Solve : Do We??

1.	Solve : Do We??
Answer» Do you think to-days world has to much technology?I mean look it up in the Bible...... Quote from: Mruniverce on January 28, 2011, 11:34:35 PM I mean look it up in the Bible...... NO.hey, is that you, 876543219, or whatever his name/nick was? Yepper... Quote from: Mruniverce on January 28, 2011, 10:46:08 PM Do you think to-days world has to much technology? Quote from: Mruniverce on January 28, 2011, 11:34:35 PM I mean look it up in the Bible...... Problem is, God talks in Base 3 and we're still in binary. (I would mention hex, but sometimes i just want to forget)It's OK... He forgives you... Quote from: patio on January 29, 2011, 06:29:40 PM It's OK... He forgives you... Only if you ask for it! Quote from: Mruniverce on January 28, 2011, 11:34:35 PM I mean look it up in the Bible...... Look what up in the Bible? Technology? It's not in there directly, but it's described pretty well (in prophecies) for not knowing what modern stuff was back then. Quote from: michaewlewis on February 04, 2011, 09:29:41 AM Look what up in the Bible? Technology? It's not in there directly, but it's described pretty well (in prophecies) for not knowing what modern stuff was back then. "back then" of course being the date of rewriting. most modern publications of the bible were written/revised within the last 10 or 20 years. Additionally, the fact that it was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, and Koine Greek, illuminated in latin and no doubt "revised" any number of times (voluntary and involuntarily), and then translated into English a full 1380 years. and the person who original translated it to english so that "more people could read it" had his bones dug up and crushed and thrown in a river. Can anybody offer a possible reason that the pope (you know, the guy people worship despite the fact that one of the commandments is to not) would be so infuriated that there was a translation into a language more people understood? I can, maybe because he was smart enough to see that if the common people started reading it they'd start making aprophenic connections between it's texts and real-life events. "OMG! this story says this and this happened yesterday that was similar if you replace any number of various involved elements with the elements from the fiction" therefore the logical deduction they make is that because Event A was followed by event B and then event C in the bible, that since Event A happened in real life will obviously be followed by event B and then event C. This is pretty stupid since the same exact aprophenia doesn't seem to extend to any other literature. If we were to follow that logic we could say that any Girl standing on a balcony talking to themselves while a peeping tom of a rival faction sits out in the bushes will inevitably lead to both of their deaths and their families making amends with one another LIKE old friends... but not before several parties where people where anonymous masks. Why? because obviously Shakespeare wasn't telling a story or trying to present a play, no- he was predicting the future and we shouldn't read it as a story and take away our own indications from it but instead extend it's OTHERWISE fictional events into real-life. Therefore I present the solution to the problems between Israel and Palestine is easy- just find a israelite who is in love with a Palestinian, put one on a balcony, one in the bushes, and the problem will solve itself, after a few soliloquies. And the original English translation was hundreds of years ago, already possessed any number of translatory indirections, and was further revised and abridged with pretty much every new publication. New, discounted areas of the bible were inconspicuously removed and then the debaters told "what, that's silly, it doesn't say that the sun revolves around the earth, it clearly says the opposite in this new "clarified" edition. The fact that it's been translated through so many languages (at least 4 or 5, probably, if you count the various forms of English as different languages) sort of puts a damper on that whole "it prophecized X" nonsense. If you really want to make claims that the bible prophecizes something, then use the original texts; that means learning about 3 or 4 different, and otherwise obsolete languages. And most religious internet trolls, such as 876543219 or whatever he is called now, have trouble mastering one, so that's out. The thing is, if you have to try to scientifically justify your faith, you've already failed; the fact that you feel you need to justify yourself at all means that your faith is not as strong as you commit; because you are more "proving" these arguments for yourself as much as for your opponent; presenting circular arguments that what the bible says is always right because it was written by god, and then you prove it was written by god because it says so right in the bible, and the bible is right because it's written by god, etc etc. TL;DR: If you have to prove your faith, you don't have any.The reason that I try to prove what I believe isn't to justify myself..... it's to explain stuff to people who don't believe. Part of my faith is that people who refuse to believe what God says is true and follow Christ, are in effect choosing censored for eternity. I don't want that for anyone, so I do what I can to help them understand. Seems to me that I am acting within my faith to try proving it to someone else. It is rather presumptuous to say that I don't have faith because I'm trying to prove it. I have no idea what you're trying to say, but it seems like you're questioning the authenticity of the modern day Bible. There have been literally thousands of pieces of manuscripts in many languages (even in original languages) that archeologists have found throughout the world in the last century that all help with the accuracy of translation. By putting together all of the pieces (there is actually a scientific process for it), they really can confirm that what you read in today's Bible is really what was in the original scriptures. While some translations may offer different words or phrases for different passages for clarity or perspective, the original meaning is usually still there and, if you wanted to, you could find a Bible that is actually written in the original language so you can decide the meaning for yourself.Oh you must have misinterpreted the fact that I quoted you to mean that my response was directly towards you. It wasn't. I'm just giving feeding the troll, who hasn't returned for some reason. I feel somewhat dejected now. If you want to talk about your religious bull do so on a religious forum. Quote By putting together all of the pieces (there is actually a scientific process for it) Of course there is, because you say so. I suppose I'm supposed to google now? the Onus of proof is on the claimant, so I'm not exactly motivated. And considering most of the original scriptures are gone I'm not sure any such proof could possibly be scientific. Quote While some translations may offer different words or phrases for different passages for clarity or perspective, the original meaning is usually still there and Gotta stop you there. First, you say "original meaning" as if it's obvious. It never is. That's why there are so many different kinds of christianity. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a sect who took some other little out of context detail of some otherwise irrelevant book in the bible and came to the conclusion that Jesus always wore a hair bun, and of course anybody who doesn't think so will be damned to censored for all eternity, by the "Just and loving god". Quote if you wanted to you could find a Bible that is actually written in the original language so you can decide the meaning for yourself. So now you're telling me I should read the Bible. And in the original language, no less. I'm not exactly keen on learning God's favourite language, Hebrew (I suppose it's mere coincidence that the people writing this stuff down weren't god and were merely "channeling his energies" or whatever the excuse they use. I think the bigger question here is that he waited a censored of a long time to provide us with the rules of the game. tens of thousands of years worth of people died and went to censored because they didn't know about Jesus or God, because he didn't tell anybody until a few thousand years ago. That hardly seems to fit with the whole "God is Just but vengeful" thing, Not sure why they had to go there... oh yeah, because they didn't feel a certain way or believe in something that apparently existed even then but was just sorta being quiet on the sidelines. I suppose he took a few thousand years off. "I have created man! whew, I need a break" then he fell asleep on his heaven couch and woke up a couple thousand years later, and decided to make some rules. Of course being omnipresent he was able to make it so all the people everywhere who ever broke these rules were sent to the depths of censored. So, he contacted some clumsy oaf who managed to break the first tablets. Excellent choice there, you can choose anybody in the entire world, but you just happen to choose somebody living in the general area where civilization was based around that time period. Seems a little weird that North America is curiously absent from the entire thing. And don't pull that old hat nonsense "well, if you interpret this phrase to mean this" Why should we have to "interpret" the bible? It's like being given the rules to a game you've been playing for thousands of years and then being told "oh yeah, it's ROT-13 encoded". And that whole "but it's described pretty well (in prophecies) for not knowing what modern stuff was back then." is nonsense too, because I'm pretty sure the belief is that god wrote the bible, and god is omnipresent and everywhere and at every time and every place simultaneously, I'm sure at some point he would have picked up on what computers and their various parts were. He might have even got somebody to write it down in english originally, since he would have known that it would become one of the primary languages of the world; odd how he chose a language that was primary at that time, especially since he would have known it would fall out of favour and pretty much only get USED on movies to establish a character as a jewish stereotype. The entire "he knows everything and is omnipresent" concept I get, but somehow I guess he just sort of forgot what they were called and had to express himself as if he were somebody from that era who didn't understand these new things. I haven't seen these "prophecies" of which you speak... it took ages to find the references and I had to wade through all sorts of nonsensical confirmation biassed nonsense to find it, but here it is, one of the main ones that predicts television, computers, and the internet. Quote Revelation 11:7-10 states, "And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves. And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth." That is pretty much the basis for the "the bible predicts the internet and tv and technology" argument. Clearly no sane argument can be constructed that could possibly waiver such a belief, because it's so utterly lacking in any sort of basic reason. P.S love the whole "I'm trying to convince you all to believe like I do out of the goodness of my heart" bit. Really you made my heart bleed for your terrible conundrum. Since the bible says an entire generation will not pass after Israel's establishment before the rapture or whatever it's called, I guess I will be witness to it. And I will most certainly say "well golly gee I admit I was WRONG" before being sent to the nether. Of course I'm rather certain nothing of such a nature will occur and the proponents will make up some ridiculous excuse, or maybe they'll discover a "translation error" or find some other way to interpret it so the "disaster" is still in the future. The entire thing tries to convert people with the nonsense that "well, if you don't, you will certainly go to censored when you die, but you won't even have lived your whole life, because the end is near. It keeps believers fearful so as to better control them, that's all. It has nothing to do with caring or compassion, it's about power.I've still got some facts for the debate, but it sounds like you've made up your mind..... good luck. Quote from: michaewlewis on February 04, 2011, 01:50:17 PM I've still got some facts for the debate, but it sounds like you've made up your mind..... good luck. This is also the wrong forum for your debates. Try finding a religious one. Quote from: michaewlewis on February 04, 2011, 01:50:17 PM good luck. With what? Quote from: Quantos on February 04, 2011, 04:00:28 PM This is also the wrong forum for your debates. Try finding a religious one. For some reason it reminds me of those conspiracy theory websites. Those are a lot of fun to troll. It wouldn't be so fun to troll religious forums though, because religion is built on faith, not on stupidity like conspiracy theories. (Although I'm sure there are those that would disagree on one or both counts) And yet, at the same time there are many similarities. Sort of like fascism and communism; despite being on entirely separate sides of the ideological spectrum, they manage to be more similar then different in many respects.

Answer»

Do you think to-days world has to much technology?I mean look it up in the Bible......
Quote from: Mruniverce on January 28, 2011, 11:34:35 PM

I mean look it up in the Bible......

NO.hey, is that you, 876543219, or whatever his name/nick was?

Yepper... Quote from: Mruniverce on January 28, 2011, 10:46:08 PM

Do you think to-days world has to much technology?

Quote from: Mruniverce on January 28, 2011, 11:34:35 PM

I mean look it up in the Bible......

Problem is, God talks in Base 3 and we're still in binary.

(I would mention hex, but sometimes i just want to forget)It's OK...
He forgives you... Quote from: patio on January 29, 2011, 06:29:40 PM

It's OK...
He forgives you...

Only if you ask for it! Quote from: Mruniverce on January 28, 2011, 11:34:35 PM

I mean look it up in the Bible......

Look what up in the Bible? Technology? It's not in there directly, but it's described pretty well (in prophecies) for not knowing what modern stuff was back then. Quote from: michaewlewis on February 04, 2011, 09:29:41 AM

Look what up in the Bible? Technology? It's not in there directly, but it's described pretty well (in prophecies) for not knowing what modern stuff was back then.

"back then" of course being the date of rewriting. most modern publications of the bible were written/revised within the last 10 or 20 years. Additionally, the fact that it was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, and Koine Greek, illuminated in latin and no doubt "revised" any number of times (voluntary and involuntarily), and then translated into English a full 1380 years. and the person who original translated it to english so that "more people could read it" had his bones dug up and crushed and thrown in a river. Can anybody offer a possible reason that the pope (you know, the guy people worship despite the fact that one of the commandments is to not) would be so infuriated that there was a translation into a language more people understood? I can, maybe because he was smart enough to see that if the common people started reading it they'd start making aprophenic connections between it's texts and real-life events. "OMG! this story says this and this happened yesterday that was similar if you replace any number of various involved elements with the elements from the fiction" therefore the logical deduction they make is that because Event A was followed by event B and then event C in the bible, that since Event A happened in real life will obviously be followed by event B and then event C. This is pretty stupid since the same exact aprophenia doesn't seem to extend to any other literature. If we were to follow that logic we could say that any Girl standing on a balcony talking to themselves while a peeping tom of a rival faction sits out in the bushes will inevitably lead to both of their deaths and their families making amends with one another LIKE old friends... but not before several parties where people where anonymous masks. Why? because obviously Shakespeare wasn't telling a story or trying to present a play, no- he was predicting the future and we shouldn't read it as a story and take away our own indications from it but instead extend it's OTHERWISE fictional events into real-life. Therefore I present the solution to the problems between Israel and Palestine is easy- just find a israelite who is in love with a Palestinian, put one on a balcony, one in the bushes, and the problem will solve itself, after a few soliloquies.
And the original English translation was hundreds of years ago, already possessed any number of translatory indirections, and was further revised and abridged with pretty much every new publication. New, discounted areas of the bible were inconspicuously removed and then the debaters told "what, that's silly, it doesn't say that the sun revolves around the earth, it clearly says the opposite in this new "clarified" edition. The fact that it's been translated through so many languages (at least 4 or 5, probably, if you count the various forms of English as different languages) sort of puts a damper on that whole "it prophecized X" nonsense. If you really want to make claims that the bible prophecizes something, then use the original texts; that means learning about 3 or 4 different, and otherwise obsolete languages. And most religious internet trolls, such as 876543219 or whatever he is called now, have trouble mastering one, so that's out.

The thing is, if you have to try to scientifically justify your faith, you've already failed; the fact that you feel you need to justify yourself at all means that your faith is not as strong as you commit; because you are more "proving" these arguments for yourself as much as for your opponent; presenting circular arguments that what the bible says is always right because it was written by god, and then you prove it was written by god because it says so right in the bible, and the bible is right because it's written by god, etc etc.

TL;DR:
If you have to prove your faith, you don't have any.The reason that I try to prove what I believe isn't to justify myself..... it's to explain stuff to people who don't believe. Part of my faith is that people who refuse to believe what God says is true and follow Christ, are in effect choosing *censored* for eternity. I don't want that for anyone, so I do what I can to help them understand. Seems to me that I am acting within my faith to try proving it to someone else. It is rather presumptuous to say that I don't have faith because I'm trying to prove it.

I have no idea what you're trying to say, but it seems like you're questioning the authenticity of the modern day Bible. There have been literally thousands of pieces of manuscripts in many languages (even in original languages) that archeologists have found throughout the world in the last century that all help with the accuracy of translation. By putting together all of the pieces (there is actually a scientific process for it), they really can confirm that what you read in today's Bible is really what was in the original scriptures. While some translations may offer different words or phrases for different passages for clarity or perspective, the original meaning is usually still there and, if you wanted to, you could find a Bible that is actually written in the original language so you can decide the meaning for yourself.Oh you must have misinterpreted the fact that I quoted you to mean that my response was directly towards you. It wasn't. I'm just giving feeding the troll, who hasn't returned for some reason. I feel somewhat dejected now.

If you want to talk about your religious bull do so on a religious forum.

Quote

By putting together all of the pieces (there is actually a scientific process for it)

Of course there is, because you say so. I suppose I'm supposed to google now? the Onus of proof is on the claimant, so I'm not exactly motivated. And considering most of the original scriptures are gone I'm not sure any such proof could possibly be scientific.

Quote

While some translations may offer different words or phrases for different passages for clarity or perspective, the original meaning is usually still there and

Gotta stop you there. First, you say "original meaning" as if it's obvious. It never is. That's why there are so many different kinds of christianity. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a sect who took some other little out of context detail of some otherwise irrelevant book in the bible and came to the conclusion that Jesus always wore a hair bun, and of course anybody who doesn't think so will be damned to *censored* for all eternity, by the "Just and loving god".
Quote

if you wanted to you could find a Bible that is actually written in the original language so you can decide the meaning for yourself.

So now you're telling me I should read the Bible. And in the original language, no less. I'm not exactly keen on learning God's favourite language, Hebrew (I suppose it's mere coincidence that the people writing this stuff down weren't god and were merely "channeling his energies" or whatever the excuse they use.

I think the bigger question here is that he waited a *censored* of a long time to provide us with the rules of the game. tens of thousands of years worth of people died and went to *censored* because they didn't know about Jesus or God, because he didn't tell anybody until a few thousand years ago. That hardly seems to fit with the whole "God is Just but vengeful" thing, Not sure why they had to go there... oh yeah, because they didn't feel a certain way or believe in something that apparently existed even then but was just sorta being quiet on the sidelines. I suppose he took a few thousand years off. "I have created man! whew, I need a break" then he fell asleep on his heaven couch and woke up a couple thousand years later, and decided to make some rules. Of course being omnipresent he was able to make it so all the people everywhere who ever broke these rules were sent to the depths of *censored*. So, he contacted some clumsy oaf who managed to break the first tablets. Excellent choice there, you can choose anybody in the entire world, but you just happen to choose somebody living in the general area where civilization was based around that time period. Seems a little weird that North America is curiously absent from the entire thing. And don't pull that old hat nonsense "well, if you interpret this phrase to mean this" Why should we have to "interpret" the bible? It's like being given the rules to a game you've been playing for thousands of years and then being told "oh yeah, it's ROT-13 encoded". And that whole "but it's described pretty well (in prophecies) for not knowing what modern stuff was back then." is nonsense too, because I'm pretty sure the belief is that god wrote the bible, and god is omnipresent and everywhere and at every time and every place simultaneously, I'm sure at some point he would have picked up on what computers and their various parts were. He might have even got somebody to write it down in english originally, since he would have known that it would become one of the primary languages of the world; odd how he chose a language that was primary at that time, especially since he would have known it would fall out of favour and pretty much only get USED on movies to establish a character as a jewish stereotype. The entire "he knows everything and is omnipresent" concept I get, but somehow I guess he just sort of forgot what they were called and had to express himself as if he were somebody from that era who didn't understand these new things. I haven't seen these "prophecies" of which you speak... it took ages to find the references and I had to wade through all sorts of nonsensical confirmation biassed nonsense to find it, but here it is, one of the main ones that predicts television, computers, and the internet.

Quote

Revelation 11:7-10 states, "And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves. And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth."

That is pretty much the basis for the "the bible predicts the internet and tv and technology" argument. Clearly no sane argument can be constructed that could possibly waiver such a belief, because it's so utterly lacking in any sort of basic reason.

P.S love the whole "I'm trying to convince you all to believe like I do out of the goodness of my heart" bit. Really you made my heart bleed for your terrible conundrum. Since the bible says an entire generation will not pass after Israel's establishment before the rapture or whatever it's called, I guess I will be witness to it. And I will most certainly say "well golly gee I admit I was WRONG" before being sent to the nether. Of course I'm rather certain nothing of such a nature will occur and the proponents will make up some ridiculous excuse, or maybe they'll discover a "translation error" or find some other way to interpret it so the "disaster" is still in the future. The entire thing tries to convert people with the nonsense that "well, if you don't, you will certainly go to *censored* when you die, but you won't even have lived your whole life, because the end is near. It keeps believers fearful so as to better control them, that's all. It has nothing to do with caring or compassion, it's about power.I've still got some facts for the debate, but it sounds like you've made up your mind..... good luck. Quote from: michaewlewis on February 04, 2011, 01:50:17 PM

I've still got some facts for the debate, but it sounds like you've made up your mind..... good luck.

This is also the wrong forum for your debates. Try finding a religious one. Quote from: michaewlewis on February 04, 2011, 01:50:17 PM

good luck.

With what?
Quote from: Quantos on February 04, 2011, 04:00:28 PM

This is also the wrong forum for your debates. Try finding a religious one.

For some reason it reminds me of those conspiracy theory websites. Those are a lot of fun to troll. It wouldn't be so fun to troll religious forums though, because religion is built on faith, not on stupidity like conspiracy theories. (Although I'm sure there are those that would disagree on one or both counts) And yet, at the same time there are many similarities. Sort of like fascism and communism; despite being on entirely separate sides of the ideological spectrum, they manage to be more similar then different in many respects.

Solve : Do We??

Discussion

No Comment Found

Related InterviewSolutions

Reply to Comment