I had what turned out to be a disingenuous Godidiot. His deceit was evident as soon as he dismissed my first reply.
I will not include his name, because I'm just not that type of guy. He'll just be GI (Godidiot) and I'll be Bacon.
Here is the exchange:
Title of email: origins of judiaism (ed. note: perhaps the author wasn't sure where to put the "i" in Judaism, so he covered his bases)
GI: you claim in your blog that theists are always the ones that need to bring the proof. Orthodox Jews have always pointed to the kuzari principle to claim a logical proof for their beliefs. As a jewish athiest, i'm sure you have researched this claim and managed to find some solid disproofs. I have been looking for a very long time for a good reason why the kuzari principle is bogus, and i'm hoping you have some idea.
Thanks!
*************************************************
Ed. Note: I know this argument from before, but I quickly did a Wikipedia search just to refresh my memory. I quickly had solid disproofs for the KP.
Just one more thing, just because I'm an atheist Jew doesn't mean I have to have researched anything about Judaism (though I have). My atheism stems from the fact that there is no evidence for God, and no one has to investigate any or all the ridiculous claims made by theists of any following.
Bacon: Lots of evidence against it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuzari_Principle
Just recently a book was written by an author featured on Oprah. Millions of people believed his story to be true, however it took the Smoking Gun to come along and show that he was embellishing some of it, and lying about the rest.
That is one example of how easy it is to dupe the public very quickly.
The Kuzari principal fails just based on historical findings alone. The history of the Jews was made up and accepted around 450 BC, but the myths were most likely gradually accepted prior to that over time.
**********************************************************
GI: thanks for the article! sadly, I don't see anything hugely conclusive. The oprah story doesnt seem to compare, because, unlike the bible, that book didn't propose anything of any consequence to its readers lives. Duping millions of people into believing that their ancestors publicly witnessed a miracle, and that they have to follow a plethora of laws seems much harder to do.
********************************************
Ed. Note: Notice how he asked for solid disproofs? I should have know. Like asking for solid disproofs of God, he is asking for conclusive evidence for a negative. This is where I should have figured out he was disingenuous.
Bacon: GI, I don't think it was hard to do. And it wasn't millions of Israelis who believed in a fake history. It was much less.
It only takes a few to begin with first, and then all of a sudden it is assumed by almost all. There was little available back then to disprove a claim.
All religions are started on the premise of a miracle. By the year 400 AD, most people in the Roman Empire started accepting that Jesus rose from his grave. And there is no contemporary history to even support a historical Jesus. Now there are almost 2 billion people on the planet who accept Jesus as the son of God.
It really takes one person to make up a viable story, and a story that people want to believe, and then it takes a few believers, and a generation or two, and then history can be rewritten.
If you watch the Bible Unearthed videos I linked on my site, you'll see that the Exodus story was impossible based on evidence alone.
*************************************************
GI: i really appreciate your answering me, but i still think your example lacks parallel. If i told you that your great great great grandfather built a spaceship and went to mars and back, would you accept it as your family history? Even without proof you will never accept such a story. If someone told you that your great great great grandfather and two million other people witnesses a great miracle and was commanded to pass down a retelling of that event to his descendants, would you accept it? Clearly you would not because you would have been told about it. So how is it possible that this fake history could ever be accepted, let alone spread? (and take note that at the time of ezra people kept family records and history).
would anybody accept a history that says "your great great grandfather saw a huge miracle" when they themselves had never head of it from their grandfather, of father? of cSurely something so great would
***********************************************
Bacon: I've already explained parallels and gave examples. How do we know when the story was started? It could have easily been started around 750 BC or even later, and then still generations upon generations could have reported the fake history to each other.
The fact is that there weren't millions of Israelis even around 1000 BC.
And more importantly, the historical finds do not support the Exodus in any way shape or form. The Bible Unearthed videos show that.
Keep believing what you need to, but I'm convinced the Exodus didn't happen 100%. There is no evidence that Jews were even monotheistic until around 600 BC or so. If the story was retold from a real starting point there would be abundant evidence to back up the myth.
***********************************************
GI: hmm...you don't seem to get what I'm saying. Your examples James Frey/Jesus just aren't parallels. Here, I'll spell out what a parallel would be: a nation that claims that their ancestors publicly witnessed a miracle (hint: there are none others). If the Sinai claim "could have easily been started" then there should be many examples to choose from.
http://www.dovidgottlieb.com/comments/Kuzari_Principle_Intro.htm
(see the bottom, 'An attempt to meet the challenge')
*******************************************
Ed. Note: I did read the link provided, and also read a few links refuting Gottlieb's "line of reasoning." This link is very good, showing how bogus the KP really is.
Bacon: Every example is unique. There is no evidence the Exodus ever happened. None whatsoever. To believe otherwise is to be wilfully ignorant.
Again, the similarities with respect to Greek Gods, Jesus (who never existed) and had many witnesses as well (or so they say).
So what about the Exodus myth? It is mind numbingly simple. Around 650 BC or so, a few Israelites invented a past, the myth grew, over time it was believed that millions left Egypt and since by 450BC the time of Ezra, 200 years had past, it was easy to say that it was passed on from generation to generation.
Sorry, but the historical findings make the Exodus IMPOSSIBLE. Therefore, my answer is the correct one.
You aren't going to change my mind on this. The idea of the Exodus happening to me, is laughable, and the explanation of saying millions of Jews from 1300 BC until now passed the story along unbroken is farcical at best.
They passed it around alright...starting around 450 BC, because enough people said they heard it from the grannies and granpas back then.
Here is more debunking that you can spin all you want:
http://offthederech.blogspot.com/2006/01/debunking-kuzari.html
****************************************
GI: You repeated your argument without responding to the link I gave you which discusses your theory in the section called 'AN ATTEMPT TO MEET THE CHALLENGE'. Please comment on his logic.
****************************************
Ed. Note: My patience has now worn thin!!!!
Bacon: GI, I'm done with this. It is farcical. I read the link, and the conclusions are just wilful ignorance times 1000.
The Exodus did not happen. Deal with it.
I've spent waaaay too much time with you on this. You just don't want to get it.
*******************************************
GI: If you had bothered to notice I was not trying to convince you of anything, just trying to elicit an intelligent response to specific points. Must have been my mistake for assuming that a person who writes a blog about a subject would have any balls to defend it.
Bye
********************************************
Bacon: I did defend it. With the Wikipedia article. And then with a blog post on the subject by someone else. But you have to be too wilfully ignorant to accept those rebuttals, even though they make perfect sense, and totally crush the idiotic 11th Century argument for why the Exodus must be fact.
The Exodus didn't happen, and the Kuzari Principal is complete hogwash that makes false assumptions and ridiculous conclusions.
*******************************************
GI: Oh, I'm so sorry honey, I hope I didn't hurt your feelings...
Being petulant wont get you anywhere, and what don't you get about the word "bye"?
********************************************
Bacon: The day I let a wilfully ignorant person dictate when bye time is, is the day after I take my last breath.
You are the one acting like a little girl btw, not me.
****************************************
GI: you sound like you want to be put on some spam mailing lists, but I hope I wont have to resort to that.
or will I?
****************************************
Bacon: My next blog post will be about our exchange. Don't worry, I won't use your name.
*************************************
GI: I'm sure your grandmother will enjoy it.
For those of you who are link adverse. Here is the 12th Century Kuzari Argument:
To summarize, the Kuzari Argument states that while oral traditions of private revelations can be fabricated, oral traditions of national public revelations must be considered authentic. The reasoning is that people will reject false beliefs of their ancestors witnessing supernatural events on the basis that if the events did occur, they would have heard about them from the previous generation. To clarify what this means, consider the following three scenarios.
(a) A population believes that many years ago, one or several people witnessed the same supernatural events and reported it to the population's ancestors. The occurrence of these supernatural events cannot be verified, since a few people could easily have been misled to believe they saw something that they really didn't, or they could have lied about witnessing the events. A gullible population who believes their story is not proof that the events indeed occurred.
(b) A population believes that many years ago, another entire population witnessed supernatural events in the past. The population who witnessed the events are not the ancestors of the more recent population, and the events are only believed today because it was reported by one or several people sometime after the supposed events have occurred. Like the previous scenario, this scenario cannot be verified, since the credibility of the events rely on the credibility of a few individuals.
(c) This scenario is similar to the previous scenario. However, the population who witnessed the supernatural events are believed to be the ancestors of the more recent population. The belief is that from the time of the events until the more recent population, there has been an unbroken collective oral tradition of the events occurring. The Kuzari Argument says that these beliefs could not have been fabricated. The reasoning is that for these beliefs to be false, at some point in history a person or a group of people would have had to convince an entire population that their ancestors witnessed supernatural events. The population would reject this belief on the basis that if their ancestors truly had witnessed supernatural events, they would have already heard about it through an oral tradition from their parents. Since none of the population would have heard about the events from their parents as expected, they would reject that the events had occurred.
The Kuzari Argument is applied to the miracles in the Torah as follows. Millions of religious Jews believe today in the miracles of the plagues, the manna, and the Sinai revelation. For these beliefs to be false, at some point in history one or several people must have presented the beliefs to the Jewish population as truth. Since a population would not accept a story that their ancestors witnessed supernatural events but they never heard about it, the Jewish population would have undoubtedly rejected the belief. Therefore, the miracles described in the Torah must have occurred.
