The Bible's Buried Secrets

[Robert Tulip]

the proper canned response sequence

Hope Dawn appreciates the coaching in proselytism - ignore, belittle, confuse, lie.

unicorns, etc. are fantasy objects or creature which can be dismissed as such due to our understanding of the origin and no supporting documentation. That is not true for the Bible.

There are unicorns in the Narnia books though, which are just as much factual "supporting documentation" as the Bible.

[Interbane]

"Stahrwe"
Of course flying spaghetti monsters, unicorns, etc. are fantasy objects or creature which can be dismissed as such due to our understanding of the origin and no supporting documentation. That is not true for the Bible. You fuss and fume and sputter but the Bible remains there as a testimony to God.

Stahrwe, you make a giant leap without any reason. Who says the bible is a testimony to god? I'm sure the humans who wrote it intended it to seem that way, but why do you believe them? Their words don't give the bible any more support than the book of scientology gives scientologists, or that Wiccan books give to witches flying on brooms.

You elevate your book above others for no reason whatsoever. To say that it's older, or that it's more popular, or that the authors have no reason to lie... these things do not support your position. It is a fallacy to use them to support your position, in fact. You honestly have nothing on these other religions, even the cults that worship pink unicorns.

You're part of the group, but you don't realize they are your identical peers. You mock them whenever a booktalker brings them up. But there is truly no difference. Every difference you try to point out is based on a lifetime of sloppy logic. It's evidence that only sloppy logic could dig the hole you find yourself in while maintaining an arrogance to rival narcissus. I wonder if you mistake your arrogance for devotion? Brownie points to get through the gate, right?

You may question the stories but you can't disprove them.

I don't think we could disprove the existence of Cthulu either. You can't disprove the idea that you've been worshipping Satan this entire time, who's fooled you into believing he's god. Argumentum ad ignorantiam; there's no reason to disprove your silly beliefs, any more than there's reason to disprove any of the millions of fantasy books across the planet. You have the burden to show it's true. You've failed. Bible dismissed. Well, at least recategorized to alternative history. That has already happened in the minds of the majority of the scholarly world. Your tardiness in joining them is due to bad logic and reasoning, and a misunderstanding of what constitutes evidence.

[Frank 013]

Stahrwe
Of course flying spaghetti monsters, unicorns, etc. are fantasy objects or creature which can be dismissed as such due to our understanding of the origin and no supporting documentation. That is not true for the Bible.

It is true of the bible actually, which is why we mock you so… your inability to see how it is exactly the same shows your bias and makes you look dim to boot!

Stahrwe
But your success must be tempered with the admission that you refuse to study the object of your contempt.

I have made no such admission because that is not true… in fact I have given the bible more of a chance than you have given most of the material that has been submitted by us over the years. I have read the bible, it took a while and I found it altogether uninteresting and badly wanting, yet I have continued to study it and its history. I don’t suppose you can believe that through study I came to a different place than you… a place that a great many others have also come to… probably because we lack the zealous bias that you have. In fact I do not even hold the bible in contempt as you so shamelessly assume… I just do not think it godly in any sense… its wrong historically... its stories unsuported in history, reliability and probability... In my opinion it is not even worthy of praise... its morality is beneath me... but it is just a book and it's existance does not offend me in the least.

You on the other hand refuse to watch a simple series, which you still felt compelled to comment on… then when confronted you cowardly began insinuating that you were blind!?!

Hypocrite

[stahrwe]

Of course flying spaghetti monsters, unicorns, etc. are fantasy objects or creature which can be dismissed as such due to our understanding of the origin and no supporting documentation. That is not true for the Bible. You fuss and fume and sputter but the Bible remains there as a testimony to God.

Stahrwe, you make a giant leap without any reason. Who says the bible is a testimony to god? I'm sure the humans who wrote it intended it to seem that way, but why do you believe them? Their words don't give the bible any more support than the book of scientology gives scientologists, or that Wiccan books give to witches flying on brooms.

Interbane, first, thank you for including the userid for the quote; in the future just be sure to put = sign after the word quote so the quote displays properly.

To your point, my leap, if such it is is not great and is not made 'without any reason'. Thirty plus years of studying the Bible as either a skeptic or believer (I have been both) as well as the thoughts of some of the greatest minds in history have lead me to my position.

You elevate your book above others for no reason whatsoever. To say that it's older, or that it's more popular, or that the authors have no reason to lie... these things do not support your position. It is a fallacy to use them to support your position, in fact. You honestly have nothing on these other religions, even the cults that worship pink unicorns.

1) See my above comment.
2) Older, more popular, truthfulness, all may not be justification for superiority but they do invest the Bible with particular attributes; Endurance, efficacy, reliability. It is not fallacious to consider this, or to continue to participate in a 2,000 year old organization.
3) The Bible honestly does have it all over religions and cults. We explored some of that in the Epistemology and Biblical Evidence until you pulled the plug as the evidence began to mount both from the Bible and outside of it. Show me a pink unicorns cult with the same history and credentials as the Church and I'll cede to point, otherwise get a new act; this one is worn thin and silly.

You're part of the group, but you don't realize they are your identical peers. You mock them whenever a booktalker brings them up. But there is truly no difference. Every difference you try to point out is based on a lifetime of sloppy logic. It's evidence that only sloppy logic could dig the hole you find yourself in while maintaining an arrogance to rival narcissus. I wonder if you mistake your arrogance for devotion? Brownie points to get through the gate, right?

If you are talking about the date setters, or the Westboro Church you can assert what you want. I doesn't matter to me, but your assertion about sloppy logic sounds like a claim to higher ground than you deserve. You hide behind the word logic not knowing that it is fundamentally flawed. Do you disagree? Then answer this question based on logic:

Does the good of the many outweigh the good of the one or does the good of the one outweigh the good of the many?

You may question the stories but you can't disprove them.

I don't think we could disprove the existence of Cthulu either. You can't disprove the idea that you've been worshipping Satan this entire time, who's fooled you into believing he's god. Argumentum ad ignorantiam; there's no reason to disprove your silly beliefs, any more than there's reason to disprove any of the millions of fantasy books across the planet. You have the burden to show it's true. You've failed. Bible dismissed. Well, at least recategorized to alternative history. That has already happened in the minds of the majority of the scholarly world. Your tardiness in joining them is due to bad logic and reasoning, and a misunderstanding of what constitutes evidence.

We have been through your non-argument over and over. Show me the literature about Cthulu written by 50 different people over 1500 years. Show me an organization dedicated to Cthulu that transforms live and improves society.

By the way, remember Darwin’s and other contemporary theories about man’s descent from the ape. Without going into any theories, Christ declares directly that, besides belonging to the animal world, man also belongs to the spiritual world. Well then, it does not really matter what man’s origins are (the Bible does not explain how God molded him out of clay or carved him out of stone), but it does say that God breathed life into him. (But what is bad is that by sinning man can once again turn into a beast).

Fyodor Dostoevsky

Letters

http://www.karamazov.co.uk/man_bread.htm

[stahrwe]

You on the other hand refuse to watch a simple series, which you still felt compelled to comment on… then when confronted you cowardly began insinuating that you were blind!?!

Hypocrite

I don't know what qualifies for 'study' in your mind but I seem to remember questions and comments you have provided which demonstrate a basic lack of knowledge of the Bible on your part.

As for the blind issue, go back and read the post. It was a hypothecal argument against the posting of videos without supporting transcripts.

If the singular word hypocrite was intended to be directed as an accusation at me, I don't see what that has to do with the argument herein, and while I believe that you are violating the spirit if not the letter of BookTalk rules, I have and will continue to state that I am a hypocrite. I believe that hypocracy is a fundamental human trait that all of us struggle with but I also point out that hypocracy does not equate to being wrong, just boorish, something you know a bit about.

[Frank 013]

Stahrwe
We have been through your non-argument over and over. Show me the literature about Cthulu written by 50 different people over 1500 years. Show me an organization dedicated to Cthulu that transforms live and improves society.

Show us how this is relevant to the truthfulness of the documents in question... and I will show you a fist full of fallacies!

Stahrwe
I don't know what qualifies for 'study' in your mind but I seem to remember questions and comments you have provided which demonstrate a basic lack of knowledge of the Bible on your part.

Well I suppose that facts must really be inconvenient to your belief system then… anyway we cannot all be fanatics on ancient fiction like you… nor do we want to be.

Stahrwe
As for the blind issue, go back and read the post. It was a hypothecal argument against the posting of videos without supporting transcripts.

Whether you want to admit it or not (I can see why you wouldn’t) you insinuated that you were blind… you know it… as does everyone else that participated in that thread… shameful... and you still refused to watch the series... which leaves you in willfull ignorance.

starhwe
If the singular word hypocrite was intended to be directed as an accusation at me, I don't see what that has to do with the argument herein, and while I believe that you are violating the spirit if not the letter of BookTalk rules, I have and will continue to state that I am a hypocrite. I believe that hypocracy is a fundamental human trait that all of us struggle with but I also point out that hypocracy does not equate to being wrong, just boorish, something you know a bit about.

Well you do not try to deny it… that is refreshing at least… but you clearly are not trying to “struggle” against it… if you are you get an epic FAIL!

I do know a little about being rude… but you are the master!

Of being rude and deceptive, and intrusive, and hypocritical, ok this could go on a while so Ill stop there…

Later

[Esoldra]

Noone can truly trust what is in the modern day versions of the Bible. Each have been tainted with political motivations of leaders and mistakes in translations, never mind the chinese whisper element that accompanies oral tradition. For instance, the world thinks that Jesus was the son of a carpenter as of one letter that could have easily be changed to reflect the word for stone mason.

I was brought up in a home in which the Bible was stated to be literal, to be almost as though written by a pen God held between his own fingers. Questionning was not permitted and that is a very good way to not answer basic flaws and questions that arise in the Bible. One man's life that is documented so heavily at birth, then disappears for over twenty years between the age of 12 and 33 - with no explanation. A very good editing job.

[Frank 013]

Esoldra
One man's life that is documented so heavily at birth, then disappears for over twenty years between the age of 12 and 33 - with no explanation. A very good editing job.

The fact that there is no evidence of Jesus from the time that he lived, or even that Christianity existed in the first century is problematic too.

[stahrwe]

Stahrwe
We have been through your non-argument over and over. Show me the literature about Cthulu written by 50 different people over 1500 years. Show me an organization dedicated to Cthulu that transforms live and improves society.

Show us how this is relevant to the truthfulness of the documents in question... and I will show you a fist full of fallacies!

we have been through this too. It is relevant in two ways. First, it demonstrates a universe of converts sharing a common set of beliefs vs an eccentric or two who have hit upon an idea. In itself this is supporting as the liklihood of being in the right place increases the more people who independently find there way there.

Second time spans allow for time testing as in the prophecy of the return of Israel pointed out in the discussion about Epistemology. Some of you objected to the empriricsm of my numbers with respect to the prophecy, but that isn't necessary, just to have the prophecy fulfilled that Israel would return as a nation per prophecy is signficant. The rantings that there is not a difference between the Bible and fsm is easily tested. Frank013, write the bible of the fsm, create a church and have it run for 2,000 years.

As for the blind issue, go back and read the post. It was a hypothecal argument against the posting of videos without supporting transcripts.

Whether you want to admit it or not (I can see why you wouldn’t) you insinuated that you were blind… you know it… as does everyone else that participated in that thread… shameful... and you still refused to watch the series... which leaves you in willfull ignorance.

in·sin·u·at·edin·sin·u·at·ing
Definition of INSINUATE
transitive verb
1a : to introduce (as an idea) gradually or in a subtle, indirect, or covert way <insinuate doubts into a trusting mind> b : to impart or suggest in an artful or indirect way : imply <I resent what you're insinuating>
2: to introduce (as oneself) by stealthy, smooth, or artful means
intransitive verb
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/insinuate

Here is what I posted:

What would you say if I told you I was blind?
How do the blind watch the videos?

Show me where I:
Said I was blind - I didn't
Hinted I was blind - I didn't
Insinuated I was blind - I didnt.

[Frank 013]

Stahrwe
we have been through this too. It is relevant in two ways. First, it demonstrates a universe of converts sharing a common set of beliefs vs an eccentric or two who have hit upon an idea. In itself this is supporting as the liklihood of being in the right place increases the more people who independently find there way there.

Really? How does it show that? I could say that the earth was flat and that millions of people in history found their way to that belief it does not make it true... and since Christianity more like forces itself on the young and ignorant people I wouldn’t say that people came to it as much as it assimilated them early.

Stahrwe
time spans allow for time testing as in the prophecy of the return of Israel pointed out in the discussion about Epistemology. Some of you objected to the empriricsm of my numbers with respect to the prophecy, but that isn't necessary, just to have the prophecy fulfilled that Israel would return as a nation per prophecy is signficant.

I have 2 words for this bunk… Self Fulfilling!

stahrwe
The rantings that there is not a difference between the Bible and fsm is easily tested. Frank013, write the bible of the fsm, create a church and have it run for 2,000 years.

The time invested is meaningless… the popularity of the belief is meaningless… all of this can and does happen with claims that are not truthful. Only weather the claims can be supported matters… in your case the best thing you can say is that they cannot be disproved… which is all any of the fantasies above can say too.

Stahrwe
Show me where I:
Said I was blind - I didn't
Hinted I was blind - I didn't
Insinuated I was blind - I didnt.

I was hoping you would not make such a false claim and spare me the effort of exposing you as a liar… but you asked for it…

Here is what you actually wrote…

Stahrwe
What would you say if I told you I was blind?
How do the blind watch the videos?

thanks for your sensitivity.

You conveniently left out the last part in your quoting of yourself… and that (of course) is the most damning part. Why would you need sensitivity if you’re not blind… this suggests that I have been insensitive to you because you are blind…

You then added this…

Stahrwe
You highlight text, move it to MSword or another program which has a reading function.
You dictate responses using DragonSpeech program by Nuance or a similar program, and have your text read back to you for corrections, despite Nuance claims, my program is only ~70% accurate.

This exposes the fact that you did indeed intend us to (at least) consider the possibility that you were blind, your “program is only 70% accurate” Why would you need DragonSpeech if you weren’t blind? Why would you mention it if you did not intend us to think you were blind?

It also shows just how stupid your position on wanting a hard copy for translation is… listing to the video is 100% accurate… listing to a transcript from DragonSpeech is 70% accurate… your reasoning for needing a transcript is as bad as your reasoning for belief in Jesus... but that does not surprise me.

In conclusion, I never said that you claimed that you were blind, but it is clear that you insinuated through hinting that you were… again, I see why you label yourself a sinner.

Later