i) The narrative viewpoint is explicitly local rather than global. The sun appeared at Gibeon and the moon in the valley of Aijalon. So the description represents the perspective of an earth-bound observer.
ii) In addition, the author of Joshua is probably quoting verbatim from the book of Jashar. Scholars disagree on where the quotation begins and ends. For example, Woudstra, in a standard commentary on Joshua (p174), thinks that the quotation extends from v12 to v15.
The book of Jashar is generally thought to be a poetic and panegyric national epic.
The fact that the author of Joshua has lifted a direct quote this hortatory encomium in tribute to a military hero does not commit him to a cosmographical theory—any more than singing the Battle Hymn of the Republic commits the audience to a particular reconstruction of the Civil War, or singing Stan Roger’s Northwest Passage commits one to a particular map of the Yukon. This is martial poesy, like the Iliad or the Song of Roland.
I don't take anyone over at Debunking Atheism seriously any more. Apparently, Loftus has now degenerated to the point where he is deleting several comments and has started to moderate them too (which is his right as blog owner, of course, but which looks really bad if you're a champion of "free thought").
ReplyDeleteSteve,
ReplyDeleteLet me second what calvindude stated above. I used to be able to post comments freely (I've only posted comments on his blog maybe 3 times under one topic about Job), until last night when I tried to respond to something he said in response to me. He may very well end up posting my comments, but it is odd that I now have to go through his "filter". I would understand this if profanity or something like that was being used, but obviously that is not the case. I hope he posts the comments, perhaps there is some other reason he is doing this. I hope I'm wrong, but I think he is tired of having his arguments dismantled on a daily basis. He much rather prefers having a hearty band of apostates slap each other on the back as they hate God together and perish in the end. The Christian message is a thorn in his flesh and a prod to his conscience....
--Jon Unyan
Does this guy know that anyone can go to the heavens-above satellite tracking website, click on the data link for the sun or the moon, and those poor "dullards" have listed "sunrise" and "sunset" to describe what time the sun comes up or below the horizon? The "morons" at NASA and NOAA also speak about sunrises and sunsets. Maybe this guy ought to email them his article to inform them the earth really revolves around the sun? They are obviously misinformed or worse, lying to us.
ReplyDeleteFred
The sun is not a stationary object. It revolves around the center of the galaxy. Does this prove that Paladin doesn't know anything about astronomy, or does it prove that he uses the conventions of his culture to express certain facts?
ReplyDeleteThank goodness none of us were under the impression that God possessed the writers of Scripture and overrode their personalities.
calvindude, I am hoping you meant Debunking Christianity...:)
ReplyDeleteWith every interaction I keep asking myself, "What is DC's motivation?". I don't get it, especially since all their wonderful refutations are... refuted.
Possible explanations:
1. Seeing as though most DCs were nominal christians at one time, they are so angry at being 'duped' that they intend to dedicate the rest of their lives to disproving something they once believed was true. So any way you look at it they have made a decision to let Christianity dominate their lives. One would think that with their new found atheism that is the last thing they would want to dedicate themselves to. Life is too short and all that...
2. As has been previously noted they are not really atheists but actually anti-theists. So if God does exist that want to prove him to be a liar, thief, etc. Anything but a God worthy of our complete adoration, praise and worship.
3. They sincerely care for those of us who have remained faithful and are desparate, for our own good of course, to show us the error of our ways.
Who knows. I think understand Gods4Suckers more (and that's a scary thought) since (1) their intention is to collectively ridicule and mock anyone who believes in God for their own personal satisfaction and (2) they are fearful of any kind of theocratic rule and have appointed themselves watchdogs and guardians.
warrenl said:
ReplyDelete---
calvindude, I am hoping you meant Debunking Christianity...:)
---
Nope, I meant Debunking Atheism. It's my little way to promote Truth in Advertising, since all they have managed to do is make atheism more ignorant.
calvindude
ReplyDeleteExcellent point!!
To follow up on what Aaron Adams said:
ReplyDeleteNot only is our sun circling the center of our galaxy, our galaxy is also moving relative to other galaxies. Since there is no TRUE fixed point in the cosmos (as far as we know), the choice of your reference point is really arbitrary. Whichever one is more convenient.
The advantage of a heliocentric coordinate system to a geocentric one is that the calculations for planetary motion are much, much simplier! And you STILL have to transform your results to the geocentric system is order to tell you where to actually look for the planet, satelite, etc.
John said:
ReplyDelete---
I invite people on who have passion and who wish to test and defend their arguments in a public forum.
---
Unless they disagree with you. Then, suddenly, they find themselves getting comments like:
"You are banned. Do not post there anymore about anything. And if you are a christian then you should respect my wishes." http://calvindude.com/dude/blog/2006/05/daniel-morgan-takes-a-stab-at-it/
Or:
"Get off your high horse and find someplace else to troll. Either try to understand what I'm saying, or if you cannot, do not comment. You're looking foolish, and you might be the only one who doesn't see it. Now go away." (Bold in the original.) http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/06/job-and-existence-of-good-god.html
John Loftus,
ReplyDeleteI apologize I didn't see your response before.
I still find it interesting that your energy (at least your intellectual energy) appears to be devoted to Christianity. So either way you look at it, the non-existent God dominates your life. Your whole worldview and life is actually defined by a negative response to Christianity.
Mr. Loftus,
ReplyDeleteIf you're really so concerned about letting your up and coming athiestic apologists get in the ring, why won't you allow Christians to get in the ring with them? Doesn't sound like a fair fight to me. Censorship from a "free thinker"? Ironic, isn't it?
--Jon Unyan
Hi Steve,
ReplyDeleteExcellent response. I love the depth of your knowledge on the OT and hope one day to approximate it.
Jon mentioned the "Loftus filter" -- I've recently had posts deleted without comment as well as he and Steve. Essentially it is unsafe to post there anymore because you don't know what Loftus is going to have a hissy fit over and instantly trash. And he has the gall to keep pointing back at his policies, as if this justifies ideological censorship. Perhaps one of the DC members will take it upon himself to start a real blog where comment-based discussion is actually allowed.
Anyway I say all this not to accuse Loftus, but by way of apology. A while back I came after you for posting in what seemed like some very harsh words about Loftus. Now that I have experienced this first hand I can see I should have respected your longer history with him, and recognized that your comments were probably accurate. I apologize for questioning you on this.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMr. Loftus,
ReplyDeleteHere's one of your "rules" that you so carefully live by over at DC, "We think that educated people can disagree agreeably. Only people not fully exposed to alternative ways of thinking will claim their opponents are stupid merely because they disagree."
Here's a typical response from John Loftus when you respond to what someone has posted here or at his blog. "You just don't see it, you're an idiot, you're stupid, you have blinders on, etc. etc." Odd, isn't it?
What rule would I be violating in any of my responses? Please advise, and I would like an intelligent answer beyond "you have blinders on..." Secondly, you don't even know me nor my level of education. If you're so well educated refute the argumentation with....argumentation. Thirdly, we're not sending letters to the editor, we're answering your assertions and challenging your ideas. Deleting previously posted comments, or not allowing a response to something you said, is censoring the conversation, is it not? Maybe I'm just too stupid, could you define censorship for me? Cuz I thought it was the suppression of an adverse opinion or judgement. Well, I should go now, I've been drooling on myself for the last 20 minutes and my faithful wife is here to change my bib. I look forward to your well educated response.....
--Jon Unyan
Steve,
ReplyDeleteThis topic is of interest to many people. You can read my on views on my post at http://www.claudemariottini.com/blog/2006/06/long-day-of-joshua-in-search-of.html
Claude Mariottini