Profile for Stillness

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Recent posts

Pages

AuthorRecent posts
Heads will roll in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Saturday, September 8 2007 07:00 Profile #22
quote:
Originally written by Nioca:

True, but by that reasoning, it'd be more accurate to say that the Earth has 24 days every 24 hour period, or 1 day per hour. Divided into 24 sections with no rotation, each section would forever see that specific hour. Or you could divide it into 86,400 sections, then whatever came after that, ad nauseam.
No, because you are neglecting the fact that four is the "prime number of the universe."
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Body Snatchers in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Friday, September 7 2007 03:06 Profile #1
I wouldn't want my child to be a police officer or soldier.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
# of games bought from jeff in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Monday, September 3 2007 13:32 Profile #29
quote:
Originally written by Arenax:

I've bought every Spiderweb game save the Geneforge series. I can't stand them.
Hmm, these are the only ones I bought - all four. Maybe I didn't give the others a fair enough chance. The storylines just were not compelling enough to make up for the graphics. Am I the only one that thinks the Geneforge storylines are the best?
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Friday, August 31 2007 18:44 Profile #47
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

I think Stillness just said that he believes in dragons and unicorns. I am amused.
I don't know about unicorns, but dragons are alive and well on Komodo. :P

I do believe that the King James version in particular has some odd translations of animal names. At Numbers 23:22 it says "unicorn," but the strong's version has this ftn. - "probably the great aurochs or wild bulls which are now extinct. The exact meaning is not known." The NWT says "wild bull." NRSV says "wild ox." Is an animal with a horn on its head or large lizards that ridiculous though? If we didn't know for a fact that there are animals like this now or that have existed in the past, maybe this would be a good point.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Friday, August 31 2007 18:16 Profile #45
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

I don't believe we've found any giant, dragon, or unicorn skeletons yet, which shouldn't be hard to do considering they should be 6000 years old or less.
We haven’t even found all of the living animals yet, let alone extinct ones. Yet, we do know that nature abounds with strange creatures with amazing abilities. You might want to check different modern translations to see how some of the names of these creatures are translated though.

quote:
The fact that virtually every such assertion of magical earthly events is never corroborated by any other ancient record is highly suspect at best, ya think?
The flood is highly corroborated. When powerful evidence like the many legends of the flood all over the world is presented it’s minimized. God splitting the languages at Babel is corroborated. Excavations in and around the ancient city of Babylon have revealed the sites of several ziggurats. A fragment found N of the temple of Marduk in Babylon related the fall of a ziggurat in these words: “The building of this temple offended the gods. In a night they threw down what had been built. They scattered them abroad, and made strange their speech. The progress they impeded.” (Bible and Spade, by S. L. Caiger, 1938, p. 29)

quote:
Stillness, you won't be permitted to dodge salient points in this one and just move on with a casual dismissive wave of your hand and contradictory reassertion that somehow God created and preserved His perfect word, except it's not perfect or reliable actually, but that doesn't actually matter.
It is reliable. Copyists used great care in transmitting the original texts accurately. The Masoretes counted the letters they copied. There are something like 6000 ancient manuscripts of the entire Hebrew scriptures or portions of it and 5000 of the Christian Scriptures in Greek. If one scribe makes an error, all of them don’t make the same one. Comparison will reveal it. Your standard seems to be no errors…ever. Mine is that the information is conveyed reliably. I’m not waving anything away or dodging points.

GE 6:19-22, 7:8-9, 7:14-16 Two of each kind are to be taken, and are taken, aboard Noah's Ark.
GE 7:2-5 Seven pairs of some kinds are to be taken (and are taken) aboard the Ark.

The clean animals were taken in sevens.

GE 6:4 There were Nephilim (giants) before the Flood.
GE 7:21 All creatures other than Noah and his clan were annihilated by the Flood.
NU 13:33 There were Nephilim after the Flood.

They were called Nephilim because of their size.

GE 12:7, 17:1, 18:1, 26:2, 32:30, EX 3:16, 6:2-3, 24:9-11, 33:11,
NU 12:7-8, 14:14, JB 42:5, AM 7:7-8, 9:1 God is seen.
EX 33:20, JN 1:18, 1JN 4:12 God is not seen. No one can see God's face and live. No one has ever seen him.

Men do not see God as he truly is, but only in some representational form.

EX 12:30 The Lord kills all the first-born of Egypt and there is not a house where there is not at least one dead. (This means that there was not a house in Egypt that did not include at least one first-born---a most unusual situation.)

Never heard this one before. My guess would be a difference in the definition of “house.” In the Bible and even in some modern languages like Mandarin Chinese, “house” conveys the meaning “family.” Also extended families occupy one literal house in many cultures. I don’t really see a problem here.

EX 12:37, NU 1:45-46 The number of men of military age who take part in the Exodus is given as about 600,000. Allowing for women, children, and older men would probably mean that a total of more than 2,000,000 Israelites left Egypt at a time when the whole population of Egypt was less than 2,000,000.

Some Egyptians left with them, but also

Ex 1:8, 9 In time there arose over Egypt a new king who did not know Joseph. And he proceeded to say to his people: “Look! The people of the sons of Israel are more numerous and mightier than we are.

EX 17:14 God says that he will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek.
DT 25:19 "... you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven; you must not forget." (That remembrance is now permanently preserved in the Bible.)

This is what I mean by being critical and taking words too literally. Other translations can make it clearer too. But the idea is that Amalek will be removed. The New World Translation says “wipe out the mention.” So, in 2007 we are not saying, “I wonder what’s going on in the land of Amalek.”

2SA 24:1 The Lord inspired David to take the census.
1CH 21:1 Satan inspired the census.

God was displeased and so removed his protection and allowed Satan to do it. Joseph B. Rotherham’s translation reads: “The anger of Yahweh kindled against Israel, so that he suffered David to be moved against them saying, Go count Israel and Judah.”

1KI 8:13, AC 7:47 Solomon, whom God made the wisest man ever, built his temple as an abode for God.
AC 7:48-49 God does not dwell in temples built by men.

Again, you’re being overly literal and ignoring context. No one expected God to literally live in the temple. It was a center of worship to God and a representation of God’s true dwelling. Note Solomon’s prayer:

2 Ch 6:18 “But will God truly dwell with mankind upon the earth? Look! Heaven, yes, the heaven of the heavens themselves, cannot contain you; how much less, then, this house that I have built?

1KI 15:14 Asa did not remove the high places.
2CH 14:2-3 He did remove them.

2 Ch 15:17 agrees with the 1 Ki account. Some high places were used for worship of pagan gods and some for worship of Jehovah. (1 Ch 21:29) It may be that Asa did not have the same zeal for removal of improper worship at the latter as he did at the former. Or possibly he removed them and they cropped up again.

1KI 22:23, 2CH 18:22, 2TH 2:11 God himself causes a lying spirit.
PR 12:22 God abhors lying lips and delights in honesty.

This account at 1 Ki was actually troublesome to me when I started to study the Bible and is IMO your strongest contention. The scripture you list at 2TH helps to resolve it. I’m going to have to spend some time on it.

1 KI 22 has the king of the northern kingdom of Israel, Ahab (an apostate Jew), and the king of Judah, Jehoshaphat (a servant of Jehovah), allied and prepared to war with Syria. Jehoshaphat suggests that they first inquire of God, as the faithful kings did before battle. Ahab collects his prophets together, about 400 of them, and they are unanimous about the success to be had. Here’s where the picture starts to become clear: After hearing from Ahab’s prophets, Jehoshaphat asks, “Is there not here a prophet of Jehovah still?” Ahab’s response – “There is still one man through whom to inquire of Jehovah; but I myself certainly hate him, for he does not prophesy good things concerning me but bad – Micaiah.”

This tells us that everyone knew that the 400 were not God’s prophets, but Micaiah was. It also tells us that Ahab was not interested in hearing the truth, but just wanted prophets to say what he wanted to hear. Jehoshaphat wants to hear from Jehovah’s prophet. So, Micaiah not only tells them that Jehovah said they would lose the battle, but reveals a vision he had of heaven in which all of God’s angels are standing before his throne. God asks who wants to fool king Ahab. Different angels present various ideas about how it should be done until finally one angel has what Jehovah finds to be a good idea.

Vs.22 - ‘I shall go forth, and I shall certainly become a deceptive spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ So he said, ‘You will fool him, and, what is more, you will come off the winner. Go out and do that way.’

We are not told what this angel did or said. Maybe he told them something like, “Jehovah wants the king to go into battle,” (which would not be a lie, but would deceive the king). Whatever it was we know that they said what they wanted to say and what Ahab wanted to hear. If he had seeking the truth from God he would not have died in battle. 2 Th 2:10-12 tells us about those like him who “are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth that they might be saved. So that is why God lets an operation of error go to them, that they may get to believing the lie, in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness.”

So God puts the truth out there for those who love it, but lets those who don’t believe lies. No conflict.

James 1:13 says "..for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."
Gen 22:1 says "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham..."

God doesn’t try us with evil. He’s not trying to get us to do wrong.

Lev 11:20-21: "All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you."
Fowl do not go upon all four.

Simply reading the scripture or trying different translations will sometimes expose the intent of the people that make up these lists. They’re counting on you not doing that.

Le 11:20-22 Every winged swarming creature that goes on all fours is a loathsome thing to YOU…These are the ones of them YOU may eat of: the migratory locust according to its kind, and the edible locust after its kind, and the cricket according to its kind, and the grasshopper according to its kind.

Lev 11:6: "And the hare, because he cheweth the cud..."
Hare do not chew the cud.

They do something similar. Call it what you want. But don’t judge biblical accuracy on modern concepts and definitions.

Deut 14:7: " "...as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof."
For the hare this is wrong on both counts: Hare don’t chew the cud and they don’t divide the "hoof."

You’re right about the second part. Read closer.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Friday, August 31 2007 18:12 Profile #44
quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

The God of the Bible condones slaughter, torture, use, misuse and discarding of women, cutting people to death with saws and knives, burning with fire, ad nauseum. The God of the Old Testament has almost nothing to do with the God of the new and in fact the OT came within a hairbreadth of being discarded from the canon of Christianity at an early point.
Your distinction between old and new is imagined. God’s activity and personality are uniform throughout. But let’s not dwell on that because you’re bringing up good points. I’ll try to tackle the bulk of them.

“GE 3:1-7, 22-24 God allows Adam and Eve to be deceived by the Serpent (the craftiest of all of God's wild creatures). They eat of the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil," thereby incurring death for themselves and all of mankind for ever after. God prevents them from regaining eternal life, by placing a guard around the "Tree of Eternal Life." (Note: God could have done the same for the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" in the first place and would thereby have prevented the Fall of man, the necessity for Salvation, the Crucifixion of Jesus, etc.)”

Being deceived does not justify criminal activity. Obedience would have prevented the fall of man. God gave them an opportunity to express their love and appreciation for his gifts and they betray him and steal. He is not to blame.

GE 4:2-8 God's arbitrary preference of Abel's offering to that of Cain's provokes Cain to commit the first biblically recorded murder and kill his brother Abel.

Synergy you didn’t read the scriptures you cite well. God tells Cain he is doing bad and tries to reason with him to turn around. He tells him he’ll be proud of him if he does. Instead of listening he turns right around and kills his brother. This is a beautiful account. God is dealing with Cain him just as a wise father would deal with a wayward son. He asks questions to draw him out and get him to reason on his own. He lets him know he loves him but he can do better.

Ge 4:6, 7 “Why are you hot with anger and why has your countenance fallen? If you turn to doing good, will there not be an exaltation? But if you do not turn to doing good, there is sin crouching at the entrance; and will you for your part get the mastery over it?”

This is the way God is right from the beginning up until the very end of the Bible. He is patient and loving, but he does not tolerate wrongdoing forever.

GE 34:13-29 The Israelites kill Hamor, his son, and all the men of their village, taking as plunder their wealth, cattle, wives and children.

Here, like many of the scriptures you list, God does not sanction this activity. It is simply a record of what happened. In fact their father, Jacob (Israel), disapproves of their retaliation. I’m not going to address every single instance that you simply list something that happened as if God is OK with it.

GE 6:11-17, 7:11-24 God is unhappy with the wickedness of man and decides to do something about it. He kills every living thing on the face of the earth other than Noah's family and thereby makes himself the greatest mass murderer in history.

Murder is unlawful killing. God does not murder. As the Sovereign Lord and Judge of the universe he has the right, even the obligation, to get rid of wickedness. Otherwise he is wicked.

GE 19:26 God personally sees to it that Lot's wife is turned to a pillar of salt (for having looked behind her while fleeing the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah).

At the risk of sounding callous, Lot’s wife was very stupid. Two of God’s angels had just miraculously blinded every man in the city to protect Lot and his family and dragged them to safety when they weren’t moving quickly enough. They then give explicit instructions to flee and “DO NOT LOOK BEHIND” so that they would not be saved. Dude, I know this stuff is kinda hard to get sometimes, but if you look at the account you can see he’s easy. It says he compassionately forced them to go when they lingered. Lot didn’t like God’s instructions and so he conceded and changed them and guaranteed he would not act until he was safe. But why after all of this would she test his patience by disobeying him? Why did Lot and his daughters have no problem obeying this simple command?

God gives way more that he takes. He doesn’t request more than we can do. In fact, his requests are always for our own good. All he asks is that we show love and appreciation in return by obeying. Why should anyone not willing to cooperate with him get to live? I would really like an answer to this question.

EX 21:20-21 With the Lord's approval, a slave may be beaten to death with no punishment for the perpetrator as long as the slave doesn't die too quickly.

If the slave did not die immediately, that would indicate that the master did not have murder in his heart and would also raise question as to whether or not the beating was actually responsible for the death.

EX 32:27-29 With the Lord's approval, the Israelites slay 3000 men.

They broke a law punishable by death in the covenant they willingly entered into with God.

LE 27:29 Human sacrifice is condoned. (Note: An example is given in JG 11:30-39)

Never! God is saying if a person is judged to be destroyed, no one can buy him out of that state. Jephthah’s daughter was not killed. She was “sacrificed” in that she would live out her life in sacred duties at God’s sanctuary, just like Hannah did with Samuel. (1 Sa 1:11)

“You must not learn to do according to the detestable things of those nations. There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire . . . For everybody doing these things is something detestable to Jehovah, and on account of these detestable things Jehovah your God is driving them away from before you.” (De 18:9-12)

“And they have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, in order to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire, a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart.” (Jer 7:31)

NU 31:17-18 Moses, following the Lord's command, orders the Israelites to kill all the Midianite male children and "... every woman who has known man ...." (Note: How would it be determined which women had known men? One can only speculate.)

The Midianites had just purposefully and successfully seduced Israelites into breaking God’s law using sex and their gods. They did this to make God remove his blessing and punish Israel. Midian was punished for their manipulation.

JS 10:40 (A summary statement.) "So Joshua defeated the whole land ...; he left none remaining, but destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded."

They died because they were wicked. God was not indiscriminate though. He never is. Two very noteworthy groups survived, The Gibeonites and Rahab and her household. (Jos 2:1-16; 9:3-14) In both instances Jehovah was recognized as the true God and they demonstrated a willingness to serve him and he granted their request for favor. Rahab is actually an ancestress of Jesus.

I wonder if you think it’s always wrong for anyone to be killed or if it’s just wrong when God does it. Are you anti death penalty, war, abortion? Answer this question for me too, please.

1SA 6:19 God kills seventy men (or so) for looking into the Ark (at him?). (Note: The early Israelites apparently thought the Ark to be God's abode.)

Num 4:20 “And they must not come in to see the holy things for the least moment of time, and so they have to die.”

2SA 6:2-23 Because she rebuked him for having exposed himself, Michal (David's wife) was barren throughout her life.

On some of these I can see your point, but a lot of these, like this one, I wonder if you’re even reading the account or are you pulling this stuff from some list. Was David clothed? Was his wife’s rebuke because she was concerned about modesty or was she showing disrespect because of some other feeling that the scripture says she had toward God’s anointed king – his representative?

2KI 2:23-24 Forty-two children are mauled and killed, presumably according to the will of God, for having jeered at a man of God

Disrespect of Jehovah’s representatives is disrespect of him, no matter the age. These children were reflecting the apostate mentality of their parents and the nation. It was not just childish silliness.

MT 10:35-36 "For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law a man's enemies will be the members of his own family."

What do you think Jesus meaning is here? Do you think he’s saying he wants to destroy families? Use the context.

MT 3:12, 8:12, 10:21, 13:30, 42, 22:13, 24:51, 25:30, LK 13:28, JN 5:24 Some will spend eternity burning in Hell. There will be weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth.

This is the “New Testament” right? I thought only in the “Old Testament” does God kill people. Anyway these don’t support your claim. Let’s take Jesus words at your last scripture at John 5:24:

“Most truly I say to YOU, He that hears my word and believes him that sent me has everlasting life, and he does not come into judgment but has passed over from death to life.”

If you spend eternity weeping and gnashing your teeth then are you alive or dead? Jesus says the only way to get everlasting life is to listen and believe in him. The alternative is a judgment of death, not life – unpleasant or otherwise. At some point, those that receive that judgment will know it and yes they will weep and gnash teeth, but not forever. Dead people don’t do anything. Death is the opposite of life.

So if you interpret the scriptures as you have and find conflict and wickedness on God’s part, then know that it is only your interpretation in which these things exist. I read the same scriptures and see the same harmonious message of God’s love and justice. If you want to be critical and find contradictions you can find them in the Bible or in any other message if you like. But, if you want to find the truth that also can be found.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Friday, August 31 2007 18:10 Profile #43
quote:
Originally written by Thuryl:

My contention, based on experience, is that people who have read the Bible are not, on average, morally better than people who have not.
No contention here. Reading about something does nothing if you don’t apply what’s read.

By the way, Ford makes cars knowing that some people will use their cars to intentionally hit others. Should they not make cars since they could be misused?

quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

That "His" writings should inspire so much confusion, division, contrariness, splits, denominations, bickering, wars, and evils shows how wise and capable the Christian God is of delivering clear instructions and intentions to humankind.
It’s clear to us. Confusion does not come from God or his word.

quote:
2000 years later of Bible inundation, and the world seems little closer to the promised Kingdom of God swallowing it up. But Jesus is of course coming back this year, and if not this year, then the next, and the next after that...hold on just a little longer folks. It's never here, but always just around the corner.
Maybe you don’t know what to look for or how to look for it. Here’s one sign:

2 Peter 3:3, 4 For YOU know this first, that in the last days there will come ridiculers with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires and saying: “Where is this promised presence of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep in death, all things are continuing exactly as from creation’s beginning.”

quote:
Originally written by Jumpin' Sarcasmon:

quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

There's Christian proverb that you know a tree by the fruit it bears. Good and rotten trees produce fruit accordingly. So if the Bible was from an wicked source it would instruct one to do wicked deeds. Does it? My examination tells me no. On the contrary it elevates thinking and morality.
Really? This is actually a line of logic that you accept? The reason I ask is because it smacks of pure prejudice. Plain and simple, if you judge that fruit by the parent tree, you are severely limiting your world.

Man. You pick the weirdest lines of argument some times. :rolleyes:
Hmm, one of us does not understand the other. I’m not judging the fruit by the tree, but the opposite. If a tree has delicious apples growing from it, it is a good apple tree. If a person does good to you and encourages you to do good as well, he’s a good person. I don’t know what prejudice you’re talking about.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Thursday, August 30 2007 13:12 Profile #34
quote:
Originally written by John Q. Random:

[QUOTE]The average person seems to act on inertia, judging by the fact that most people maintain the religion they're born into, and there are a few outliers who switch.
I think that's tue to some degree. I meet a lot of people that call themselves by their parents religion and believe it somewhat, but don't really practice. I find that to be the most common position - at least in southeastern Micigan.

quote:
Since the only source of information on Satan is the Bible, there's no way to know whether God wrote it or Satan did, or even if God wrote it and Satan corrupted it by tempting a few key scribes. Maybe Satan is the good guy after all and God has deceived everyone with the Bible.
This is really a very good point you all are raising. This is one way you would need to reason to find out the Bible's source. That's why I was asking what Satan's goal might be if it is not truly as revealed in the Bible. These trifles about scribal errors are so boring and nitpicky.

There's Christian proverb that you know a tree by the fruit it bears. Good and rotten trees produce fruit accordingly. So if the Bible was from an wicked source it would instruct one to do wicked deeds. Does it? My examination tells me no. On the contrary it elevates thinking and morality.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Thursday, August 30 2007 08:37 Profile #31
quote:
Originally written by Lt. Sullust:

EDIT: Apparently my count was a bit too low... Parting Waters ...
Yes, I forgot about Elijah and Elisha.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Thursday, August 30 2007 07:43 Profile #28
quote:
Originally written by Lt. Sullust:

quote:
The same way I rule out a warning of a robbery coming from the thief trying to break in. The Bible exposes Satan and his tactics.
Not necessarily, this could just be deception. It would certainly advantageous to have the enemy think they know your true strategy...
And what would Satan's true strategy be? The Bible says he wants us alienated from God, servants of himself, and/or dead and he does everything he can towards those ends.

Yes, I believe the miracles in the bible occured. I'm only recalling two sea partings atm though - one under Moses and one under joshua. I'm drawing a blank on the other two you mention.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Thursday, August 30 2007 06:58 Profile #26
Jumpin’ and Leftover, I understand the sentiment, but I guarantee I will not just sit and rant about the Bible and spirituality by myself. Even if I am behind all of the “derailing” (which is so not true), I certainly am not alone in my interest in the Bible and things spiritual. I was actually disappointed with the Europa thread, but you can’t make people talk or not talk about a topic. Think about it this way, maybe if people can focus their spiritualness here, other threads will be safe.

------------------

The arguments about the Bible passing through human hands is only valid if God doesn’t exist or if he didn’t mean the Bible to be given to humans. If he exists and wanted the Bible to be, then he certainly can protect it.

------------------

quote:
Originally written by Leftistking:

I see there is a teacup orbitting around the sun between Earth and Mars. However, I also say that no matter how hard you look, you will not be able to detect it. Also, I say that I learned of this from an ancient book written by a supposed circus clown who lived thousands of years ago, and that no one has heard of. Do you believe me?
Why can’t we detect the teacup, and more importantly why should we care?
------------------

quote:
Originally written by Thuryl:

How do you rule out the possibility that it was written by Satan to deceive humanity?
The same way I rule out a warning of a robbery coming from the thief trying to break in. The Bible exposes Satan and his tactics.

-------------------

quote:
Originally written by Synergy:

Why? Why do you think you believe it? Would the average person have come to the same conclusion if they weren't raised to believe it without question?
I don’t know what qualifies as an “average person,” but I know a lot of people that weren’t raised as a Christian that now believe the Bible. They believe because of a detailed thorough examination of the Scriptures has convinced them that the answers to the most important questions are to be found there. They believe because they see that the things they read actually work.

Many have been on a path very similar to what how you describe your own. One of my good buddies taught himself Hebrew and Koine Greek so he could figure things out for himself. Just accepting what someone else believes is mental laziness, but if you do a careful and systematic search and find a claim to make sense, accepting and acting on it is not lazy. It is the only wise course. It doesn’t have anything to do with needing to believe.

quote:
early transcribers both in Hebrew text and in other ancient languages both managed to mistransliterate years by a factor of ten. In the Hebrew texts, we wound up with Methusaleh living to 969 years old as a result.
Then Methusaleh’s father, Enoch, was 6 years old when he was born? This is a bit of a problem. A bigger problem is resolving the gradual decrease in age after the flood. Look at Genesis 11:10. The ages are 600 yrs for Shem, 438 for his son, 433, 464, 239, 239, 230, 148, 205. Then Abraham-175; Isaac-180; Jacob-147; Joseph-110. So where do the errors stop? It’s easy to say decimal places were moved or the years were months until you actually look at the accounts. For me, none of these ages is not problematic, when Adam and Eve were not supposed to die at all. If you don’t believe that people can live much longer than they do know and things have to work the way they do today, then I can understand.

quote:
2 Samuel 6:23 says "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death"

2 Samuel 21:8 says "But the king took...the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul"
Often the supposed discrepancies are a matter of perspective. In this case the traditional view is that Michal had no children of her own, but adopted her sister, Merab’s, sons and raised them as her own.

quote:
I am seriously interested in seeing how these are inerrant and inerrantly preserved by the God Who saw it important to give us a perfect book to live by and trust with our lives:

2 Kings 8:26 says "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."

2 Chronicles 22:2 says "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."
God preserving it doesn’t require that humans not make mistakes. It requires that we are able to sort them out. In this instance 2 Chron. 22:2 in the New World Translation reads “Twenty-two” and in the footnote refers to a Septuagint and another manuscript from the fifth century as sources. The case of David’s conflict with Hadadezer is similar.

quote:
Job:

"I will make mention of Rahab"
Rahab is a sea-demon or dragon from ancient Jewish folklore. 87:4

"Thou hast broken Rahab [the sea monster] in pieces." 89:10
This is from the Psalms, not Job. Your claims about these animals overlooks two important points:

1) Myths about animals does not mean that they don’t exist. I recently read about the sun spider that rips open camel bellies, hunts down men and kills them in their sleep, has speed like a cheetah, and is extremely large and viscious. There is actually a large and fast arachnid called the sun spider, but the myth surrounding it is overblown.
2) Just because an animal doesn’t exist now doesn’t mean it didn’t exist in the past.

Your critical eye also seems to be forcing literalism on the scriptures that you wouldn’t place on any other speech or writing. If you read that the president was as dumb as a box of rocks, what would you conclude? The writer is lying or using hyperbole?

quote:

When Jesus was crucified, there was three hours of complete darkness "over all the earth." It is strange that there is no record of this extraordinary event outside of the gospels. 23:44-45
So you conclude it did not happen because you don’t know of any other record? Is that logical? Also, it would be dark already in other places on the globe. But,most likely “earth” here means “land” as Matthew and Mark’s accounts indicate. So this would be localized darkness as in the case of the ninth plague on Egypt when the Israelites were not affected. Ex 10:21-23
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Wednesday, August 29 2007 19:57 Profile #240
ADoS, I made the other thread for the Bible stuff, but you can use it for whatever you want as far as I'm concerned.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Worst product name ever in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Wednesday, August 29 2007 19:36 Profile #4
Hilarious! I literally have tears in my eyes. It's amazing that folks had meetings and threw out ideas and had focus groups and concluded this is a good name. Did they not ever say it? Unbelievable.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Wednesday, August 29 2007 10:55 Profile #238
quote:
Originally written by SkeleTony:

"Beyond time"(not "above time") is a typical 'transcendence-rationalization' of many theists and such for trying to explain away the apparent paradox be of 'omniscience' and 'free will' and such. When I point out that an omniscient being himself could not have free will(and hence neither can anyone else which does away with the rationalization that HUMANS are to blame for "evil" which is the typical rationalization offered in answer to The Riddle of Epicurus/problem of evil), they posit that he is "beyond time" and that this somehow means he COULD simultaneously know the future and make decisions.
And this is why I’m saying you’re projecting opinions you’ve heard elsewhere here. God doesn’t know every single detail of the future. We do have choice. Wickedness comes from misuse of that freedom. No robots. No paradox.

quote:
I do not deny the existence of things by virtue of me not understanding them. I logically rule out things which are NOT UNDERSTANDABLE(period). BIG difference.
Is “logically rule out” = “deny the existence of”? This is what I mean by having a problem with not understanding things. If you say something is unreasonable so you can’t accept it, I can understand. If you say because you don’t understand a thing it doesn’t exist, you are unreasonable. I think that is the major qualm that I and the others are having with you. It may be just be lack of clear communication or we’re missing your point.

If humans were a blind species, would color exist?

quote:
If you are going to assert something that is nonsensical to the human, rational mind then you are going to have to back this up.
Yes, but what have I asserted nonsensically?! Unless you qualify questioning your assertion as irrational assertion, I’ve done no such thing.

quote:
p1. In defining "existence", we must be able to differentiate "existent" things from "imaginary" things. To not do so leads to inability to communicate or establish any existential truth or understanding of reality.

p2.The means by which we differentiate existential things from imaginary things is by sense contents primarily and logic(including linear sequential constraint…

p3. "Transcendent" and "supernatural" are defined as being "beyond observation-capability" and/or "beyond logic/rationality/linear constriant/etc".

C1 - Ergo, "transcendent things/supernatural things do not "exist" except as imaginary entities and concepts.
p1. OK.

p2. OK, but ones logic and sense can be limited by lack of knowledge, experience, or ability. At the risk of beating a dead horse, it may seem nonsensical to some that 299,999m/s added to 299,999m/s gives us 300,000m/s, but based on current understanding it can.

p3. And this is why I said you define things supernatural out of existence.

Find the flaw: I hereby call all fruit “apples.” Therefore any fruit that is not an apple does not exist.

Is it illogical to say there could be entities with a nature very different from our own? If not why? If so, is it possible we cannot fully grasp this nature? If not, do you believe that baboons know the nature of bacteria? Do bacteria not exist for baboons?

C1. Does not follow logically.

quote:
Yes, there IS a fallacy(or three) you committed above and you add another one here. You are citing a SUBJECTIVE text(the Bible) as if it were some OBJECTIVE source. Te Bible, as all holy scriptures, is interpreted and everyone has their own interpretations. NO where does it explicitly say "Use reason" or anything like that. That does not stop you from interpreting it to say such but this is due to psychological quirks such as pattern recognition behavior in humanity.
Cite the fallacy. You say reason is not a foundation of religion. I say that is too broad of a statement. To support my position I cite a religions textbook viewed as the foundation for Christianity.

Proverbs 14:15 Anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word, but the shrewd one considers his steps.

Acts 17:2 So according to Paul’s custom he went inside to them, and for three Sabbaths he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving by references…

Romans 12:1 Consequently I entreat YOU by the compassions of God, brothers, to present YOUR bodies a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God, a sacred service with YOUR power of reason.

One cannot have Biblical faith without reason. There’s a dumber version in which a person believes something because they want to or because they have been told it by parents, priests, or climatologists. But faith, as outlined in the Bible, is based on evidence and reason.

quote:
Reading the Bible is a leading cause of atheism amongst critical atheists for example. The Bible simply cannot be justified as reasonable.
Reading the Bible does not guarantee understanding it. Disbelief is not evidence that something doesn't exist. Some people read the Bible and are convinced it has all the answers and is what it claims to be. It is perfectly reasonable to them. What conclusion would you draw from that? Personally, there are a very small minority of accounts out of the many thousands that present difficulties in understanding. The vast majority of them and certainly the overall theme are perfectly clear and reasonable to me.

quote:
It is blatantly silly and bears all the earmarks of man-made doctrine. it makes perfect sense when we assume that it was written by nomadic sheep-herders of 2,000+ years ago(what with it's morality fables of children being slain for t4easing bald men, tower of babel etc.) but makes no sense at all if we assume an omni-max deity inspired/wrote the thing.
But it was not just written by shepherds, that’s a major fallacy and it that betrays the claim that one has read the Bible critically. If you had you would know that the penmen of the Bible included military generals, kings, high ranking imperial officials, lawyers, physicians, priests, judges, and tax collectors.

What would you expect from a book written by God that is not in the Bible? What do you see in the Bible that conveys it is man-made? In all fairness we should probably take this to another thread. I have a suspicion it may get closed by the powers that be, but we could give it a go.

http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=004455#000000
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
Man or God in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Wednesday, August 29 2007 10:45 Profile #0
This is a continuation of an aside from "The Sky is Falling?" http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004427 It started as a discussion about whether or not manmade global warming is hype, the practice of science, and the power of scientists . This involved the human inclination towards religiosity and the perception of reality, which digressed into a discussion about whether or not a spiritual realm is illogical. I think this is somewhat related to the original topic. But then, as spiritual discussions tend to do, this took a tangent towards the Bible’s authenticity. To be fair to the OP and anyone who wanted to talk about the original topic I thought we needed a new thread.

The claim from SkeleTony is that the Bible is man-made and illogical. I don’t know how well this discussion will be tolerated on these boards, but I think it is very relevant considering the bible’s impact on society. I for one believe it is God’s word and as such is in perfect harmony with itself, reality, and logic. I don’t pretend to know everything, but I am quite familiar with the Bible, it’s history, the cultures it was made in, and even it’s original languages to some extent. I have all sorts of reference material to make up for anything I don’t know.

So, if you feel like SkeleTony (I didn’t realize how funny that name is until I wrote it), if you had questions you wanted to ask your religious friends and family but didn’t want to make them feel stupid, if you feel they are stupid – here’s your chance. I have a high pain threshold, so you probably won’t offend me, and even if you do I can take it, Thuryl.

[ Wednesday, August 29, 2007 10:46: Message edited by: Stillness ]

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 1 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

function launch_voter () { launch_window("http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=poll;d=vote;pollid=NEDhnVzYdTmt"); return true; } // end launch_voter function launch_viewer () { launch_window("http://www.ironycentral.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=poll;d=view;pollid=NEDhnVzYdTmt"); return true; } // end launch_viewer function launch_window (url) { preview = window.open( url, "preview", "width=550,height=300,toolbar=no,location=no,directories=no,status,menubar=no,scrollbars,resizable,copyhistory=no" ); window.preview.focus(); return preview; } // end launch_window IMAGE(votenow.gif)     IMAGE(voteresults.gif)
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Tuesday, August 28 2007 07:41 Profile #217
quote:
Originally written by SkeleTony:

quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

quote:
Originally written by SkeleTony:
[b]
What does it mean, for example, for a God to "create the universe" if there was not a preceding moment where the universe did NOT exist
It’s not the preceding moment, but the preceding eternity that gets us.
Very "Sphynx-like"(See Mystery men) but does not answer the question.[/b]
The thing is I really don’t think I disagree so as to contend. It makes perfect sense to me that there was a moment before the universe. If you say there can be no being above time, I don’t know that I quite disagree with that. I guess you’d have to define “above time.” If a being has no beginning and no end and can accurately foresee and control events as he sees fit does that mean he is “above time?”

It seems to me that you have a problem understanding not understanding. You want to define everything as things you can understand or are aware of and anything you can’t understand as nonexistent. As has been pointed out, that is not sound logic. You want to place the ball in my court as if I was the one that made the matter of fact statement about what is and is not possible. Again, I did not. I questioned you about your statement as I thought you had some novel logic that would preclude a spiritual realm and was curious. So here’s an exercise that the gang here forced me to do when my logic was unclear. It will expose soundness or lack thereof. It helped me to be surer of my position and so I am forever grateful. DELINEATE YOUR LOGIC.

1. Only things I can comprehend exist.
2. I cannot comprehend supernatural entities.
3. Supernatural entities do not exist.

That is what you seem to be saying. Fix it if it is not representative of your position.

quote:
A bald assertion and hinting at a No true Scotsman fallacy here. Reason MAY be a part of SOME Christian faiths(depending on how one is defining these terms)....
There’s no fallacy as the Bible instructs Christians to use their thinking ability, reason, examine evidence, and to be sure of what they believe. I can somewhat agree with your latter statement though. Some religions discourage logical examination of doctrine. Some is different from all though, which is what you seemed to be implying.

-------------

Yes Drew, this thread has been hijacked.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Monday, August 27 2007 23:06 Profile #210
quote:
Originally written by Student of Trinity:

Everyone's emotional bias is for a static universe.
That's comforting. I thought I was alone. The only person I shared this with that seemed to care anything about it didn't feel the same way. Now that you're saying this I do remember hearing it about Einstein.

quote:
Theists have been chortling ever since, of course, since atheists had been appealing for centuries to the impossibility of time having a beginning.
Yeah, the Bible even mentions expansion. It's still disturbing to me for there to be current expansion though. When there are no atheists to harass I'm left with my uneasiness.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Monday, August 27 2007 22:05 Profile #208
quote:
Originally written by Jumpin' Sarcasmon:

quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

Your saw blades are not finely honed?! That the problem. You can build or destroy with the proper saw and a skilled, steady hand.
You are mis-informed. I suggest you learn a bit about carpentry before you speak out of turn.
Ridiculous! As someone who has used a sawzall to build stuff your ignorance is forgiven.

quote:
Originally written by Student of Trinity:

Speaking as a professional theoretical physicist
Awesome. I did not know this. Out of all things scientific, physics is my most favorite. While I was in college ignoring all of my studies, some of my fun time was spent in the library studying physics well beyond anything mechanical engineering required. It is to a large extent physics that made me believe again when my faith in God wavered.

You seem knowledgeable about astrophysics. Does your work involve that? How sure are you about the big bang? 100%? 90%? Why? How sure are you about an expanding universe? Somehow a currently expanding universe (especially the high rate of expansion) is unsettling to me. I've seen explanations of redshift as not solely an indicator of velocity but as an intrinsic quality of galaxies. I like this because a more static universe feels a lot better to me. And we know how important feelings are in science.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Monday, August 27 2007 18:45 Profile #206
quote:
Originally written by SkeleTony:

What does it mean, for example, for a God to "create the universe" if there was not a preceding moment where the universe did NOT exist
It’s not the preceding moment, but the preceding eternity that gets us. We’re accustomed to things having a start. It’s difficult to imagine something that doesn’t. I’m glad we can agree that there is though. That means that we can agree that something exists that we can’t quite wrap our brains around.

quote:
Originally written by SkeleTony:

quote:
It also seems a pretty bold claim to assume we know everything must be natural and physical – that was your claim.
Not at all bold. By definition all things must be natural and physical for we live in a natural and physical reality. This fact remains until one of you can cough up reason to infer otherwise.

What you are doing here is citing the lack of proof for your own speculation as the case for your speculation being true. If we DO live in a material reality(as all evidence points to) then we CANNOT have evidence for or against a 'non-physical' reality, which is why we have that "burden of proof" thing that falls on YOU making such a claim.
I think you are projecting some other discussion you’ve had on me. You made the claim about everything being physical and indicated having some logical basis for it. I made no such matter of fact claims to back up. All I did was ask you what the basis was. For all you know I could agree with you as I’ve given no indication either way. Now I see you’re forcing your point to be true by some definition you have.

quote:
False. If someone is employing methodology to arrive at understanding then they are using reason . I am not saying that no religious people use reason(quite the contrary). I am just saying that this is not part of a religious foundation itself.
Reason is inherent to Christian faith.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Monday, August 27 2007 09:39 Profile #202
Your saw blades are not finely honed?! That the problem. You can build or destroy with the proper saw and a skilled, steady hand.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Monday, August 27 2007 07:43 Profile #200
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

My point is valid because there are complicated factors, unknowns, and untestables at this point as concerns our climate. I asked what we should do when opinions differ and the response from TM was 'scientific method instead of prayer' as if we're not talking about a scientific disagreement and as if scientific method is guaranteed to resolve all disputes.
It is, when we actually get conclusive data. If what you're saying is true — and I don't think that it is — the most that you could possibly say is that we don't have enough information yet, not that the scientific method is not useful in answering this question.
I agree. I’m not arguing that this is unknowable. Which is why my answer to unresolved dispute is further investigation.

quote:
If our predictions about climate change are anywhere near as accurate as that, it hardly matters if there are some other minute factors we have yet to take into account that may also add or subtract a thousandth of a degree.
Unless we’re applying Newtonian techniques to something on relativistic scale.

quote:
Quit being asinine. No one is actually saying this. What people are saying is that we know enough now to get to a finite level of accuracy on this particular topic, not that we know everything about everything.
Kel, that sounds reasonable, but I talk to so many people and what I said is about what they believe. For example, I just read on this thread about shepherds 2000 years ago. What’s the implication? “Those people only knew about sheep. They didn’t have thoughts exactly like the ones we have today. They didn’t have science, and art, and complicated philosophy, politics, or technology. We are something more, so their beliefs are passé.”

That assumes so much and is such a misguided view. If things continue as they have some of our descendants will hold the same self-centered outlook of us in centuries to come. Unless we are just about at the pinnacle and only a very little bit is left to be tweaked. Yeah, that’s the ticket. In 1000 years, we’ll still believe basically the same things about biology, astrophysics, and the nature of the universe. Certainly our sacred beliefs, like relativity, evolution, and spontaneous generation will remain untouched.

--------------------

quote:
Originally written by SkeleTony:

And it must also conform to linear sequence(cannot be "beyond time" and similar nonsense for obvious reasons) because the simple act of BEING(let alone ACTING) requires such a span entailing the preceding moment to said action and/or the sequence that comprises "being".
By what rule must a real being be subject to time? Do you believe there was always something? Or always nothing, then something from nothing? If I’m not mistaken the general consensus is something. If that something is someone, it does not seem farfetched, even if difficult to understand, that time is not the same for them as for us. It also seems a pretty bold claim to assume we know everything must be natural and physical – that was your claim.

quote:
Religion has no methodological approach.
Maybe some religions, but not all.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Monday, August 27 2007 05:13 Profile #191
quote:
Originally written by Thuryl:

Now, science is in the business of providing answers: that's all it does. So if one has another religion that "hold[s] the answers to any questions worth answering", then one has no place for science, because one has no worthwhile questions for it to answer.
My faith provides answers to the most important questions. It doesn't work so well for cutting through pipes and branches though. For that I use my trusty Sawsall (reciprocating saw). It's the answer to a lot of problems I encounter. But, when I cut through too much with my saw I have problems.

Science, like my saw, has its place. When used where it should be used it works well. Its methods are tools for figuring, like FOIL in math. No one ever says, "I don't go for religion because I just remember FOIL."

So no, I'm not hostile to science. I am partial to a balanced view of it and those that practice it though. Unless...Are you trolling? :rolleyes: Does anyone else note the similarity between "Troll" and "Thuryl"?
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Sunday, August 26 2007 22:01 Profile #187
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

If you're trying to point out that Newtonian mechanics breaks down as you extrapolate them out to far, far, far beyond anything that Newton was ever able to test, then okay, but that's not really relevant to anything.... experimental results, in order to be valid, need to be replicable and can't ever really directly contradict each other unless they're not really comparable or someone made a mistake somewhere.
My point is valid because there are complicated factors, unknowns, and untestables at this point as concerns our climate. I asked what we should do when opinions differ and the response from TM was 'scientific method instead of prayer' as if we're not talking about a scientific disagreement and as if scientific method is guaranteed to resolve all disputes.

BTW, relativistic measurements are more precise at all velocities. Our limitations before yielded less accuracy. In some cases out limitations in observation have returned completely wrong understandings. It's a good thing our resources and abilities are infinite now, otherwise we'd still have inaccurate and completely wrong beliefs.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Sunday, August 26 2007 20:16 Profile #183
quote:
Originally written by Kelandon:

quote:
Originally written by Stillness:

EDIT: TM, do you think it's possible to use scientific method and arrive at different results?
Not if you're doing things properly, no.
I think you place too much confidence in scientific method.

If object A is moving at velocity V1 relative to an observer and object B is moving at V2 relative to object A, what is the velocity of object B relative to the observer? Depending on the knowledge of the scientists and the tools at their disposal the answer will be different. We think we know now. They thought they knew back then.

---------

quote:
Originally written by SkeleTony:

Everything which exists(outside of the imagination) IS natural/material/physical and must be so by definition.
I'm almost afraid to ask, but how do you know this? It seems you would have to know everything unless you define everything that exists with these terms, in which case your statement is meaningless.

I would not say the sciences are religion anymore than a hammer is. It's a tool. But if a guy collects hammers, dedicates his time and mental energies studying them, decorates them, and thinks they hold the answers to any questions worth answering then hammers have ceased to be just a tool - he's made them his religion. Not the superhuman, supernatural definition of religion, but the kind that involves devotion and belief. There are without question people for whom science holds this place.
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00
The Sky Is Falling...? in General
Stillness
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
 written Friday, August 24 2007 00:54 Profile #156
Well, we'll just have to think about that some more...
Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00

Pages