Historical Evidence for the Book of Ruth

[Guest ninhao]

I don't have a lot of knowledge of how historical events are considered true by historians. There seems to be no clear way of testing a lot of the claims. When it comes to historical claims, I generally try to be skeptical of them. 

 

As I've said before, I could make up a lot of stories that are consistent with the genealogy and cultural information I've been presented. A lot of them may conflict. That's why I can't use the genealogy and cultural information I've been given here as the end-all-be-all to determine if the stories are true. 

 

 

If you have conflicting stories it then relies on establishing credibility through correlating data. In the case of the Book of Ruth there isn't any conflict with other stories and it's consistent with known data.

 

Ancient history doesn't always have a lot of corroborating preserved writings and so I assume you don't believe much of it. 

[Swoosh]

 

I don't have a lot of knowledge of how historical events are considered true by historians. There seems to be no clear way of testing a lot of the claims. When it comes to historical claims, I generally try to be skeptical of them. 

 

As I've said before, I could make up a lot of stories that are consistent with the genealogy and cultural information I've been presented. A lot of them may conflict. That's why I can't use the genealogy and cultural information I've been given here as the end-all-be-all to determine if the stories are true. 

 

 

If you have conflicting stories it then relies on establishing credibility through correlating data. In the case of the Book of Ruth there isn't any conflict with other stories and it's consistent with known data.

 

Ancient history doesn't always have a lot of corroborating preserved writings and so I assume you don't believe much of it. 

 

yea, I take a very skeptical approach to historical claims as far as whether these events actually happened. I do think it is important to hear these stories of history though, as they can teach us a lesson about how to practically live our lives, or give us some perspective.

 

For example, even if the Holocaust never happened, there's still value in stories about human suffering, as long as it is applied to our lives to better society. If it can't better society or our individual lives, I see no practical use for it. Same as Bible stories. Whether they are true or not, they may help offer insight into our lives. I just have to keep in mind that there is no very definitive test that I know of that confirms that the stories actually happened. Kinda like fables. In fact, the book of Judges is one of my favorite books.

[Fez]

 

 

I don't have a lot of knowledge of how historical events are considered true by historians. There seems to be no clear way of testing a lot of the claims. When it comes to historical claims, I generally try to be skeptical of them. 

 

As I've said before, I could make up a lot of stories that are consistent with the genealogy and cultural information I've been presented. A lot of them may conflict. That's why I can't use the genealogy and cultural information I've been given here as the end-all-be-all to determine if the stories are true. 

 

 

If you have conflicting stories it then relies on establishing credibility through correlating data. In the case of the Book of Ruth there isn't any conflict with other stories and it's consistent with known data.

 

Ancient history doesn't always have a lot of corroborating preserved writings and so I assume you don't believe much of it. 

 

yea, I take a very skeptical approach to historical claims as far as whether these events actually happened. I do think it is important to hear these stories of history though, as they can teach us a lesson about how to practically live our lives, or give us some perspective.

 

For example, even if the Holocaust never happened, there's still value in stories about human suffering, as long as it is applied to our lives to better society. If it can't better society or our individual lives, I see no practical use for it. Same as Bible stories. Whether they are true or not, they may help offer insight into our lives. I just have to keep in mind that there is no very definitive test that I know of that confirms that the stories actually happened. Kinda like fables. In fact, the book of Judges is one of my favorite books.

 

For example, even if the Holocaust never happened

 

You do understand that this is a Ministry site managed out of Israel and the owner lives in the Negev do you?

[Swoosh]

 

 

 

I don't have a lot of knowledge of how historical events are considered true by historians. There seems to be no clear way of testing a lot of the claims. When it comes to historical claims, I generally try to be skeptical of them. 

 

As I've said before, I could make up a lot of stories that are consistent with the genealogy and cultural information I've been presented. A lot of them may conflict. That's why I can't use the genealogy and cultural information I've been given here as the end-all-be-all to determine if the stories are true. 

 

 

If you have conflicting stories it then relies on establishing credibility through correlating data. In the case of the Book of Ruth there isn't any conflict with other stories and it's consistent with known data.

 

Ancient history doesn't always have a lot of corroborating preserved writings and so I assume you don't believe much of it. 

 

yea, I take a very skeptical approach to historical claims as far as whether these events actually happened. I do think it is important to hear these stories of history though, as they can teach us a lesson about how to practically live our lives, or give us some perspective.

 

For example, even if the Holocaust never happened, there's still value in stories about human suffering, as long as it is applied to our lives to better society. If it can't better society or our individual lives, I see no practical use for it. Same as Bible stories. Whether they are true or not, they may help offer insight into our lives. I just have to keep in mind that there is no very definitive test that I know of that confirms that the stories actually happened. Kinda like fables. In fact, the book of Judges is one of my favorite books.

 

For example, even if the Holocaust never happened

 

You do understand that this is a Ministry site managed out of Israel and the owner lives in the Negev do you?

 

No, I didn't know that. Do you know the context that I wrote that in?

 

No need to read a "curt and dismissive" tone in this request for information, but why did you bring the management information of this site up? 

Edited December 1, 2013 by Swoosh

[Guest ninhao]

 

yea, I take a very skeptical approach to historical claims as far as whether these events actually happened. I do think it is important to hear these stories of history though, as they can teach us a lesson about how to practically live our lives, or give us some perspective.

 

For example, even if the Holocaust never happened, there's still value in stories about human suffering, as long as it is applied to our lives to better society. If it can't better society or our individual lives, I see no practical use for it. Same as Bible stories. Whether they are true or not, they may help offer insight into our lives. I just have to keep in mind that there is no very definitive test that I know of that confirms that the stories actually happened. Kinda like fables. In fact, the book of Judges is one of my favorite books.

 

 

This is interesting. Is your only barometer of the importance of historical events ( which don't meet your criteria of proof ) whether they better society ?  I fail to see how the Holocaust lends to the betterment of society.  Actually this reminds me of something I discussed recently with another poster. Do you believe evil benefits society; and if so, do you believe God created evil ?

 

The book of Judges is an excellent account of Israelite history. I assume you have some objections to it's authenticity and accuracy young Mr Swoosh 

 

I'll be happy to address any concerns you have feel free to present them.

[Swoosh]

This is interesting. Is your only barometer of the importance of historical events ( which don't meet your criteria of proof ) whether they better society ?  I fail to see how the Holocaust lends to the betterment of society

Yes, my view of things is very pragmatic. Learn from historical events so that you might not make the same mistakes. Perhaps by learning about how Hitler came to power, we can be taught important lessons on standing up for what is right, rather than letting someone be in charge simply because they are charismatic. That's just one example of how the Holocaust stories can better society.

 

Do you believe evil benefits society; and if so, do you believe God created evil ?

Evil can benefit society in the sense that learning about how certain evil actions got started can help us combat future evil events. Like the Holocaust example I gave. 

 

But evil itself by definition doesn't better society.

 

I would suspect I don't even believe in the existence of your definition of God, so I wouldn't believe he created evil. To be sure though, what is your definition?

 

 

 

The book of Judges is an excellent account of Israelite history. I assume you have some objections to it's authenticity and accuracy young Mr Swoosh  

 

I'll be happy to address any concerns you have feel free to present them.

I wouldn't say objections. Just as with the Book of Ruth, I haven't seen convincing enough evidence to believe all the stories are true. Not that I think it's impossible to have happened.

 

Any concerns I have would be the same as with the Book of Ruth. Would you address my concerns the same way as was done with Ruth on this thread?

[Guest ninhao]

 

Swoosh, on 01 Dec 2013 - 5:07 PM, said:

Yes, my view of things is very pragmatic. Learn from historical events so that you might not make the same mistakes. Perhaps by learning about how Hitler came to power, we can be taught important lessons on standing up for what is right, rather than letting someone be in charge simply because they are charismatic. That's just one example of how the Holocaust stories can better society.

Evil can benefit society in the sense that learning about how certain evil actions got started can help us combat future evil events. Like the Holocaust example I gave. 

But evil itself by definition doesn't better society.

 

 

The absence of any evil would be the most beneficial as you say. I suggest you repent and receive the Gospel which will culminate in eternal life free from all evil.

 

 

Rev 21:2-4  I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband.  (3)  And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God.  (4)  'He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death' or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away."

 

 

 

I would suspect I don't even believe in the existence of your definition of God, so I wouldn't believe he created evil. To be sure though, what is your definition?

 

 

Evil comes from rebellion against God and is anything which disobeys Him.  What’s your definition of evil ?

 

 

I wouldn't say objections. Just as with the Book of Ruth, I haven't seen convincing enough evidence to believe all the stories are true. Not that I think it's impossible to have happened.

 

Any concerns I have would be the same as with the Book of Ruth. Would you address my concerns the same way as was done with Ruth on this thread?

 

 

It’s up to you what becomes the level of evidence required to determine the authenticity of any historical account.  Seeing your lack of dogmatism concerning the authenticity of the Holocaust I’m assuming few historical accounts will be real to you.

 

I will address your concerns regarding the Book of Judges by referring to any corroborating data. Do you have any conflicting data which may refute this Book?

[Swoosh]

Evil comes from rebellion against God and is anything which disobeys Him.  What’s your definition of evil ?

I was actually asking for your definition of "God", not evil. 

 

Evil is that which brings harm to me. 

 

 

I will address your concerns regarding the Book of Judges by referring to any corroborating data. Do you have any conflicting data which may refute this Book?

No, I have no conflicting data that may refute that Book. This seems to be going the same direction as I did with someone else concerning the book of Ruth. Are you going to say that me having no conflicting data means that the book of Judges is accurate?

[Guest ninhao]

 

Swoosh, on 01 Dec 2013 - 6:06 PM, said:

I was actually asking for your definition of "God", not evil. 

 

 

Oh ok. Asking the definition of God is a strange question. Do you mean who is God? He is the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. He is Yahweh, or Jesus if you like.

 

 

Evil is that which brings harm to me. 

 

 

Ok yes this is a common secular definition aside from some people who allow for short term harmful things which benefit you ie. discipline. Did your parents discipline you went you were a child Mr Swoosh?

 

 

No, I have no conflicting data that may refute that Book. This seems to be going the same direction as I did with someone else concerning the book of Ruth. Are you going to say that me having no conflicting data means that the book of Judges is accurate?

 

 

If you have no conflicting data which refutes the Books of Ruth and Judges, and there is some supporting data, I suppose it places my acceptance of them as accurate in a more solid place than denial.

Would you agree ?

Have you read the Bible Swoosh and do you understand the Gospel message?

[Swoosh]

Oh ok. Asking the definition of God is a strange question. Do you mean who is God? He is the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. He is Yahweh, or Jesus if you like. 

It's actually not as strange as it may seem. Many people have different definitions of their different divine beings. Even among Christians, there are some that distinguish "God" using different descriptions. I have to know your specific one to answer your question. I'm asking what makes an object "God". What is the defining qualities of this being that separates it from things that are not "God"?

 

In general though, the god/Yahweh presented in the Bible is one that I don't believe in the existence of, so asking me if he created evil is like asking me if Dracula bites people. btw, some may take that comparison as disrespectful, but I only said that to illustrate my view of it.

 

 

Ok yes this is a common secular definition aside from some people who allow for short term harmful things which benefit you ie. discipline. Did your parents discipline you went you were a child Mr Swoosh?

They did what they thought was discipline, yes.

 

And you are correct, short term harm can bring long term joy.

 

 

If you have no conflicting data which refutes the Books of Ruth and Judges, and there is some supporting data, I suppose it places my acceptance of them as accurate in a more solid place than denial. Would you agree ?

It would depend on this supporting data. If it's of the type that has been described already (genealogies and cultural consistency), then I would disagree. Is this the type of supporting evidence you are talking about?

 

 

Have you read the Bible Swoosh and do you understand the Gospel message?

I have read parts of the Bible. Could hardly call myself an expert though.

 

The world is sinful and we will go to hell unless we make ourselves believe the claim that Jesus is the son of God and died to take our sins? At least, that's one way it's presented.

Edited December 1, 2013 by Swoosh