The Tower of Babel -- History or Myth? Put your thinking caps on, guys and gals

Started by eyeshaveit, July 22, 2022, 10:40:48 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Francis

Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 03:05:11 PMwhich parts of scripture prove tbat yaweh is not mythology?

 ??? No one uses the Bible to show that God's existence is the best inference and most likely conclusion from the evidence in front of all of us.

Secondly, what does this have to do with the discussion about whether the Genesis creation story is to be viewed as a young earth (6 literal days and/or an earth that is 10,000 years old) or an old earth (an earth that is billions of years old)... and what does this have to do with whether people in Genesis lived or up to 900 years old, etc????

God Bless you

kevin

Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PMProof is whatever a person will BELIEVE is the best conclusion from the evidence they are presented with.  Evidence is a matter of objective truth whereas proof is in the mind of the evaluator.


you could have just posted ^^^this, francis. it summarizes all that you have said, and its exactly backwards. evidence is any piece of information that someone apllies to a question, and it can be irrelevant, hearsay, nonsense, or rhetorical. evidence is seldom objective.

proof is independent of the mind of the evaluator, and exists in the same way for everyone, everywhere. that does not mean that everybody is mentally equipped to believe or accept it.

proof is proof, and does not depend on belief. merely because someone believes that an idea has been proven does not mean that it been proven. it merely means that people frequently believe in unoproven or unproveable things. there is plenty of room for the fuzzy logic you describe in inductive reasoning, but induction does not prove anything. only deduction can establish black and white values for proven and disproven, and you avoid deduction when discussing this issue.

narrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

can you answer that question, or will you avoid it again? if you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.
dare to know.

Francis

Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 05:45:43 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 05:03:07 PMProof is whatever a person will BELIEVE is the best conclusion from the evidence they are presented with.  Evidence is a matter of objective truth whereas proof is in the mind of the evaluator.


you could have just posted ^^^this, francis. it summarizes all that you have said, and its exactly backwards. evidence is any piece of information that someone apllies to a question, and it can be irrelevant, hearsay, nonsense, or rhetorical. evidence is seldom objective.

proof is independent of the mind of the evaluator, and exists in the same way for everyone, everywhere. that does not mean that everybody is mentally equipped to believe or accept it.

proof is proof, and does not depend on belief. merely because someone believes that an idea has been proven does not mean that it been proven. it merely means that people frequently believe in unoproven or unproveable things. there is plenty of room for the fuzzy logic you describe in inductive reasoning, but induction does not prove anything. only deduction can establish black and white values for proven and disproven, and you avoid deduction when discussing this issue.

narrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

can you answer that question, or will you avoid it again? if you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

I disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

Kiahanie

An apple falls from the tree to the ground. That is evidence, not proof, that the apple falls to the ground because that is its natural place.

A cannon ball falls faster than a feather. That fact was used as evidence that heavy things fall faster, but that fact proves nothing.
"If there were a little more silence, if we all kept quiet ... maybe we could understand something." --Federico Fellini....."Silence is the language of God, all else is poor translation" -Jellaludin Rumi,

kevin

Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PMI disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

francis. ^^^this is unimportant. i'll repeat the important question one last time. if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on.

Quotenarrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

can you answer that question, or will you avoid it again? if you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

i will be specific. you have referred to scientists and historians. most scientists i know are atheists. is that what you think we should do with judeo-christian scripture?

dare to know.

maritime

Quote from: maritime on January 07, 2010, 07:58:42 AMhttp://radio.seti.org/
Jan. 4, 2010: Time's Mysteries Part II: Warping Time
3:45 to 20:53: Roy Gould ? Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

13:00 forward
Molly: Okay. So there's this relationship between speed and time. But time can also be warped by gravity as well, can't it?
Roy Gould: Yes.
M: How so?
RG: Yes. What Einstein discovered, or predicted, was that the closer you get to a massive object like the earth, the slower the scale of time, that is the more slowly time flows compared to the way it flows further away from a massive object. Now, here at the surface of the earth the effect is very, very slight so we don't really notice it. But if we lived closer to, let's say, the sun, or actually to a black hole, which is probably the densest object, then we would really notice it. If you could hover just outside a black hole, for example, time would flow so slowly, when we returned to earth everyone would--actually they'd be long since passed away and it would be thousands of years in the future. And so now you get to an extreme difference in time caused just by your proximity to a massive object.
M: So if I were to climb to the top of Mt. Everest--this is on my "to do list," by the way--time would run more quickly at the top of the mountain than it does down below?
RG: Very slightly more quickly. Yes.
M: Time--it's weird. I don't know another word for this, the way that time is warped by speed and by gravity is weird.
RG: Yes, it is weird. There is one, of course, very familiar effect from it and that is gravity itself. What Einstein showed was that here on earth at least where gravity is not so extreme, objects fall towards the earth because that is where time flows more slowly. And so when we drop an object we say, Oh it falls towards the earth. It's actually moving towards the region where time flows slightly more slowly. So even though we don't notice that effect, it's not a dramatic effect in terms of a clock, we certainly notice in it terms of the fall of objects. So if you're on top of Mt. Everest, you're not gaining very much in your clock, but if you fall off you'll certainly notice that effect.
M: Certainly if you fall off Mt. Everest you will probably notice the effect. Safe to say. Did you know that time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana?
...
M: The weirdness of time truly gets weird when you consider what happens to time in a black hole. Now if I were to fall into a black hole or, better yet, watch someone else falling into a black hole, what would I see?
RG: If you fall into a black hole and we imagine how that it's a very large black hole, so large that it takes you a long time to fall into the center and so you can observe what's going on. As you fall in, you notice nothing unusual as far as time goes. Your wrist watch runs exactly at the right time. Everything seems normal to you. But, again, that's where you are. To someone outside the black hole, they see something tremendously different. As you fall towards the black hole, your time appears to slow down and actually stop so that you appear to hover just outside the entrance to the black hole. It's called the event horizon. And the outside observer--we, sitting here in our studio--never actually see the person enter the black hole. You just see their image slowly fading away outside the black hole.
M: So my image would just freeze.
RG: Yes.
M: You would have just a still snapshot of me on the edge of a black hole.
RG: Exactly. And in the early days, the early astronomers called it a frozen star for that reason because anything falling into it appears to freeze.
M: That's a creepy image.
RG: Isn't it?
M: Well it is; it's a little unsettling. Now that's because there's this massive concentration of gravity in a black hole. That's what a black hole is, right, this massive concentration of gravity?
RG: Yes, and all the light that would normally just flow back out to us and send us an image is struggling to get out of the gravitational pull of the black hole and right at the horizon it can't get out. Even the light can't get out, it falls into the black hole, and so that's why we see nothing at all past that horizon.
M: Does time stop in a black hole, then? If you were in the center of a black hole would time be no more?
RG: Two amazing things happen inside a black hole with time and I find it hard to wrap my mind around it. The first is that time is predicted to come to an end at the very center of a black hole, at the singularity. We're talking now about the simplest kind of black hole, one that's not rotating or spinning. And that's a signal that our understanding of the laws of nature breaks down...umm, that Einstein's equations break down, that we really need a new understanding of how nature works. We don't know what it means for time to come to a complete end. The "time line"--whatever that direction of time means--it's suddenly cut off right at the center of a black hole. And so some physicists have called the black hole the reverse of creation. We don't know how time began either. How could it suddenly start? And so, in a sense, a black hole is that creation of the universe in reverse. Everything is destroyed at the center. Time apparently comes to an end. But we don't really know. We don't yet have the science to describe it.
RG: Now a second amazing thing happens inside a spinning black hole and I find this-- Don't ask me to describe it, Molly, but I'm just going to tell you where that state of the science is. When you fall to a certain distance inside a black hole and you can turn around and look at light coming into the black hole from outside, you're seeing light from every part of the universe pouring into your black hole. And the difference in time inside and outside the universe is so great that you actually can see the entire future of the universe, that is, the outside future of the universe, coming in and impinging on a spot inside the black hole.
M: How can you see things that haven't happened yet?
RG: They haven't happened but there's no contradiction because nothing that you do inside the hole can ever influence what happens outside the hole. Einstein once said to the widow of a friend of his who had just passed away, he said, You know, to a practicing physicist the past, present and future are one and the same thing. By which he meant, perhaps everything that can happen in the universe has already happened: we've made all of our choices already, that all of our free will has been exercised, we've been born, we've lived and we've even died, but we haven't--however nature replays all of that, we haven't gotten to it yet. And that's a very strange thought about time. I don't like to think of that.
M: Roy Gould, thank you very much for talking to us.
RG: My pleasure. Thank you, Molly.
North Star Polaris Sept 26, 2021 photo by JE

Shnozzola

Fran, the interesting thing about your views is that you refuse to see how you pick and choose like everyone else. I'm sure you could find condemnation as having too liberal of a biblical view, while also finding condemnation for having too conservative a view of the bible.


To take that to all extremes, more and more liberal, or more and more conservative, that is the thing that allows me to believe that even agnostics and atheists are as welcome as the most conservative religious position one can imagine in a totally unpredictably orthodox view of the strangest religion we can imagine.


You always seem to have such a strong opinion of where your deity wants to draws that line. Interestingly, that is just where your views are.


For myself, I still don't think there is a line, whether due to no deity, or universalism.
Ironically, the myriad  of "god" beliefs of humanity are proving to be more dangerous than us learning that we are on our own, making the way we treat each other far more important

eyeshaveit

Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMexplain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

All (Holy Bible) scripture is true. But all such scripture is not similarly easy to explain to the unbeliever. So the Atheist/agnostic concentrates on these more "difficult" passages hoping to confound his prey while he merrily racks up points for himself -- all the while avoiding the God and truth offering eternal life.
Jesus Christ died so you could have access to God.

kevin

Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 01, 2022, 08:33:02 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMexplain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

All (Holy Bible) scripture is true. But all such scripture is not similarly easy to explain to the unbeliever. So the Atheist/agnostic concentrates on these more "difficult" passages hoping to confound his prey while he merrily racks up points for himself -- all the while avoiding the God and truth offering eternal life.


eyes, in my readings of scripture i have found close to two dozen examples of passages that contradict in matters of numbers, chronology, identities, places, quoting of other passages, or that describe events in contradictory ways. some of these are well-known and have been debated for the 1700 or so years that christian scripture has existed. they're not important for doctrine, but they give the lie to the statement that all scripture is "true," if "true" means historically factual.

their difficulty lies not in being hard to explain to an unbeliever, but in simply being contradictory. you have shown no interest in thinking about scripture critically, so i haven't bothered listing any of them. and i don't have much interest in reading the increasingly nasty comments you've started posting about people with whom you find disagreement.

but if anyone else here is interested in learning a few places where christian scripture is not "true," i would be happy to discuss them. they're not hard to find, and the inconsistencies are not hard to see.
dare to know.

Kiahanie

Eyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?
"If there were a little more silence, if we all kept quiet ... maybe we could understand something." --Federico Fellini....."Silence is the language of God, all else is poor translation" -Jellaludin Rumi,

Kiahanie

Maritime-- thanks for that post. Gould explains well, and describes the unexplainable rather than trying to explain it. Seems consistent with Kevin's view of time.
"If there were a little more silence, if we all kept quiet ... maybe we could understand something." --Federico Fellini....."Silence is the language of God, all else is poor translation" -Jellaludin Rumi,

8livesleft

QuoteExactly, there is no basis for thinking that time lengths in the Genesis text is to taken literally... and that is why must Jews and most Christians are not young earthers.  The polls shows that only 1 in 10 Christians and Americans are young earthers.


That's about 240 million people, man. That's over 2x the population of my entire country. Imagine if a whole country believed that, that would be considered a complete failure of an education system.

Or complete success depending how you look at it...



eyeshaveit

Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 10:33:32 PM
Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 01, 2022, 08:33:02 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMexplain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.

All (Holy Bible) scripture is true. But all such scripture is not similarly easy to explain to the unbeliever. So the Atheist/agnostic concentrates on these more "difficult" passages hoping to confound his prey while he merrily racks up points for himself -- all the while avoiding the God and truth offering eternal life.


eyes, in my readings of scripture i have found close to two dozen examples of passages that contradict in matters of numbers, chronology, identities, places, quoting of other passages, or that describe events in contradictory ways. some of these are well-known and have been debated for the 1700 or so years that christian scripture has existed. they're not important for doctrine, but they give the lie to the statement that all scripture is "true," if "true" means historically factual.

their difficulty lies not in being hard to explain to an unbeliever, but in simply being contradictory. you have shown no interest in thinking about scripture critically, so i haven't bothered listing any of them. and i don't have much interest in reading the increasingly nasty comments you've started posting about people with whom you find disagreement.

but if anyone else here is interested in learning a few places where christian scripture is not "true," i would be happy to discuss them. they're not hard to find, and the inconsistencies are not hard to see.

There are more than 400 seemingly contradictory passages in the Bible. But they have all been explained and with the Internet the explanations are very easy to find.

As for my being "nasty" I wasn't aware of this and I certainly have no intention of being unkind, rude or malicious. And I wonder if these so-called posts of mind are just a matter of not being carefully read. Because if my God exists we dwell in the midst of the trappings of hate, revenge, aggression and war. And to label these things as such is not to indict anyone that posts on this forum. If the God of the Bible exists then evil intent winds its way through all of his opposing forces and their literature and accoutrements, etc.

This is much more your forum than mind, Kevin -- and I left these regions twice before without so much as a hiccup. So perhaps if my ramblings greatly offend, you ought to consider extending yourself to buy some peace for yourself by getting me disengaged. After all you would still have Francis-the-Good to joust with. 
Jesus Christ died so you could have access to God.

eyeshaveit

Quote from: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PMEyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?

What is truth? Truth is defined as conforming with fact or reality. Truth is genuine. Truth is veracity. Truth is reality and how things actually are. Holy Bible truth is always consistent with the will and being of God. God declares the nature of truth -- God made it so. God's very nature is truth and should always be described as such.
Jesus Christ died so you could have access to God.

Kiahanie

Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 02, 2022, 08:32:07 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PMEyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?

What is truth? Truth is defined as conforming with fact or reality. Truth is genuine. Truth is veracity. Truth is reality and how things actually are. Holy Bible truth is always consistent with the will and being of God. God declares the nature of truth -- God made it so. God's very nature is truth and should always be described as such.

I guess we are not synchronous. I see "facts" as derivative facets of reality, not reality itself.

To answer the question, I understand "truth" to be an accurate representation f the relationships that exist between "things that exist."
"If there were a little more silence, if we all kept quiet ... maybe we could understand something." --Federico Fellini....."Silence is the language of God, all else is poor translation" -Jellaludin Rumi,

eyeshaveit

Quote from: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PMEyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?

Yes/No
Jesus Christ died so you could have access to God.

Francis

Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PMI disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

francis. ^^^this is unimportant.

I disagree again.  You keep saying that there is no evidence or very little for the existence of God.  So the words "evidence" and "proof" are very important.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi'll repeat the important question one last time. if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on.

That's cool, but that would be completely on you, and it won't be for anything I've done or not able to do in timely manners. Just because you come to a faulty and baseless conclusion, that doesn't justify your actions to act with false knowledge.

I often work 13hr days with my mind fully engaged and razor focused on my many technical tasks during the day... and when I get home, I'm sapped of all energy and crash.  Then I wake up early in the morning and resume the whole daily process again, 6 days a week. Add to that is the quiet time or prayer and meditation that I spend with my Lord to start and end each day, and the days are very long.

Sometimes I get a small window of opportunity to visit our forum and that is why you will see short periods of activity interspersed between long periods of inactivity.

To conclude that I am unable to answer a question of yours... or someone else in here... just because I happen to work extremely long days and I lack the time to devote to this forum like I would like to... is sheer folly and completely unwarranted.

After long stretches of hours and days completely focused on my tasks at work, I will not only be exhausted, but often, I will forget where I left off in a conversation.  And if you visit the name of the different threads in this forum, you'll notice right away that the names of the  threads don't always give you a clue as to all the things that were discussed in that particular thread.

And so I often not only forget what I was last working on... but I also find it difficult to find the conversation I was last in. And then when I get sidetracked in another conversation, that only exacerbates the problem.

For example, I can only remember one conversation with you that I "owe" you a response in.  It was about whether Jesus ever claimed... or the people believed that Jesus claimed or implied... to be God.  I wish I had a secretary to help me with keeping track with the different conversations and their locations, in which I'm involved in.

If you are truly truly truly interested in hearing my take or opinion on a question/objection you may have, then simply have mercy and remind me and tell me what it was and where it was, and I will do my best to accommodate you.

If this is not satisfactory to you, then that only reveals your personal psychology and has nothing to do with the facts of what is happening in my life and the limited time I have and whether or not I can answer a question.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMnarrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.
I already offered an answer, but I will offer it again. Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMcan you answer that question, or will you avoid it again?
I've never avoided a question, unless the question was being deliberately derogatory and the person asking the question had no desire to be serious and sincere.




Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMif you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

If you consider that I choose to avoid a serious and sincere question, then you do so without any warrant... and so all you do is reveal your own personal psychology and personal bias and prejudice by deliberately engaging in faulty and baseless conclusions.

You seem to have forgotten that I've asked you questions that you never responded to.  And yet not once did I think you were avoiding it. Instead I gave you grace and the benefit of doubt and thought that you must be extremely busy, like me... and so forgot it... like me.

Indeed, you've even admitted that you often don't read my posts if they are too long for your sensibilities and focus, so there are times when I never avoided or didn't answer your question, it was just simply a case that you didn't read my answer.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi will be specific.

Awesome. That's always a very good start for a fruitful discussion.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMyou have referred to scientists and historians. most scientists i know are atheists.

That appears to be an Ad populum fallacy.

Just because a person is called a scientist, that doesn't mean that the scientific data leads to atheism or that a person is justified in being an atheist because of the scientific data,  since science... the process and the data itself... can't prove or contribute anything to the question of whether God exits or not, to begin with.

The human beings who are scientists are just that... flawed human beings like you and I... subject to the same fallen sin nature and prejudices that all humans are subject and prone to.  What is important is not the scientists themselves (in so far that they are fallible human beings with their own agendas like all of us)... but what is important instead is the scientific data itself.

You YOURSELF have repeated many times that you are not impressed with what scientists say... especially when I or others bring them up as evidence in an argument (like in your debate UnklE)... but that you want to be able to look at the scientific data ITSELF and to make your OWN INFORMED decision/opinion about the scientific data.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMis that what you think we should do with judeo-christian scripture?

Already answered above.  Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.

And the science helps us to understand what is or is not NATURALLY possible.  Science helps us to understand the NATURAL world and universe. Not God Himself.


God Bless

Kiahanie

Quote from: eyeshaveit on August 03, 2022, 05:17:27 AM
Quote from: Kiahanie on August 01, 2022, 10:46:27 PMEyes might share my distinction between "factual" and "true", that truth lies in the relationship between facts, not in facts themselves. Are we synchronous here, Eyes?

Yes/No

Intriguing. I would like to know more about that answer, Eyes.
"If there were a little more silence, if we all kept quiet ... maybe we could understand something." --Federico Fellini....."Silence is the language of God, all else is poor translation" -Jellaludin Rumi,

8livesleft

Quote... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.


You're putting Jesus on equal historic footing as Alexander the Great?


kevin

Quote from: Francis on August 03, 2022, 05:37:07 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PMI disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

francis. ^^^this is unimportant.

I disagree again.  You keep saying that there is no evidence or very little for the existence of God.  So the words "evidence" and "proof" are very important.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi'll repeat the important question one last time. if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on.

That's cool, but that would be completely on you, and it won't be for anything I've done or not able to do in timely manners. Just because you come to a faulty and baseless conclusion, that doesn't justify your actions to act with false knowledge.

I often work 13hr days with my mind fully engaged and razor focused on my many technical tasks during the day... and when I get home, I'm sapped of all energy and crash.  Then I wake up early in the morning and resume the whole daily process again, 6 days a week. Add to that is the quiet time or prayer and meditation that I spend with my Lord to start and end each day, and the days are very long.

Sometimes I get a small window of opportunity to visit our forum and that is why you will see short periods of activity interspersed between long periods of inactivity.

To conclude that I am unable to answer a question of yours... or someone else in here... just because I happen to work extremely long days and I lack the time to devote to this forum like I would like to... is sheer folly and completely unwarranted.

After long stretches of hours and days completely focused on my tasks at work, I will not only be exhausted, but often, I will forget where I left off in a conversation.  And if you visit the name of the different threads in this forum, you'll notice right away that the names of the  threads don't always give you a clue as to all the things that were discussed in that particular thread.

And so I often not only forget what I was last working on... but I also find it difficult to find the conversation I was last in. And then when I get sidetracked in another conversation, that only exacerbates the problem.

For example, I can only remember one conversation with you that I "owe" you a response in.  It was about whether Jesus ever claimed... or the people believed that Jesus claimed or implied... to be God.  I wish I had a secretary to help me with keeping track with the different conversations and their locations, in which I'm involved in.

If you are truly truly truly interested in hearing my take or opinion on a question/objection you may have, then simply have mercy and remind me and tell me what it was and where it was, and I will do my best to accommodate you.

If this is not satisfactory to you, then that only reveals your personal psychology and has nothing to do with the facts of what is happening in my life and the limited time I have and whether or not I can answer a question.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMnarrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.
I already offered an answer, but I will offer it again. Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMcan you answer that question, or will you avoid it again?
I've never avoided a question, unless the question was being deliberately derogatory and the person asking the question had no desire to be serious and sincere.




Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMif you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

If you consider that I choose to avoid a serious and sincere question, then you do so without any warrant... and so all you do is reveal your own personal psychology and personal bias and prejudice by deliberately engaging in faulty and baseless conclusions.

You seem to have forgotten that I've asked you questions that you never responded to.  And yet not once did I think you were avoiding it. Instead I gave you grace and the benefit of doubt and thought that you must be extremely busy, like me... and so forgot it... like me.

Indeed, you've even admitted that you often don't read my posts if they are too long for your sensibilities and focus, so there are times when I never avoided or didn't answer your question, it was just simply a case that you didn't read my answer.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi will be specific.

Awesome. That's always a very good start for a fruitful discussion.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMyou have referred to scientists and historians. most scientists i know are atheists.

That appears to be an Ad populum fallacy.

Just because a person is called a scientist, that doesn't mean that the scientific data leads to atheism or that a person is justified in being an atheist because of the scientific data,  since science... the process and the data itself... can't prove or contribute anything to the question of whether God exits or not, to begin with.

The human beings who are scientists are just that... flawed human beings like you and I... subject to the same fallen sin nature and prejudices that all humans are subject and prone to.  What is important is not the scientists themselves (in so far that they are fallible human beings with their own agendas like all of us)... but what is important instead is the scientific data itself.

You YOURSELF have repeated many times that you are not impressed with what scientists say... especially when I or others bring them up as evidence in an argument (like in your debate UnklE)... but that you want to be able to look at the scientific data ITSELF and to make your OWN INFORMED decision/opinion about the scientific data.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMis that what you think we should do with judeo-christian scripture?

Already answered above.  Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.

And the science helps us to understand what is or is not NATURALLY possible.  Science helps us to understand the NATURAL world and universe. Not God Himself.


God Bless

sorry francis

tldr
dare to know.

maritime

North Star Polaris Sept 26, 2021 photo by JE

Francis

Quote from: kevin on August 04, 2022, 06:14:29 AM
Quote from: Francis on August 03, 2022, 05:37:07 PM
Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 01, 2022, 06:05:03 PMI disagree. I'm using  the term evidence and proof in the same manner that detectives and courtroom uses them

Evidence
The facts we offer to support our claims of truth

Proof
What we infer from the facts offered

francis. ^^^this is unimportant.

I disagree again.  You keep saying that there is no evidence or very little for the existence of God.  So the words "evidence" and "proof" are very important.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi'll repeat the important question one last time. if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on.

That's cool, but that would be completely on you, and it won't be for anything I've done or not able to do in timely manners. Just because you come to a faulty and baseless conclusion, that doesn't justify your actions to act with false knowledge.

I often work 13hr days with my mind fully engaged and razor focused on my many technical tasks during the day... and when I get home, I'm sapped of all energy and crash.  Then I wake up early in the morning and resume the whole daily process again, 6 days a week. Add to that is the quiet time or prayer and meditation that I spend with my Lord to start and end each day, and the days are very long.

Sometimes I get a small window of opportunity to visit our forum and that is why you will see short periods of activity interspersed between long periods of inactivity.

To conclude that I am unable to answer a question of yours... or someone else in here... just because I happen to work extremely long days and I lack the time to devote to this forum like I would like to... is sheer folly and completely unwarranted.

After long stretches of hours and days completely focused on my tasks at work, I will not only be exhausted, but often, I will forget where I left off in a conversation.  And if you visit the name of the different threads in this forum, you'll notice right away that the names of the  threads don't always give you a clue as to all the things that were discussed in that particular thread.

And so I often not only forget what I was last working on... but I also find it difficult to find the conversation I was last in. And then when I get sidetracked in another conversation, that only exacerbates the problem.

For example, I can only remember one conversation with you that I "owe" you a response in.  It was about whether Jesus ever claimed... or the people believed that Jesus claimed or implied... to be God.  I wish I had a secretary to help me with keeping track with the different conversations and their locations, in which I'm involved in.

If you are truly truly truly interested in hearing my take or opinion on a question/objection you may have, then simply have mercy and remind me and tell me what it was and where it was, and I will do my best to accommodate you.

If this is not satisfactory to you, then that only reveals your personal psychology and has nothing to do with the facts of what is happening in my life and the limited time I have and whether or not I can answer a question.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMnarrowing down to the evidence from the bible, i asked you to explain how you determine which parts are true and which are not.
I already offered an answer, but I will offer it again. Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMcan you answer that question, or will you avoid it again?
I've never avoided a question, unless the question was being deliberately derogatory and the person asking the question had no desire to be serious and sincere.




Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMif you choose to avoid it, i will consider the question answered and will move on.

If you consider that I choose to avoid a serious and sincere question, then you do so without any warrant... and so all you do is reveal your own personal psychology and personal bias and prejudice by deliberately engaging in faulty and baseless conclusions.

You seem to have forgotten that I've asked you questions that you never responded to.  And yet not once did I think you were avoiding it. Instead I gave you grace and the benefit of doubt and thought that you must be extremely busy, like me... and so forgot it... like me.

Indeed, you've even admitted that you often don't read my posts if they are too long for your sensibilities and focus, so there are times when I never avoided or didn't answer your question, it was just simply a case that you didn't read my answer.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMi will be specific.

Awesome. That's always a very good start for a fruitful discussion.



Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMyou have referred to scientists and historians. most scientists i know are atheists.

That appears to be an Ad populum fallacy.

Just because a person is called a scientist, that doesn't mean that the scientific data leads to atheism or that a person is justified in being an atheist because of the scientific data,  since science... the process and the data itself... can't prove or contribute anything to the question of whether God exits or not, to begin with.

The human beings who are scientists are just that... flawed human beings like you and I... subject to the same fallen sin nature and prejudices that all humans are subject and prone to.  What is important is not the scientists themselves (in so far that they are fallible human beings with their own agendas like all of us)... but what is important instead is the scientific data itself.

You YOURSELF have repeated many times that you are not impressed with what scientists say... especially when I or others bring them up as evidence in an argument (like in your debate UnklE)... but that you want to be able to look at the scientific data ITSELF and to make your OWN INFORMED decision/opinion about the scientific data.


Quote from: kevin on August 01, 2022, 07:32:38 PMis that what you think we should do with judeo-christian scripture?

Already answered above.  Christians ask for only one thing... and that is to treat the Bible as you would treat any other historical documents... especially about the lives of ancient peoples, etc.  From that process,  historians are able to glean non-miraculous historical nuggets from the narrative... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.

And the science helps us to understand what is or is not NATURALLY possible.  Science helps us to understand the NATURAL world and universe. Not God Himself.


God Bless

sorry francis

tldr


Sorry Kevin

You just proved what I said.  How can you say that I don't answer your questions or that I avoid them if you don't read my answers to begin with???

Not only that, but you yourself have written much longer posts than the one I wrote above.

You even said above: "if you refuse to answer it again, i will conclude it is because you are unable to answer it and i will move on."   Well, the fact that I did answer your question but you didn't read it, shows that you have no merit or warrant for saying that I REFUSE to answer your questions or that I try to AVOID them.

Is this an example of you refusing and avoiding my answers?

Your claims have even less merit when I explained the time and physical constraints I'm operating under, and yet you didn't read that as well.

Anyway, while you may not extend mercy to me, I will always extend mercy to you and give you the benefit of doubt.

God Bless you sir




Francis

Quote from: 8livesleft on August 04, 2022, 02:26:38 AM
Quote... just like they do with Alexander the Great and many others.


You're putting Jesus on equal historic footing as Alexander the Great? 


????? What does your question mean?  Are you on equal historic footing as George Washington and Alexander the Great and Socrates and Napoleon?  Aren't you all historical figures/persons/human beings? Yes.  All of you existed.  So I don't understand your question.

kevin

francis, we havent proven anything except that you are unable to say anything in a concise enough manner that i have time to read it.

dare to know.

8livesleft

Francis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources. 

That's the difference.

Francis

Quote from: kevin on August 04, 2022, 05:44:26 PMfrancis, we havent proven anything except that you are unable to say anything in a concise enough manner that i have time to read it.


Kevin, all you've shown is your personal biased psychology and your inconsistency. 

(1) you yourself have written much longer posts than the one I had written in #166.   (2)  You keep saying I will avoid your questions and/or I am unable to answer your questions, and yet you don't read my answers to your questions, nor the conditions and time constraints I'm operating under in my life. And so your claims/opinions are empty.

As I said before, while you may not extend mercy to me, I will always extend mercy to you and give you the benefit of doubt for the reasons for your inconsistency... because of your intrinsic value as a human being that is made in the image of God. 

I admire you and I have no desire to try and "win" a point.  It's not about me... All I care about is your eternity.

God Bless you sir


Francis

Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.

That's the difference.


Then you don't know or understand what evidence there is for Alexander the Great nor for Socrates nor for Shakespeare nor for Jesus, etc that historians use to determine that these and other ancient figures existed.

Indeed, it is obvious that you don't even know or want to know or want to believe  the evidence that many atheistic historians use to help  them determine which figures are historical.  And you don't even know what the case for the existence of Jesus' historicity is.

After the vast majority of historians (atheist and theist and agnostics alike) looked at all the evidence impartially, they have resoundingly said that Jesus deniers are a fringe group... just like flat earthers and the holocaust deniers.  And I had given you the citations for that.

Are you a flat earther or a holocaust denier or a fringe conspiracy theorists? I don't think you are.

Secondly, you don't understand the criteria that historians use to determine the reliability of ancient historical accounts and in determining which parts of the ancient document can be assessed as historical.

Thirdly, you don't understand the process that historians use to be able to glean non-miraculous historical facts from ancient documents... even if  the documents are filled with "miracles", etc like many ancient documents are.

etc etc

Think about it for a moment.  Let's suppose that after a great apologpytic world war... all records of your existence disappears or is erased... and the only record anyone in the future has of your existence is your mom's claim.  Does that make you any less historical and less real?  Of course not.  If your mom is considered reliable, then there is no  reason to doubt her claim that she gave birth to you.

The burden of proof is on anyone who doubts your mom's veracity.

That's the difference

Hope you and your family are doing well

Kiahanie

Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.

That's the difference.


Then you don't know or understand what evidence there is for Alexander the Great nor for Socrates nor for Shakespeare nor for Jesus, etc that historians use to determine that these and other ancient figures existed.

Indeed, it is obvious that you don't even know or want to know or want to believe  the evidence that many atheistic historians use to help  them determine which figures are historical.  And you don't even know what the case for the existence of Jesus' historicity is.

After the vast majority of historians (atheist and theist and agnostics alike) looked at all the evidence impartially, they have resoundingly said that Jesus deniers are a fringe group... just like flat earthers and the holocaust deniers.  And I had given you the citations for that.

Are you a flat earther or a holocaust denier or a fringe conspiracy theorists? I don't think you are.

Secondly, you don't understand the criteria that historians use to determine the reliability of ancient historical accounts and in determining which parts of the ancient document can be assessed as historical.

Thirdly, you don't understand the process that historians use to be able to glean non-miraculous historical facts from ancient documents... even if  the documents are filled with "miracles", etc like many ancient documents are.

etc etc

Think about it for a moment.  Let's suppose that after a great apologpytic world war... all records of your existence disappears or is erased... and the only record anyone in the future has of your existence is your mom's claim.  Does that make you any less historical and less real?  Of course not.  If your mom is considered reliable, then there is no  reason to doubt her claim that she gave birth to you.

The burden of proof is on anyone who doubts your mom's veracity.

That's the difference

Hope you and your family are doing well

The point is not whether a person we call Jesus ever existed, but whether the claims made about him are factual.

There is a great deal of historical evidence supporting many of the claims made concerning Alexander the Great, Socrates, Shakespeare. Not so much for Jesus and King Arthur.
"If there were a little more silence, if we all kept quiet ... maybe we could understand something." --Federico Fellini....."Silence is the language of God, all else is poor translation" -Jellaludin Rumi,

Francis

Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMFran, the interesting thing about your views is that you refuse to see how you pick and choose like everyone else. I'm sure you could find condemnation as having too liberal of a biblical view, while also finding condemnation for having too conservative a view of the bible.


To take that to all extremes, more and more liberal, or more and more conservative, that is the thing that allows me to believe that even agnostics and atheists are as welcome as the most conservative religious position one can imagine in a totally unpredictably orthodox view of the strangest religion we can imagine.


You always seem to have such a strong opinion of where your deity wants to draws that line. Interestingly, that is just where your views are.


For myself, I still don't think there is a line, whether due to no deity, or universalism.


Hello Shnozzola,  (are you a relative of Jimmy Durante?)



Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMFran, the interesting thing about your views is that you refuse to see how you pick and choose like everyone else. I'm sure you could find condemnation as having too liberal of a biblical view, while also finding condemnation for having too conservative a view of the bible.

The fact that everyone picks and chooses, only proves that not everyone is correct or can be correct, because that would violate the law of non contradiction.

I've seen Nobel laureate scientists express contradictory opinions and conclusions after they look at the SAME scientific evidence.

Obviously, even scientists are prone to pick and choose and can't all be correct if they contradict each other.

So what is the answer?

Each side makes their case, citing the evidence they use to support their case... and then everyone must determine for themselves which case has more rational merit and is a more reasonable inference from the facts and evidences in the case.

Agreed?




Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMTo take that to all extremes, more and more liberal, or more and more conservative, that is the thing that allows me to believe that even agnostics and atheists are as welcome as the most conservative religious position one can imagine in a totally unpredictably orthodox view of the strangest religion we can imagine.

I honestly don't know what that means.





Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMYou always seem to have such a strong opinion of where your deity wants to draws that line. Interestingly, that is just where your views are.

I'm confident in my opinion because I've had my opinions tested in the crucible of public forums.

But...

(1) A strong opinion is no guarantee that a person is correct or not. You can have an atheist with a strong opinion in favor of atheism and you can have a theist with a strong opinion in favor of theism.

But logically, they can't both be correct... even though they both have a strong opinion.

(2) Additionally, there is nothing wrong with a strong opinion.  I have a strong opinion that 1+1=2.  I have a strong opinion that the earth is not flat.  I have a strong opinion that the universe is billions of years old. I have a strong opinion that you have intrinsic value and worth.  I have a strong opinion that you exist.  I have a strong opinion that you are intelligent.  I have a strong opinion that God loves you so much.

And I'm sure you have strong opinions about some of the stuff in your own worldview.  As I think everyone does.  Some more than others.

So what do we do?  We always have to go back to what I said earlier... which is that each side or person makes their case, and then let it be judged on its own evidentiary and logical merits.  There is nothing else we can do when people have mutually exclusive strong opinions.



Quote from: Shnozzola on August 01, 2022, 08:13:42 PMFor myself, I still don't think there is a line, whether due to no deity, or universalism.

Still unclear what that means.

Hope you and your family are well



Francis

Quote from: Kiahanie on August 06, 2022, 09:09:50 PM
Quote from: Francis on August 06, 2022, 07:55:41 PM
Quote from: 8livesleft on August 06, 2022, 04:58:49 AMFrancis,

If we remove the bible, where else can you find jesus?

Remove a historic account of Alexander and you'll still have many others from all over the region.

Take away any 1 evidence of a real person's existence and you'll still have countless others from many unrelated sources.

That's the difference.


Then you don't know or understand what evidence there is for Alexander the Great nor for Socrates nor for Shakespeare nor for Jesus, etc that historians use to determine that these and other ancient figures existed.

Indeed, it is obvious that you don't even know or want to know or want to believe  the evidence that many atheistic historians use to help  them determine which figures are historical.  And you don't even know what the case for the existence of Jesus' historicity is.

After the vast majority of historians (atheist and theist and agnostics alike) looked at all the evidence impartially, they have resoundingly said that Jesus deniers are a fringe group... just like flat earthers and the holocaust deniers.  And I had given you the citations for that.

Are you a flat earther or a holocaust denier or a fringe conspiracy theorists? I don't think you are.

Secondly, you don't understand the criteria that historians use to determine the reliability of ancient historical accounts and in determining which parts of the ancient document can be assessed as historical.

Thirdly, you don't understand the process that historians use to be able to glean non-miraculous historical facts from ancient documents... even if  the documents are filled with "miracles", etc like many ancient documents are.

etc etc

Think about it for a moment.  Let's suppose that after a great apologpytic world war... all records of your existence disappears or is erased... and the only record anyone in the future has of your existence is your mom's claim.  Does that make you any less historical and less real?  Of course not.  If your mom is considered reliable, then there is no  reason to doubt her claim that she gave birth to you.

The burden of proof is on anyone who doubts your mom's veracity.

That's the difference

Hope you and your family are doing well

The point is not whether a person we call Jesus ever existed, but whether the claims made about him are factual.

There is a great deal of historical evidence supporting many of the claims made concerning Alexander the Great, Socrates, Shakespeare. Not so much for Jesus and King Arthur.

I understood 8livesleft's point differently that you did.

But ok, let's discuss your point then.

My point is that we DON'T HAVE to know a great deal of what claims about Jesus are historical or not, to make a strong rational reasonable case from the facts we do and can know... that Jesus was Resurrected and thus He demonstrated Himself to be God Incarnate.

Anything less is moot and irrelevant.

It's like Paul said, If Jesus was not Resurrected, then Christianity collapses and we are all left in our sins and the Christians are to be most pitied for believing a lie and basing their salvation on a lie.

Hope you are your family are well