Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 69

Thread: Which Bible

  1. Top | #21
    Veteran Member Lion IRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,897
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post

    Where? In your mind?
    Just stick to the quote function rather than putting words in my mouth.
    I'm very confused about your postings. Are you trying to critique the "historical critical method", or just individual posters?

    I'm sorry you're confused.

    I don't understand how it is that an entire post confuses you so completely that you can't be specific about which part you find confusing.

    And I'm sorry that all your responses to my posts consist of asking me whether I'm saying something OTHER than what I actually wrote.

    How about you try this alternative method of discourse.

    "Hey Lion IRC, you [actually] wrote xyz and I disagree with you because...[insert evidence/reason/logic]"

    Or/

    "Hey Lion IRC could you please explain to me what you meant by xyz because I've never heard that term/word before and even a Google search didn't yield any results"

    Or/

    Hey Lion IRC even though you haven't actually stated xyz, I'd like to accuse you of thinking it because I'm hoping that will provoke you into admitting it.

  2. Top | #22
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    2,841
    Rep Power
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post

    Where? In your mind?
    Just stick to the quote function rather than putting words in my mouth.
    I'm very confused about your postings. Are you trying to critique the "historical critical method", or just individual posters?

    I'm sorry you're confused.

    I don't understand how it is that an entire post confuses you so completely that you can't be specific about which part you find confusing.

    And I'm sorry that all your responses to my posts consist of asking me whether I'm saying something OTHER than what I actually wrote.

    How about you try this alternative method of discourse.

    "Hey Lion IRC, you [actually] wrote xyz and I disagree with you because...[insert evidence/reason/logic]"

    Or/

    "Hey Lion IRC could you please explain to me what you meant by xyz because I've never heard that term/word before and even a Google search didn't yield any results"

    Or/

    Hey Lion IRC even though you haven't actually stated xyz, I'd like to accuse you of thinking it because I'm hoping that will provoke you into admitting it.
    If you followed your own advice, you might just answer the question instead of waffling on.

  3. Top | #23
    Super Moderator Atheos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Heart of the Bible Belt
    Posts
    2,534
    Archived
    5,807
    Total Posts
    8,341
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quick quiz.
    Q1. Any/all of the bible writers knew that their writing contained deliberate falsehood? Yes/No
    Q2. Any/all of the bible writers lunatics? Yes/No
    Q3. Any/all of the bible writers wrote historical/scientific truths and we can't account for how they learned such? Yes/No

    Bonus question - can the historical critical method provide objective proof/evidence that Moses or David or Luke were lunatics, liars or plagiarists?
    In a thread where the merits of textual scholarship is being questioned, these have to be some of the least scholarly questions ever. Somehow, based on writings where we have no idea who actually wrote them we're supposed to answer black and white questions about the motivations, integrity and/or sanity of people who have been dead for thousands of years. It's nonsense of the highest order.

    Try answering these questions about scriptures you don't venerate first and see where you get.

    Did any/all of the people involved in authoring the Rig Veda know that their writing contained deliberate falsehood?
    Were any of the people involved in authoring the Rig Veda lunatics?
    Did any writers of the Rig Veda write historical/scientific truths and we can't account for how they learned such?

    Koran?

    Book of Mormon?

    Greek / Roman / Babylonian / Egyptian mythology?

    The one thing all religious people who have a venerated scripture share is that they are eager to rationalize problems with their scripture while condemning other scriptures for the very same problems.

  4. Top | #24
    Veteran Member Lion IRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,897
    Rep Power
    18
    I would be happy to answer those questions.
    But you first.

  5. Top | #25
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Between two cities
    Posts
    2,266
    Archived
    56
    Total Posts
    2,322
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Atheos View Post
    In a thread where the merits of textual scholarship is being questioned, these have to be some of the least scholarly questions ever. Somehow, based on writings where we have no idea who actually wrote them we're supposed to answer black and white questions about the motivations, integrity and/or sanity of people who have been dead for thousands of years. It's nonsense of the highest order.

    Well I don't know about that. People find the phsycological aspects to be quite convincing ( I include myself I suppose, similar to Lee Strobel). Criminologists in their respected fields can get a pretty good picture, profiling unknown individuals. You don't have to be a forensic expert in the FBI to recognize human characteristics, taking from consistent texts throughout the bible, especially imo when you consider there to be a consistency ... from many writers involved.

    Try answering these questions about scriptures you don't venerate first and see where you get.

    Did any/all of the people involved in authoring the Rig Veda know that their writing contained deliberate falsehood?
    Were any of the people involved in authoring the Rig Veda lunatics?
    Did any writers of the Rig Veda write historical/scientific truths and we can't account for how they learned such?
    The bible has always acknowledged and never denied the existence of various beliefs of other gods, in the scriptures. Of course the bible says there can only be one true God.

    Koran?

    Book of Mormon?

    Greek / Roman / Babylonian / Egyptian mythology?

    The one thing all religious people who have a venerated scripture share is that they are eager to rationalize problems with their scripture while condemning other scriptures for the very same problems.
    Don't have time to put into detail but...

    It can't be helped if believers of different faiths venerate their own scriptures which is understandable (sort of in agreement). Just as the bible says: 'Test ALL Things' (which should be with all faiths). Stating the Obvious...continuous studies, comparing and pitching scriptures alongside each other may change peoples minds. It does happens.

  6. Top | #26
    Super Moderator Atheos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Heart of the Bible Belt
    Posts
    2,534
    Archived
    5,807
    Total Posts
    8,341
    Rep Power
    61
    Yeah, Lee Strobel may be a decent lawyer but he's nothing but a big, fat liar when it comes to his "hard nosed investigation" in "Case For Christ." Big. Fat. Liar.

    I have lived with my wife for many years and can't always tell what she's thinking or what her motivations are. People who think they can remote-diagnose psychoses of people based on writings they can't even be certain that individual produced and who they've never met and who died thousands of years ago are delusional at best. They can't be proven wrong of course, but they can certainly wow crowds of willing believers motivated by confirmation bias. Lots of money in that sort of thing.

    Did I mention that Strobel is a big, fat liar? I think I did but just wanted to be sure.

  7. Top | #27
    Super Moderator Atheos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Heart of the Bible Belt
    Posts
    2,534
    Archived
    5,807
    Total Posts
    8,341
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    I would be happy to answer those questions.
    But you first.
    Perhaps I wasn't clear: My post implied that I cannot answer those questions. I'm certain there isn't enough information to do so. The rational thing to do when insufficient information is available is to withhold making conclusions. I could offer opinions but that's all they would be.

    Feel free to jump to conclusions if that's your thing.

  8. Top | #28
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Between two cities
    Posts
    2,266
    Archived
    56
    Total Posts
    2,322
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Atheos View Post
    Yeah, Lee Strobel may be a decent lawyer but he's nothing but a big, fat liar when it comes to his "hard nosed investigation" in "Case For Christ." Big. Fat. Liar.

    I have lived with my wife for many years and can't always tell what she's thinking or what her motivations are. People who think they can remote-diagnose psychoses of people based on writings they can't even be certain that individual produced and who they've never met and who died thousands of years ago are delusional at best. They can't be proven wrong of course, but they can certainly wow crowds of willing believers motivated by confirmation bias. Lots of money in that sort of thing.

    Did I mention that Strobel is a big, fat liar? I think I did but just wanted to be sure.
    You were able to make that conclusion of Strobel by reading about him? Yes it is possible after all.

  9. Top | #29
    Contributor skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    5,230
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    18,206
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Atheos View Post
    Did I mention that Strobel is a big, fat liar?
    A liar, yes. But he has found that many believers are more than eager to pay dearly to hear the lie that there are no atheists, only theists who call themselves atheist so they can fornicate and carouse. I understand he has accumulated something like eight million dollars supplying this need that believers have to believe that atheists are just despicable theists defying god.

  10. Top | #30
    Veteran Member Lion IRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,897
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Atheos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    I would be happy to answer those questions.
    But you first.
    Perhaps I wasn't clear: My post implied that I cannot answer those questions. I'm certain there isn't enough information to do so. The rational thing to do when insufficient information is available is to withhold making conclusions. I could offer opinions but that's all they would be.

    Feel free to jump to conclusions if that's your thing.
    So you were asking rhetorically and assuming that since you can't answer no one can.

    OK
    Quick quiz. My answers to your rhetorical question.

    Q1. Any/all of the [Rig Veda] writers knew that their writing contained deliberate falsehood?
    No I don't think they told deliberate untruths. People who respect divine authority are the least likely to lie/blaspheme in the name of such an authority. Sincerely mistaken maybe. But not lying.


    Q2. Any/all of the [Rig Veda] writers lunatics?
    No. That is not my first instinct. I believe they were, at worst, reporting real experiences of a dream state or hallucination.
    See Lobsang Rampa, Jidda Krishnamurti, Mouni Sadhu.

    Q3. Any/all of the [Rig Veda] authors wrote historical/scientific truths and we can't account for how they learned such?
    Yes. This is well known.

    Bonus question - can the historical critical method provide objective proof/evidence that Moses or David or Luke were lunatics, liars or plagiarists?

    No. Because its very method is its limitation.

Similar Threads

  1. The Bible
    By steve_bank in forum Religious Texts
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-16-2019, 09:47 PM
  2. the dog ate the bible
    By BH in forum Freethought Humor
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-17-2018, 03:21 PM
  3. Murder in the bible
    By phands in forum General Religion
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 07-09-2018, 02:30 PM
  4. Most Ignored Bible Teachings
    By ideologyhunter in forum General Religion
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-22-2016, 03:52 PM
  5. The Bible
    By DLH in forum Religious Texts
    Replies: 171
    Last Post: 06-04-2015, 09:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •