Religion

marylandblue

(12,344 posts)

51. Nope, very little ancient history is "reliable first hand accounts"

Mon Nov 26, 2018, 10:22 AM

Nov 2018

Most is 2nd, 3rd or 4th hand. Even when we have first hand accounts, historians weigh it with a critical eye. Lots of ancient "first hand accounts" are forgeries, fabrications or richly embellished by personal agendas, with no easy method of deciding which is which. We rely heavily on people like Herotodus who made excessive use of hearsay.

Archeology has it's limits. We rarely find written records. We mostly find artifacts, which can inform us about lifestyles, but don't tell us very much about persons.

DNA evidence is nice for ancient demography and things like that. It won't give you information that can only be gotten from written records, 95% of which are forever lost.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

90 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Hillel the Elder and Jesus were contemporaries, according to the stories. [View all] MineralMan Nov 2018 OP

Maybe they were the same person, and the followers invented the stories. TreasonousBastard Nov 2018 #1

We will never know. Cary Nov 2018 #3

Could very well be. The Sumerians seemed to have Crutchez_CuiBono Nov 2018 #4

Or, perhaps a young Jesus met Hillel and listened to him. MineralMan Nov 2018 #5

Does it matter if they actually lived? Cary Nov 2018 #2

Well, it probably doesn't matter, but it's important to many MineralMan Nov 2018 #6

True believers decide for themselves what they think is important. nt. Mariana Nov 2018 #9

We each decide for ourselves what is important Cary Nov 2018 #19

Except that wouldn't really make them a true believer Major Nikon Nov 2018 #13

Or, in the case of some, an admission that it's all pretty much metaphor MineralMan Nov 2018 #14

Some aren't comfortable with unanswerable questions Major Nikon Nov 2018 #16

Hocus Pocus Dominocus MineralMan Nov 2018 #17

Since all of what we deem to be "reality" is in fact an illusion... Cary Nov 2018 #23

Obviously it can mean whatever people want it to mean Major Nikon Nov 2018 #29

It is 100% faith which means it is personal Cary Nov 2018 #32

Facts not in evidence. MineralMan Nov 2018 #62

They all pick and choose, including the ones who say they don't marylandblue Nov 2018 #28

"Actually lived" is fundamental to Christianity. Voltaire2 Nov 2018 #24

There is zero proof, in spite of meticulous Roman record keeping Cary Nov 2018 #25

Oh I agree that it is likely all fictional. Voltaire2 Nov 2018 #26

I understand your point Cary Nov 2018 #27

I wouldn't agree with zero Major Nikon Nov 2018 #30

Zero Cary Nov 2018 #31

As I said, I don't agree Major Nikon Nov 2018 #33

That's an appeal to popularity Cary Nov 2018 #34

Not quite Major Nikon Nov 2018 #35

What "autboritative opinions" based on what "documents?" Cary Nov 2018 #37

Just because you don't agree, doesn't mean I'm wrong Major Nikon Nov 2018 #39

I see, so now you presume to tell me how I feel. Cary Nov 2018 #40

Thanks, I will advise my former history teachers to close down their department marylandblue Nov 2018 #45

Do whatever you think you need to do Cary Nov 2018 #47

I am not the one who told you how you feel, so don't complain to me. marylandblue Nov 2018 #49

I'm not telling you to feel anything Major Nikon Nov 2018 #46

You engaged in sd hominem Cary Nov 2018 #52

Nonsense Major Nikon Nov 2018 #65

I am not "a big fan of pointing out logical fallacies." Cary Nov 2018 #66

Well, you've already told us what you were thinking. MineralMan Nov 2018 #67

What we perceive as reality is indeed an illusion. Cary Nov 2018 #68

You can go on if you like. MineralMan Nov 2018 #70

Our knowledge base expands Cary Nov 2018 #72

This argument is illogical marylandblue Nov 2018 #73

It's a rhetorical statement, really. MineralMan Nov 2018 #75

It's also a meaningless argument marylandblue Nov 2018 #78

Correct. It's all part of the "Matrix" fallacy, MineralMan Nov 2018 #79

That isn't at all what I said Cary Nov 2018 #80

What you did was hijack my thread. MineralMan Nov 2018 #81

Yeah, I am not so happy with you either, dude Cary Nov 2018 #84

:shrug: MineralMan Nov 2018 #85

I have had plenty of pleasant exchanges with you Cary Nov 2018 #88

Our senses are largely an illusion Cary Nov 2018 #82

If you don't want to go down rabbit holes, don't enter them marylandblue Nov 2018 #87

Biblical historians have different standards of evidence. Voltaire2 Nov 2018 #86

Slim but not zero marylandblue Nov 2018 #89

All academics have various biases Major Nikon Nov 2018 #90

Not at all, between 0 and 100 is real history marylandblue Nov 2018 #36

My assertion is that there is no evidence to prove or disprove Cary Nov 2018 #38

There is in fact evidence, just a matter of how you weight them marylandblue Nov 2018 #42

In other words you have no objective evidence Cary Nov 2018 #43

What do you consider objective evidence in ancient history? marylandblue Nov 2018 #44

Archeological records Cary Nov 2018 #48

Now be good enough to answer my question. Cary Nov 2018 #50

Nope, very little ancient history is "reliable first hand accounts" marylandblue Nov 2018 #51

What are you trying to say? Cary Nov 2018 #53

I am trying to say you are thinking in black and white marylandblue Nov 2018 #55

Oh good, another one telling me how I think! Cary Nov 2018 #56

After complaining that I told you how you think marylandblue Nov 2018 #60

You cannot prove your religion. Cary Nov 2018 #57

What proseletyzing? I am agnostic. marylandblue Nov 2018 #61

There's also big difference between an informed guess and pure speculation Major Nikon Nov 2018 #41

How about zero first hand sources? Cary Nov 2018 #54

You are confusing expert opinion with argument from popularity marylandblue Nov 2018 #64

There's also "zero first hand sources" Muhammad existed Major Nikon Nov 2018 #69

We weren't talking about Muhammed Cary Nov 2018 #71

You also claimed that reality is an illusion and we'll never know most of it marylandblue Nov 2018 #74

Neither were "we" speaking of Clinton murder allegations Major Nikon Nov 2018 #83

It matters, because the things attributed to them MineralMan Nov 2018 #63

I think Jesus was probably a real dude qazplm135 Nov 2018 #7

There's no way to know, actually. MineralMan Nov 2018 #8

Ironically we know far more about Socrates than Jesus Major Nikon Nov 2018 #18

Exactly. MineralMan Nov 2018 #21

that's probably why I used words like qazplm135 Nov 2018 #20

I wasn't arguing with you. MineralMan Nov 2018 #22

I studied with a rabbi who insisted that Jesus plagiarized from other no_hypocrisy Nov 2018 #10

That Rabbi knows no more about what Jesus actually did or said MineralMan Nov 2018 #11

There's quite a bit of that going around these days as well Major Nikon Nov 2018 #12

Say it ain't so, Joe. Say it ain't so! MineralMan Nov 2018 #15

Growing up in Galilee, Jesus was no doubt exposed to all sorts of radical philosophies, as well as malchickiwick Nov 2018 #58

There's a lot of time during which there is no information MineralMan Nov 2018 #59

This explains it all. thewhollytoast Nov 2018 #76

See this thread: MineralMan Nov 2018 #77