🕯️ Traditions What is atheism - a common misconception

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Paulit ulit ka. Sabi ng historical fiction ibig sabihin nyan. 1% real, 99% fiction.

lol. edi sana sinabi dun ALL SCHOLARS eh di naman. sabi mainstream scholars lang. lol.

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Di mo kasi magets and MYTH... maipilet mo....

Wait claims?? Wat claims exactly???

ung beliefs nyo na walang god. eh di naman kayo scientist. lol. AKA. god claim

 

[jayendecastro]

game ako dyan ahaha sige mag bigay ka eto nanaman tayo. wahaha.. sige lagay mo ung mga @sses at stoning mo ha at ung mga slavery... here we go again sana kung ganito ulit bibigay ko na lang ung link ulit sa dating ko discussion with the op wait lang.

Woooah nagkausap na tayo bfore??? Hahaha.. oh yan alam mo na pala eh... So those things are not atrocities para sayo???

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Paulit ulit ka. Sabi ng historical fiction ibig sabihin nyan. 1% real, 99% fiction.

A majority of scholars nevertheless still believes that the Exodus has some historical basis,You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. with Kenton Sparks referring to it as "mythologized history.

some historical basis ang sabi wag ka mag cherry pick

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Woooah nagkausap na tayo bfore??? Hahaha.. oh yan alam mo na pala eh... So those things are not atrocities para sayo???

baka gusto mo mag backread para patawa ka na explain ko na yan at lahat ayoko mag sayang sa mga tao sasali lang bigla sa forum discussion na walang naman alam.

 

[jayendecastro]

ung beliefs nyo na walang god. eh di naman kayo scientist. lol. AKA. god claim

Wrong.
Never said na i believe walang god/s
Never said im a scientist.

Nakasticky nman ung definition ng pinaguusapan dito... Which clearly nga u dont know kaya inaassciate mo ang "sinners" within ur circle as "atheist" kasi "bad" sila...

 

[fabbriche]

lol. edi sana sinabi dun ALL SCHOLARS eh di naman. sabi mainstream scholars lang. lol.

Aral ka muna ng reading comprehension bago ka makipagdebate dahil hindi ako magtuturo sau nun.

Hindi totoo ang exodus. Hindi inalipin ang mga Hebreo sa Ehipto. Hindi nahati ang Red Sea. Hindi nabuhay si Moises. Walang totoong ngyari sa bibliya.

 

[fabbriche]

A majority of scholars nevertheless still believes that the Exodus has some historical basis,You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. with Kenton Sparks referring to it as "mythologized history.

some historical basis ang sabi wag ka mag cherry pick

Ang sabi fiction ang exodus. Matuto kang umunawa.

The Book of Genesis and Book of Exodusdescribe a period of Hebrew servitude in ancient Egypt, during decades of sojourn in Egypt, the escape of well over a million Israelites from the Delta, and the three-month journey through the wilderness to Sinai.[7]This episode is not corroborated by any historical evidence and is regarded by scholars to be fictitious.

 

[jayendecastro]

baka gusto mo mag backread para patawa ka na explain ko na yan at lahat ayoko mag sayang sa mga tao sasali lang bigla sa forum discussion na walang naman alam.

Eh sa di ko nga maalala kung san kita nakausap before eh...whut?? Special ka for me to remember u....

Naalala ko lang ung post mo neto na nabasa mo ang bible and u found na fault in it....

If u say nadiscuss na naten yan...which i dont remember wen at san then clearly u didnt convince about the "goodness" of ur book

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Aral ka muna ng reading comprehension bago ka makipagdebate dahil hindi ako magtuturo sau nun.

Hindi totoo ang exodus. Hindi inalipin ang mga Hebreo sa Ehipto. Hindi nahati ang Red Sea. Hindi nabuhay si Moises. Walang totoong ngyari sa bibliya.

bat ako mag aaral ikaw kaya mag aral ung meron kapang audacity na pag sabihan ako ng ganyan eh hatalang gusto mo lang pilit gusto mo.

kapal mo eh ikaw lang nag pipilit na 1% 99% fiction ano yan alcoh0l? kung di ka may sira sa tuktok.

di naman nakalagay na all na naniniwala na myth ang exodus tapos pag pipilitan mo kung di bulok ung utak mo. sinabi na nga na

A majority of scholars nevertheless still believes that the Exodus has some historical basis,You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. with Kenton Sparks referring to it as "mythologized history.

pag sabihin hati ung paniniwala tapos pag pipilitan mo na fiction kung di talaga bulok utak mo

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Eh sa di ko nga maalala kung san kita nakausap before eh...whut?? Special ka for me to remember u....

Naalala ko lang ung post mo neto na nabasa mo ang bible and u found na fault in it....

If u say nadiscuss na naten yan...which i dont remember wen at san then clearly u didnt convince about the "goodness" of ur book

special di kita kausap ung op kausap ko same thread halata ka na si join lang kase uso maging athiest ngayon eh dahil in at cool. edgelord ako lol.

 

[fabbriche]

bat ako mag aaral ikaw kaya mag aral ung meron kapang audacity na pag sabihan ako ng ganyan eh hatalang gusto mo lang pilit gusto mo.

kapal mo eh ikaw lang nag pipilit na 1% 99% fiction ano yan alcoh0l? kung di ka may sira sa tuktok.

di naman nakalagay na all na naniniwala na myth ang exodus tapos pag pipilitan mo kung di bulok ung utak mo. sinabi na nga na

A majority of scholars nevertheless still believes that the Exodus has some historical basis,You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. with Kenton Sparks referring to it as "mythologized history.

pag sabihin hati ung paniniwala tapos pag pipilitan mo na fiction kung di talaga bulok utak mo

E hindi nga inalipin sa Ehipto ang mga Hebreo pano magiging totoo ang Exodus? Paano sila palalayain ng diyos sa Ehipto e hindi naman sila nagpunta dun. T@nga t@ngahan o talagang hindi nakakaunawa?

Kung totoo ang exodus hindi mga Hebreo ang nagexodus galing Ehipto. Inari lang nila ang istorya at nilagyan ng mga kababalaghan. Kaya nga mythologized history. History na ginawang myth. Sa madaling salita, hindi totoo.

 

[fabbriche]

Hindi lang exodus ang fiction pati GENESIS.

The Book of Genesis and Book of Exodusdescribe a period of Hebrew servitude in ancient Egypt, during decades of sojourn in Egypt, the escape of well over a million Israelites from the Delta, and the three-month journey through the wilderness to Sinai.[7]This episode is not corroborated by any historical evidence and is regarded by scholars to be fictitious.

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

E hindi nga inalipin sa Ehipto ang mga Hebreo pano magiging totoo ang Exodus? Paano sila palalayain ng diyos sa Ehipto e hindi naman sila nagpunta dun. T@nga t@ngahan o talagang hindi nakakaunawa?

Kung totoo ang exodus hindi mga Hebreo ang nagexodus galing Ehipto. Inari lang nila ang istorya at nilagyan ng mga kababalaghan. Kaya nga mythologized history. History na ginawang myth. Sa madaling salita, hindi totoo.

You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now., studied religion at Harvard, Chicago, & IU, I offend people ecumenically
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. · Author has 826 answers and 2.8m answer views

Originally Answered: You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
There is no academic consensus about the relationship between the Hebrews and the Pharaonic Egyptians. The best evidence we have, though, is pretty strong that the master/slave relationship depicted in Exodus is inaccurate.

This is to say that the "Maximalist" interpretation of Exodus is very unlikely; the authors of the Torah were at least 500 years removed from the events they were describing and some elements seem patently invented. However, this is not sufficient to automatically assume a "Minimalist" interpretation that posits all the described events as completely fictitious.

Before we even consider the testimony of the Torah, the plain facts of archaeology and geography support the idea that the two cultures had mutual influence, but were not likely to have been in a constant state of war toward another. Most likely, what actually happened was that there was some kind of arrangement or polity between the two cultures during the Bronze Age. At that point, Egyptian society was relatively stationary while the Hebrews were one of many mobile, quasi-nomadic tribes. Before we even consider the testimony of the Torah, the plain facts of archaeology and geography support the idea that the two cultures had mutual influence, but were not likely to have been in a constant state of war toward another.

So, it's reasonable to assume that Exodus describes a sudden interruption in relations between Egyptian and Hebrew society. That is, there was a long period of exchange or cooperation between them, then things went sour and a new status quo arose out of the ashes. This process was considered vital to Jewish identity during the period when oral traditions were being collected into scripture (mostly coincident with the Babylonian Captivity half a millennium later) so historical details were smudged around and poetic licenses were taken.

To get into some specifics of your question, there's practically zero chance that the Hebrews were slaves who built the pyramids. There is something to be said about the role that religious views may have played, but it's not likely that the Hebrews were just persecuted for having different mythologies than the Egyptians. In general, the Egyptians were strongly polytheistic while the Hebrews were polytheists who ρáíd special attention to a single national god, Yahweh. Over the centuries, as Hebrew identity formed a proto-nationality, this evolved into monotheism. This process seems to have had a synergistic relationship with Egyptian religion. In particular, the Pharaoh Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV) is often credited with the "invention" of monotheism. This is really a glossing over of a more complicated process, but basically Akhenaten created a religion where the Sun (Aten) was the supreme god and the only one worth worshiping. There is very strong evidence that there was a relationship between Atenism and early Judaism, but the nature of this relationship is not understood very well at all. Furthermore, Atenism was rebuked by Akhenaten's successors and it lasted as a state religion for only about two decades. It's important to note that this happened very early in the history of the Hebrew people, in the 14th Century BCE (a century before the events of Exodus are supposed to have happened).

Given that the Egyptians had a reliable, fixed social structure that maintained records, one would hope to find validation in their accounts for Hebrew existence. The problem here is that, while it's possible we'll find something here or there, it's not particularly likely. This is because the Egyptians were major league players during the time in question while the Hebrews were one of many small, inconsequential players. The Egyptians had no way of knowing that the Hebrews, among all the others neighbors of theirs, would go on to create a religion that would be a definitive feature of Western Civilization millennia later. So, to posit that a lack of Egyptian records of the Hebrews is to commit the historian's fallacy.

For example, think of it like the meeting between a very young Bill Clinton and President Kennedy. Bill Clinton was just an ambitious student at the time, so the event was highly remarkable and memorable for him. Kennedy, at that point in his life, was meeting hundreds, maybe thousands, of kids just like Bill Clinton. Once Clinton became president, a photo of the two of them shaking hands circulated.

Now, imagine that we didn't have this photo and that Kennedy hadn't been assassinated. During his campaign, Clinton says a special moment in his life was when he met Kennedy. Kennedy has no recollection of that event whatsoever. Some spin doctors would hype that up to mean that Clinton was lying. People with fallible memories (read: everyone) would be able to reason, well, why SHOULD Kennedy remember an inconsequential event like that?

So, with Hebrew-Egyptian Relations, we're stuck with many theories that range from plausible to insane, from minimalist to maximalist with regard to Exodus. And we're probably going to be stuck here forever, but that's not stopping anyone from throwing out new interpretations of the evidence. That's what makes it fun.



ayan oh so basically nag meet ang mga Hebrew at mga Egyptian when ung time reign of the Egyptians is on it's last days.

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Hindi lang exodus ang fiction pati GENESIS.

The Book of Genesis and Book of Exodusdescribe a period of Hebrew servitude in ancient Egypt, during decades of sojourn in Egypt, the escape of well over a million Israelites from the Delta, and the three-month journey through the wilderness to Sinai.[7]This episode is not corroborated by any historical evidence and is regarded by scholars to be fictitious.

ikaw lang nag claim at mga katulad mong antichrist.

 

[jayendecastro]

special di kita kausap ung op kausap ko same thread halata ka na si join lang kase uso maging athiest ngayon eh dahil in at cool. edgelord ako lol.

Pala nman eh di ako ang kausap mo eh... Im just addressing wat u said na atheist and corrupt sa pera at nangmomolestya ng mga bata.. dunno san mo napulot yan...

U said na walang mali or masama sa bible..i disagree...kung nadiscuss mo na yan sa iba (dont think na its in this thread, if it is then my bad...tinatamad ba ko backread eh..hahaha).u mentioned those na nga .and by my standards those are pretty bad.. kung sau un ang cool at in then i suggest u tilt ur morals in another direction.

Cool at in?? Uso?? Lage nasasabi yan dunno kung kelan at san nauso at lage nyo sinasbi yan...hahahaa

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Pala nman eh di ako ang kausap mo eh... Im just addressing wat u said na atheist and corrupt sa pera at nangmomolestya ng mga bata.. dunno san mo napulot yan...

U said na walang mali or masama sa bible..i disagree...kung nadiscuss mo na yan sa iba (dont think na its in this thread, if it is then my bad...tinatamad ba ko backread eh..hahaha).u mentioned those na nga .and by my standards those are pretty bad.. kung sau un ang cool at in then i suggest u tilt ur morals in another direction.

Cool at in?? Uso?? Lage nasasabi yan dunno kung kelan at san nauso at lage nyo sinasbi yan...hahahaa

eh bat sila maniniwala sa diyos at kay jesus kung ang sabi eh patayin ang mga rapist at nalulunya at ang mga corrupt rin? isipin mo may diyos ba ung ganung tao? eh di nga natatakot sa nakasulat sa bible eh tapos sila mismo ung nag tuturo di nila sinusunod? pag sabihin di sila naniniwala.

sana basahin mo ung amendment na ginawa ni hesuscristo na ang sinless lang ang pwede pumatay at mang bato. tsaka etc.

daming mga batang sinasabing athiest daw sila tapos nag mamalaki pa naka salamin pa sa mata at etc pa bibo tapos pag tinanong mo kung bakit kasi corrupt daw ang mga pari at rapist puro bakla pero pag tinanong mo kung nabasa na nila at naintindihan ung bible nganga lang at sasabin na fairy tale lang na parang manga na gawa sa japan lol.

cool daw kase maging edgy ngayon.

 

[jayendecastro]

eh bat sila maniniwala sa sa diyos at kay jesus kung ang sabi eh patayin ang mga rapist at nalulunya at ang mga corrupt rin? isipin mo may diyos ba ung ganung tao? eh di nga natatakot sa nakasulat sa bible eh tapos sila mismo ung nag tuturo di nila sinusunod? pag sabihin di sila naniniwala.

Hence u label them as atheist??

Here's the thing.
Can a theist be a good person? YES.
Can an atheist be a good person? YES.

Can a theist be a bad person? YES.
Can an atheist be a bad person? YES.

Ginagawa mo kasi matic na labeling sa atheist pag may ginawang masama...which is wrong.

Di lang sa belief or non-belief sa isang god ang nagdidikta ng character ng isang tao at kung ano ang mga kaya at di nea kayang gawin.

 

[Lets-All-Love-Lain]

Hence u label them as atheist??

Here's the thing.
Can a theist be a good person? YES.
Can an atheist be a good person? YES.

Can a theist be a bad person? YES.
Can an atheist be a bad person? YES.

Ginagawa mo kasi matic na labeling sa atheist pag may ginawang masama...which is wrong.

Di lang sa belief or non-belief sa isang god ang nagdidikta ng character ng isang tao at kung ano ang mga kaya at di nea kayang gawin.

athiest -no
agnotic -yes/no
cult like churches -no
bible reader and follower -yes
the sheeple -yes/no
Buddhist monk (not fake) -yes
Buddhist halfass - no/yes

ang akin lang as long as their is conflict of interest at merong nag dedenounce ng freedom of religion di sila nalalayo sa mga culto tapos pareho lang sila.

pwede ka naman maging agnostic bat mo pang gustong maging athiest? malamang gusto mo lang ng conflict.

katulad nung kobe cannibal

Why is Issei Sagawa not in jail?
He was captured by police and charged with attempted rape. He did not confess his true intentions to authorities. In 1977, at the age of 27, Sagawa moved to France to pursue a Ph.D. in literature at the Sorbonne in Paris.

athiest na cannibal free at di na kulong great.

 

[Delta India Charlie Kilo]

madami rin mga sekta ng atheism, yung cancer lang sa kanila ay yung Church of Richard Dawkins.