Re: Open Debate Challenge

On 2005-08-18, Ray Martinez <pyramidial@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From:
>
> Ray Martinez
>
> To:
>
> Any Atheist, Darwinist, or secularist.
>
> I challenge any of the above to a one-on-one debate in any of these
> topics:
>
> 1) Archaeology
>
> 2) Ancient history/Biblical history
>
> 3) The Exodus
>
> 4) Chronology
>
> 5) Celts = Lost Tribes
>
> 6) Theology
>
> 7) Prophecy
>
> When it comes down to it I see none of you loud talkers can walk the
> talk.
>
> This Evangelical is in your face calling you out on your home court.
>
> Ray Martinez

I'm none of the invitees, but I'll take 2).

Opening material for context:

Ancient history is an open ended subject and therefore not definable in
terms of references.

Biblical history has a built-in reference: The Bible.

For history, what is sought is primary material. That is different from
all other types of material: commentary, analysis, interpretation, etc.
I choose to argue from primary material only, thereby avoiding any
necessary limitations.

It is now thought, so I understand, that the earliest complete Biblical
text extant is the LXX. This is the so-called Septuagint, a translation
of written material in Hebrew and Aramaic into Greek. The origin of
this document was the contract between various Hebrew scholars and
Ptolemy Philadelphius in or around 280BCE. The initial contract was for
a translation of the Torah (also known as the Pentateuch, the books of
Moses, and the first five books of the Old Testament of the Holy Bible).
Other translations were added over the following decades and centuries
until there existed in the 1st century CE a collection of documents that
were accepted as authentic by the earliest Christians. As such, the
direct source of the Biblical Old Testament is the LXX.

In general, the Hebrew Testament, or Bible, called the Tenahk (sp?) is
the Hebrew equivalent of the Old Testament. Although there is a
different book count and some rearrangement of some texts, there is a
virtual line by line agreement on the Torah itself. The Hebrew
Massorah, which is the Tenahk and the entire corpus of commentary and
interpretation, has been generally agreed to be definitive, especially
with regard the Torah.

As the initial contract stipulated the Torah, I will undertake to
examine that document, as provided in the KJV, for purposes of easy
accessibility to all readers.

If this is satisfactory, please so indicate.

Longfellow

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Bible question.
    ... the usual consensus is not that the Torah was written ... But we know pretty specifically the way the written Hebrew ... That the Bible is real history? ... Were the Israelites slaves in Egypt? ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Okay, what the HECK is going on in France?
    ... The first Five Books, called the "Torah" in Hebrew, are actually preserved extremely meticulously by a "Sopher", or Scribe... ... Archeological evidence may support the history contained in the Torah, and the more support for any historical item, the more faith I have that the others are fairly reported. ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: Theyre finding Brown made it all up.
    ... "historical" as the ones that got accepted into the New Testament. ... I told you later that they were deleted from history by "the church" ... The censors didn't note down which items they had censored. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: Theyre finding Brown made it all up.
    ... "historical" as the ones that got accepted into the New Testament. ... I told you later that they were deleted from history by "the church" ... but there is no evidence of it which proves that the ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: OT: Bible question.
    ... The fact that the story of Babel speaks of Babylon is not exactly a ... Hebrew Bible "is made ... The Torah was penned ... Hebrew and Jewish traditions as being wholly oral before that point. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
Loading