as some sort of proof that the majik in the bible is true. sad

                    Ridiculous behavior dj. This is why you got ridiculed. It is ridiculous to suggest that an historic reference in the Bible some how proves the majik is true.

                    This is why your religion causes so many conflicts dj. sad

              2. fadedsnow profile image61
                fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                So in a nut shell, you believe in slavery, murder, sacrifices,  genocide, magic, zombies, God/s, talking animals, talking bushes,  and children eating bears O MY. Kudos for you!

                1. aka-dj profile image79
                  aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I can't deny these things exist and they all happened.
                  Just by way of example, slavery is aive and "well" today. However, it's not we Christians who run or profit from them. These are usually criminals who are prosecuted when caught.
                  I believe in grace, mercy, peace, joy, eternal life, health, blessing, family, patience, forgiveness, and truth.
                  Yes, kudos for me, I guess.

                  1. fadedsnow profile image61
                    fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    So you cherry pick the bible and take only the good?

                  2. fadedsnow profile image61
                    fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    What do you think you our to the character named God in the bible? You are to be a slave to him. Nothing more and nothing less. Christianity is a huge profit organization.

        2. profile image0
          Baileybearposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          smile

        3. profile image67
          paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Bible is a mix; some parts of Bible could have a glimpse of truth in it but others are just manmade.

      2. aka-dj profile image79
        aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        To be honest, I only skim read it.
        I was inspired by a TV documentary on the subject.
        But, after your challenge, I had a better read. I found that the existence of the Hittites is not in question, as you claim, but the lineage of the KINGs.
        So, my main OP point still stands.

    2. WriteAngled profile image93
      WriteAngledposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      There are plenty of reports concerning the Hittites carved into stone in Egyptian temples. Ramses II, arguably the greatest of the pharaohs led a major campaign against them.

      Why should I worry about whether or not to believe the Bible, when I can see the facts in carvings that have survived from the period in question?

    3. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      LOLOLO

      Dear me. So - you thought there was no mention of the Hittites outside the bible huh?

      Now you know there are plenty of references to them - what does that mean to you?

      Does this mean Jesus does not speak to you into your head any more? Seeing as you are not religious in any way shape or form. lol

    4. Beelzedad profile image61
      Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The Museum of Anatolian Civilizations has a tremendous amount of artifacts regarding the Hittites. It also has a tremendous amount of artifacts from civilizations that existed thousands of years before them. *hint hint*

      smile

    5. DoubleScorpion profile image87
      DoubleScorpionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Do you believe the movies you watch are real life or historical facts? (not the documentary types but entertainment movies). Those settings are based partly on real facts as well...But they are still not real...The choice to believe the bible as 100% historical fact is on you...is there some good things in the bible...yes...but it was still written by poetic embellishing authors, not by some divine being...and before you say anything...all artistic things, to include books, paintings, songs are all "divinely" inspired...as in your mind and imagination creates them.

  2. vector7 profile image60
    vector7posted 6 years ago

    Nice post dj..

    They still act like doubting in God is hard huh?

    Wonder why they tempt people so?

    Little tempters they are.. Tempt away little ones..

    My house is on a rock. 

    wink

    1. Daniel Carter profile image92
      Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      He said with arrogance and superiority....

  3. Eaglekiwi profile image74
    Eaglekiwiposted 6 years ago

    Dj

    Be encouraged, 2/3rds of the Angels cheer you on smile and they dont shriek,spit or mock untelligently.

    1. aka-dj profile image79
      aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      This is me big_smile big_smile big_smile big_smile

    2. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Wow. Yet another conflict-filled thread started by a religionist who knows nothing of history or science. And you think there are angels cheering?

      Little wonder your religion causes so many conflicts. sad

      1. Eaglekiwi profile image74
        Eaglekiwiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Touch another nerve Mark hmm

        Why dont you try loving people ,instead of fighting with them.

        The you will feel all warm and fuzzy inside like me smile

    3. Woman Of Courage profile image60
      Woman Of Courageposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Wonderful thread dj. big_smile

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It certainly is. It proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the bible is stolen content. I am surprised you noticed.

        The Angels are cheering yet another battle started by a religionist who tells untruths? What an odd imagination you have. Shows why your religion causes so many wars though.

      2. aka-dj profile image79
        aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks!
        smile

  4. recommend1 profile image71
    recommend1posted 6 years ago

    Dang !!  and I was hoping to get a glimpse of some hysterical hottites here !

  5. superwags profile image81
    superwagsposted 6 years ago

    If anyone's reading this from the Uk and interested; then get on iplayer and watch "The Bible's Buried Secrets" which discusses the Bible's interpretation of real events.

    Some things in the bible are based loosely on what the authors observed around them, but the majority is myth. It's not really the authors' faults; they had to work to an agenda and had some pretty sketchy facts to go on with a lot of what they wrote - often where the things they noted took place hundreds of years before...

    1. Disappearinghead profile image88
      Disappearingheadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I watched with great interest and believe what's-her-face raised some very good points on the probable spinning up of King David in episode 1 and the early polytheism of the Semitic people in episode 2. However the Garden of Eden argument was not well presented and not particularly convincing. Her whole argument was based upon similarities between Eden and some excavated remains of similar gardens, but she ignored all of the Hebrew text which did not agree with her. Sure it's hard to compress an alternative theory into an hour's programme, but it didn't sound like she was being objective.

      1. superwags profile image81
        superwagsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        No, I agree that the last one did seem a little rushed and forced upon to audience. I don't disagree with her necessarily; I just felt that it wasn't presented particularly well.

        You're right, that it is difficult to get through it in an hour and you are left with little way of reviewing the evidence for yourself (unless you have a degree in ancient hebrew and an annotated hebrew bible with you!) which makes me feel a little uncomfortable at times.

        I think with regards to her style; she's essentially presenting as a polemic, or at least that's how I chose to view it.

  6. profile image67
    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago

    Is Bible a book of history?

    I don't think so.

    1. aka-dj profile image79
      aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Of course you think so.

      The Koran is your history book!

      1. profile image67
        paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Is Bible a book of history?

        I don't think so

        I don't think that Bible claims to be a book of history? If it does not claim to be a book of history; why should you claim it to be one?

        1. aka-dj profile image79
          aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Because It contains historic facts.

          1. fadedsnow profile image61
            fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            So does Harry Potter, what's your point?

          2. profile image67
            paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            That does not make it a text book of history. Does it?

            1. aka-dj profile image79
              aka-djposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I didn't call it a history book, YOU did!

    2. superwags profile image81
      superwagsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      For your standpoint, it's probably worth bearing in mind that an awful lot of the koran is duplicated from the Torah/ Old testament...

      1. vector7 profile image60
        vector7posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yes and yet the quran is still not scientifically accurate at all..

        How'd they screw that up? Because it's not God inspired.

        smile

  7. aka-dj profile image79
    aka-djposted 6 years ago

    So. mr faded snow
    did you read the list?
    I have to go to bed, so, I can't continue the debate.
    I see, after 25 minutes you have not responded. Surely that was long enough to read the above post.
    Catch ya another day. smile

    1. fadedsnow profile image61
      fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Like I said, the Earth is still here. I can continue to post contradictions in the bible as you did but I would eventually obtain carpal tunnel syndrome from typing.

    2. fadedsnow profile image61
      fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The only thing abolished at the cross was the ceremonial law, contained in ordinances. They were the sacrificial laws. After Christ's death, it was no longer necessary to sacrifice lambs at the Temple. But, after the death of Christ, Christians were still obligated to keep the moral law!

      1. DoubleScorpion profile image87
        DoubleScorpionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Here is something you might find interesting Fadedsnow. Read about John the Baptist. His message for forgiveness of sin was to be baptised and Jesus agreed with it. How did we go from animal sacrifice to water baptism back to an ultimate sacrifice that covered everything? And yet one is still baptised by fire? I wonder how the christians will explain this one?

        1. fadedsnow profile image61
          fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Religion in its entirety is dumbfounded!

      2. profile image67
        paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Jesus was a Jew and was a follower of Moses and the Torah; he never aboulished or cancel it; it is Paul and the Church who cancelled it and misled the people; unauthorized, of course.

        1. fadedsnow profile image61
          fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          The bible is crystal clear, “cough”, that Jesus died to remove the sacrificial laws.

          1. profile image67
            paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Please quote from Jesus' words.

            1. fadedsnow profile image61
              fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              How deep down the water hole are we going? There isn’t any evidence of Jesus existence much less his writings.

            2. fadedsnow profile image61
              fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Christ was a sin offering: Hebrews 10: 8-10, 12, 18. When Jesus died on the cross, it signified the end of the first covenant, the covenant consisting of the sacrificing of animals for atonement.

              1. profile image67
                paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                fadedsnow wrote:
                "There isn’t any evidence of Jesus existence much less his writings."

                1. fadedsnow profile image61
                  fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  that is correct! What's your point?

              2. profile image67
                paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Jesus did not die on the cross; human sacrifice was already abolished in the times of Abraham; so there was no core change with the advent of Jesus; Jesus followed religion of Moses .

                1. fadedsnow profile image61
                  fadedsnowposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Well actual there isn't any verification that he existed, much less died. Now if we are reading the fables in the bible, then yes the character Jesus died on the cross and with his death animal sacrifices were deleted.

                  1. profile image67
                    paarsurreyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Jesus's existence does not depend on Bible or its fables.

 
working