History of religion

[storch]

if we take your model then there is no basis for the authentication of any historical document or historical event.  since none of us were there to corroborate the story it must not be so.  is that what you are saying?  in the bible you have a historical document of which many different editions have been discovered throughout time and all retain consistentcy with a copy you could purchase today.   you choose to call this majic or voodoo?  read up on the topic a little better, you don't need faith you need to comprehend what you are reading. and yes jewish ethnicity is central to the issue.  start with that series prophecy, the one about the jews being God's chosen people and all of the prophecies concerning them and how there were manifested and when.  it's pretty compelling reading, at least to me is.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

biblical prophecy is finely detailed and fulfilled 100% accurately 100% of the time. it is inerrant.

How can you claim such bs in the year 2006? There are whole websites dedicated to proving the Bible errant, hundreds of examples.

This is the typical example of putting faith over common sense and reason. A typical example of why religions have the ill-effect on development that they do.

[storch]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
How can you claim such bs in the year 2006? There are whole websites dedicated to proving the Bible errant, hundreds of examples.

This is the typical example of putting faith over common sense and reason. A typical example of why religions have the ill-effect on development that they do.

I posted a fact. don't spew, embark on a course of study to debunk me then.  all you are doing is posting your mis-guided opinion.  don't be so emotional it seems very eu....er never mind.

[moot]

It's not that one should only believe in the plausability of what one did see, but that it's irresponsible to blindly bet on something you not only didn't see, but by principle couldn't see, and even if you saw, could not understand.
Yes, the bible's got a pretty good record of consistency.. of telling yet another supernatural myth. I don't care what you do, nor whether you say something that is erroneous (or not).
That's what humans are, causal True/False machines.  What I will oppose is breach of my liberties in the name of an erroneous principle.
Preaching an irrational theoretical solution to real practical problems can't be anything else than a wild goose chase.

I've done catechism for years, while I was small.  The teachers talked to us (imo anyway) like we were idiots, even when the analogies were especially transparent and honest.  I did get what they were saying, but it was always apparent to me the ideas they were preaching could not have practical value (nevermind that, all things considered, we already knew almost all that stuff from our own experiences).
So Jesus was a nice guy, of mythical proportions. Ok, so I should do the same, be 'good'? But what was good? Something that made you fuzzy inside?  My deskmate felt fuzzy eating earthworms. Feelings are inconsistent, anyone who's watched the 8oc news knows it by 10y.o., latest.
A teacher is grading the mathematical correctness of his students' copies. All are made of numbers, except one copy, that instead of 2+2= (number), is "2+2=(drying ball of student's snot).  How does that stack up, in terms of mathematical accuracy?  It's not a mathematical answer.
Reason and irrationality had both nice fruits to offer, e.g. various and sundry sciences for one, and arts for the other, but they were apples and oranges.
Reason was, and still is, the only failsafe method.

Suppose we made a watch, and in the usual clockwork essential to telling time on the front-end, we imbedded a chaotic singularity generator, that would affect the time displayed on said front-end.
Regardless of how accurate the rest of the clockwork would be, the time displayed would be corrupt.
The analogy here is that you're trying to rationaly define and predict something that is by principle not rational.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I posted a fact.

No you posted a statement of faith. Because Bible contains hundreds of errors and it is easily verified. Either you have never studied Bible or you simply block it from your conciousness.

don't be so emotional it seems very eu....er never mind.

Discrimination gear popping in already? Didn't take long untill the nationality racism stepped in.

[storch]

well then at least I understand that there are certain things in the historical record that given the evidence presented, you would accept at face value.  good.  on what basis could a case be made, proven or disproven once all the principals involved have long expired?

[storch]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
No you posted a statement of faith. Because Bible contains hundreds of errors and it is easily verified. Either you have never studied Bible or you simply block it from your conciousness.

 

Discrimination gear popping in already? Didn't take long untill the nationality racism stepped in.

ok then since, according to you the bible "contains hundreds of errors" and since I "have never studied the bible" or "i'm simply blocking it from my consciousness" please post these errors.  with so many errors it shouldn't take you but a second to accomplish.

[Shuckins]

Ripley,

You use the English language very well.  Is that a result of a fine Finlandial education, or are you an ex-patriate American or Englishman?

What are you hoping to accomplish with your posts?  Trying to educate the unwashed and illiterate masses?  Trying to improve the world?  Or just trying to stir up a ruckuss and make yourself feel superior?

I've known a lot of people who were faithful and sincere Christians who have done a lot of good in the world.  They are not fanatics and faithfully try to live by Christian precepts.  Their faith brings them comfort, so why should you care what they believe?

How about a little civility and respect for their beliefs?  Or is the use of manners also a passe concept for you?

[storch]

Originally posted by moot
A teacher is grading the mathematical correctness of his students' copies. All are made of numbers, except one copy, that instead of 2+2= (number), is "2+2=(drying ball of student's snot).  How does that stack up, in terms of mathematical accuracy?  It's not a mathematical answer.

that would depend, was that a (singular) or was it four tightly packed?  it may have been a thoughtful and creative answer that simply flew over the teacher's head.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Silat
Its sad to see those with faith being so insecure in their beliefs that they personally attack anyone who doesnt believe in their comic book.
 

What`s even sadder are those who proclaim not to beleive in God or a higher being, but seemed to be so scared and insecure in their nonbeleif that they feel compelled to continualy try to back up their stance by injecting childish drivel whenever the subject is brought up, and in some case such as this, when it hasn`t been brought up. Then when confronted on such they immediately start saying that they are being attacked or insulted.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Shuckins, thank you. In answer to your question I've been raised in a multinational family with periods of english as spoken language. I've never even stepped on US ground, unfortunately. Something I have to correct one of these days. In addition to that we do have an education system that has been proven efficient.

What is the point in my posts? The point is that there is high relevance to the original subject when a believer states things like the Bible is inerrant. I could have taken that at face value naturally and left the remark as it is, but since I'm baited easy I went for it.


Then to storch:

please post these errors. with so many errors it shouldn't take you but a second to accomplish.

Not the best link I've ever seen but first to google

[lazs2]

One  of the themes that comes up here is that bad things were done in the name of religion many hundreds of years ago... no kidding?

Course... what the socialists here fail to point out is that in those times... bad things were done in the name of.... of anything... cruelty reigned... kings were much worse... millions died at the whim of kings.... human rights did not exist...  government killed much more than any religion... government even used religion to mask their reign of oppression and terror and cruelty..

move forward into more modern times...  for every person killed in the name of christian religions.... government killed a 1,000 or more.   If the mormons killed a 100... the government would kill a million mormons and indians.

let's look at stalin and pole pot and mao... How many people are christians killing these days?

certainly muslims are still berserk but... they don't live in any century we would recognize... they coexist with the centuries.

I don't fear the jehova witness or mormon at my door near as much as I fear the socialist.   christians don't tax and jail and tap phones and draft people and slaughter people in other lands.   Christians have no power over me.

To focus on religion as evil and ignore socialism or totalitarianism of any kind is either ignorant or dishonest...  

Big government is the religion of the athiest... it is a socialist concept... government is their god...  

lazs

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Lazs the problem with many people here seem to be that they confuse the individual level faith to the organized religion.

Personal level of faith is anyones right. But when an organized church is built, a political structure is raised up. God does not need a church. Christians do not need a church. And by this I don't mean church buildings and priests as places of worship, I mean the whole political power structure consisting of the Pope, bishops, archbishops, priests, chaplains and the lot.

In the old days the church stood in the place of the current political structure. Only difference was (and is) that the church is not a democracy. As we've by now established that the church is in fact a political structure consisting of men it is logical to assume those men in power will take necessary means to protect their positions in power - and ultimately the churches position on top of the society.

That's where the herecy claims, witch hunts and the lot came from. Political corruption, greed and evil of men.

Organized religion then is the dominating factor on evil things of the history of religion. Despite the good intentions of single believers. As they say: The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[storch]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Shuckins, thank you. In answer to your question I've been raised in a multinational family with periods of english as spoken language. I've never even stepped on US ground, unfortunately. Something I have to correct one of these days. In addition to that we do have an education system that has been proven efficient.

What is the point in my posts? The point is that there is high relevance to the original subject when a believer states things like the Bible is inerrant. I could have taken that at face value naturally and left the remark as it is, but since I'm baited easy I went for it.


Then to storch:

 

Not the best link I've ever seen but first to google

don't google something post one yourself

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Hmm.. so you actually want me to go and study Bible and find something that already hasn't been discovered? That's a bad one.