Re: For Matt Giwer Concerning Evidence
- From: KLM <dodahday@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:39:04 -0600
TomP wrote:
On 11/6/2007, Matt Giwer wrote: "I have no beliefs. I have only evidence.
Why are you dumb enough to have only
beliefs?"
On 11/9/2007, in the thread "Hebrew is Greek Online," I asked Matt Giwer
this question: "There are extant manuscripts of both the Hebrew and Greek
Old Testaments that predate Flavius Josephus, aren't there?"
Yet, on 11/11/2007, this same Matt Giwer replied, writing: "No."
On 11/12/2007 I replied: "You are mistaken because yes, actually, there
are. The so-called "Great Isaiah Scroll" 1QIsa[superscript]a has been dated
to 125 BCE, or 201-93 BCE when dated using Accelerator Mass Spectrometry at
Zurich and dates of 202-114 BCE or 341-325 BCE using Accelerator Mass
Spectrometry at the University of Arizona. Those date ranges are based upon
a 1-sigma calculation.
cite this work. "Those dates"? What dates? Mass spectrometry
can only give a range based on several decay estimates of ... ... you moron.
Based on 1_s calculation? Calculation(s)? Would this replace a 2-p estimate?
What are you talking about?
In fact you dont know what you are talking about. You are parroting what read
somewhere and havent the faintest knowledge
of physics. . Your style is transparent. The sword in your shorts is
you thought you had has melted like the normal decay of lunacy.
Jesus H Christ! Give us including Christians and Jews a break!
Happy Moron Day -
There are many other manuscripts. Why don't you
know this information? These datings are nothing new and have been in the
public
domain since at least 1991. Why don't you read at least one of the many
articles and books that discuss the dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls? The
journal "Radiocarbon," Vol. 37, No. 1, 1995, pages 11-19 contains an article
titled "Radiocarbon Dating of Scrolls and Linen Fragments from the Judean
Desert." I can provide several other articles from peer reviewed journals
if you are interested in learning something about how manuscripts are dated
and specifically the dating of the material published in the DJD
[Discoveries in the Judean Desert] series."
"Or do you maintain that Flavius Josephus was alive in 125 BCE?"
To the best of my knowledge, Matt Giwer has posted nothing to refute the
evidence that at least one rather large scroll written in Hebrew and is
securely dated to not later than 93 BCE. Not only has the "Great Isaiah
Scroll" been archaeologically and paleographically dated to 125 BCE, but
this manuscript was also radio carbon dated using Accelerator Mass
Spectrometry in 1991 at the Institut fur Mittelenergiephysik, Zurich, and
again at the University of Arizona in 1994-95. This Zurich study was first
published in an article titled "Radiocarbon Dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls"
by Bonani, et al, in "Atiqot," Vol. 20, pages 27-32, 1991. This same study
was also announced in the article "Radiocarbon Dating of Fourteen Dead Sea
Scrolls" by the same authors in the journal "Radiocarbon" Vol. 34, No. 3,
pages 843-849, 1992. The University of Arizona Study was published in Vol.
37 of "Radiocarbon" I described more fully above in my response to Matt
Giwer on 11/12/2007 above.
Obviously, the paleographical, archaeological, historical, and radiocarbon
dating evidence is overwhelming that the "Great Isaiah Scroll" written in
Hebrew predates the birth of Josephus by at least 130 years. And if Matt
Giwer, and anyone else who cares to, will read the studies I cite above,
they will discover that at least 16 manuscripts written in Hebrew that have
been paleographically, archaeologically, and radiocarbon dated in the
studies I cite, also predate Flavius Josephus, some by centuries. I must
conclude that since all of the available historical, archaeological,
paleographic, and radiocarbon dating evidence flatly contradicts Matt
Giwer's theory that no Hebrew manuscripts are known to predate Flavius
Josephus, Matt Giver's theory must be mistaken. In fact, Matt Giwer's
theory appears totally baseless.
It seems odd to me that a poster who declares "I have no beliefs. I have
only evidence. Why are you dumb enough to have only
beliefs?" can so totally ignore the evidence that obliterates his theory.
Does this mean that Matt Giwer's explicitly stated theory that there are no
extant manuscripts of both the Hebrew and Greek Old Testaments that predate
Flavius Josephus is a belief?
It must be merely a belief on the part of Matt Giwer, because all of the
available evidence flatly contradicts Matt Giwer's theory.
What do you have to say in defense of your theory, Matt Giwer?
.
- References:
- For Matt Giwer Concerning Evidence
- From: TomP
- For Matt Giwer Concerning Evidence
- Prev by Date: For Matt Giwer Concerning Evidence
- Next by Date: German Stone Age Coalstone Hunter Campfires
- Previous by thread: For Matt Giwer Concerning Evidence
- Next by thread: German Stone Age Coalstone Hunter Campfires
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
