Hi all this is just my own belief but i wondered if anyone else thought of this people read the bible and believe all it says, the bible was written by some guy but so was the sense and sensibilty but no one believe that that book is true. What if some guy was frightened of dieing and wanted to know if there was anything else after death so he decided to write the bible and help people who are also afraid of dieing, to make them feel easier and give them something to believe that something is there after death. What would you all think.
Err....no.
Firstly you would have to distinguish between the different testaments - Old and New. Then you need to distinguish the different books in those testaments - most were written by distinct authors in different periods (there was not a single author for either the Old or New Testament).
The Jewish Bible (Old Testament) can be seen more as a 'handbook' for being a Jew. It contains the folk mythology and history, as well as the legal and civil codes, and system of justice/legislature.
The New Testament is an edited and carefully selected collection of books which support a particular sect of Judaism which later became Christianity, and a particular historic view of the founding figure of that sect - Jesus. Some of it is concerned with fitting Jesus into the context of the OT but most of it is narrative account of his life according to a particular tradition (the 'Pauline' tradition).
Oh, hell, that's just the start of it.
Let's just take the Old Testament as an example. Pick a single book in the Old Testament (well, first pick a version of the Old Testament ^_^; Jewish, Protestant, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, etc.). The chances are next to zero that that book had a single author. Oh, one person might have put the story together, but the stories and sayings and such were probably cobbled together from dozens of sources: Egyptian, and so on. And even after it was put together it was probably revised over and over again.
It is a silly, childish view of the construction of the Bible to think that one person sat down with a quill and some papyrus, wrote down a book, and what they wrote has become part of the accepted text. Pretty much every part of the Bible was an oral tradition before it was ever written down - and is there anyone who seriously believes that oral traditions do not get corrupted over time?
No, what happened was over hundreds of years, collections of sayings or stories got put together, slowly (over generations) they were structured into something consistent, then once they were packaged nicley enough, they had a label slapped on them, and then they were called one of the "books". That's more or less true for every single book of the Bible, with the possible exception of some of the Epistles in the New Testament.
And then, once they were somewhat formalized as books, they were passed on orally for another span of time before they were finally written down. (And, most people don't know that much of the New Testament was written down before any of the Old Testament.)
And then, after they were written down, they were revised and edited a number of times (we have archaeological evidence of this).
The "traditionalist" view of the Bible - that each book was written by a single person and then passed down unchanged - is patent nonsense.
| Indi wrote: |
| Pick a single book in the Old Testament (well, first pick a version of the Old Testament ^_^; Jewish, Protestant, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, etc.). The chances are next to zero that that book had a single author. |
I disagree. Several books in the OT were written by one person. In fact, there is a whole sequence known as the Deuteronomistic History which was written by the same person as the book of Deuteronomy. | jeremyp wrote: |
| Indi wrote: | | Pick a single book in the Old Testament (well, first pick a version of the Old Testament ^_^; Jewish, Protestant, Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, etc.). The chances are next to zero that that book had a single author. |
I disagree. Several books in the OT were written by one person. In fact, there is a whole sequence known as the Deuteronomistic History which was written by the same person as the book of Deuteronomy. |
Er... if you know about the Deuteronomist theory, then you should know that it is exactly the kind of thing i was talking about. i said: "The chances are next to zero that that book had a single author. Oh, one person might have put the story together, but the stories and sayings and such were probably cobbled together from dozens of sources: Egyptian, and so on. And even after it was put together it was probably revised over and over again." See the part in red? That would be Mr. Deuteronomist. He collected a bunch of myths and older writings and revised them. But he did not make them up himself (we know this because the same myths exist in different sources).what does everyone else think theres nly a few people on ere that chat
Well, what is left to say?
You asked if the bible was written by 'some guy' who was afraid of dying and wanted to help others. The answer is no. That's about it...
| Quote: |
| what does everyone else think theres nly a few people on ere that chat |
| Quote: |
Well, what is left to say?
You asked if the bible was written by 'some guy' who was afraid of dying and wanted to help others. The answer is no. That's about it... |
That's about right. Most other people who comment here will simply be restating what already has been said. That the Bible was not written by 'some guy', but by various people over the course of history. Take the New Testament, for example. It is historically verifiable that the various books and letters contained therein were not written all by the same person.Nope, the Bible had many authors. In fact, it was even assembled by many people, some 300 years after Jesus died.
Hi Guys
I guess you firstly do not believe the bible is divinely inspired but let me give you some real information about the bible which will help you make you own choice!
As know from the above discussion that the bible is divided into two parts, the Old and the New Testaments. The entire bible was written by 40 different authors from Kings, Prophets, Leaders and common people but there is one major thread going through the bible from Genesis to Revelation.
The Old Testament has 39 Books written by 32 authors, some of the authors of the Old Testament were: Moses – Price of Egypt, King David, King Solomon (also the wisest man to ever live on earth), Prophets like Isaiah, Daniels, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Joel. Etc, 32 in all. These were all men with intellectual knowledge and in some even major leaders not only in Israel, but Egypt, Babylon and Persia.
The Old Testament is divided into various groups:
The Torah or the Law
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy (5)
History
Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Ester (12)
Poetry
Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Lamentations (6)
Major Prophets – Major because the wrote the most
Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel (4)
Minor Prophets
Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (12)
The New Testament has 27 Books written by 8 different authors, Tax collectors, Medical Doctors, Fishermen and Highly trained intellectuals like Paul. The New Testament is divided into various groups:
Gospels
Matthew, Mark, Luke, John (4)
Church History
Acts (1)
Paul’s Epistles
Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews (14)
James Epistles
James (1)
Peter’s Epistles
1 & 2 Peter (2)
John’s Epistles
1,2 & 3 John (3)
Jude’s Epistles
Jude (1)
Prophesy
Revelations (1)
What is really amazing is the common thread running through the bible, that thread is Jesus Christ with over 40 prophesies of His death and resurrection in the Old testament which were fulfilled through Jesus Christ, that is mathematically be calculated at one person fulfilling all these prophesies is somewhere in the region of ten to the power forty-eight. By the way some of the things prophesied were not invented yet like death by crucifixion.
The bible speaks about many thing which today modern science has proved like the Hydrological cycle, spoke of in the Book of Job. The Pleiades being held together by gravity – also found in Job, only today our “fantastic” scientists have discovered that this is infact true. The bible said the world was round, you know what happened to Galileo when he suggested this – funny it was the church that persecuted him. And I can go on and on for Medical terminology, science, astronomy even references to dinosaurs are discovered in the bible (remember we only woke up to the existence of dinosaurs in the later 1800, that means the bible beat science by 5850 years!!!).
So no it is not just a book of fables but a book full of actual events, wisdom, history, sciences, prophecy and a lot more that can be historically and scientifically proven. Where there have been discrepancies science or history have been proved wrong and the outstanding issues will also prove science and history wrong.
But lets say it is just another book, I bet you could not get 40 of your buddies together and ask them to individually write a story about there life and the history around them, what happened, who the people where, what date and time things happened, let them even prophesy 40 things that will happen in the next year. Make sure also these friends of yours are at 40 different locations and at least four different countries, with no outside help from your friends or any other reference material, just write what you know and remember.
Now get together and read your accounts, I doubt that even 50% will have a common thread, and even if they do they most probably are not inspirational and most definitely unable to give us much hope, wisdom, insight and especially insight into the future.
Now take your accounts and publish them and let see if they will ever become a best seller even in your home country and top the sales of bibles.
As you may or may not know, the Bible is the worlds Number ONE best seller of all time. No other book ever printed has been translated into so many languages of the world, sold more copies, given so much inspiration to so many countless billions of people. There is no other book in existence that can even compare to the bible.
One last thing, lets compare the bible to just two ancient books on history, which we take as fact and lets look at how many copies there are and how long after the even they were written:
Book Copies The number of years the account
Available was written after the events occurred
Wars of Hannibal 1 400 years
History of Rome 3 300 years
The New Testament >5000 less than 80 years
The Old Testament >10000 Written over a period of 2500 years
No the BIBLE is no ordinary book!!! It is not a set of fables but actual facts and historical accounts of mankind, mainly focused on the Jewish nation with the scarlet thread running right through the bible of Jesus Christ.
The BIBLE is God’s love letter to you, it tells of man’s efforts to please Him and His plan for you to have Eternal life and a relationship with Him. I suggest you start reading it, it is the Very Words of GOD almighty and if you let it, it will change your life.
| xtupie wrote: |
Hi Guys
I guess you firstly do not believe the bible is divinely inspired but let me give you some real information about the bible...>
<...
Jude (1)
Prophesy
Revelations (1) |
I don't quote this part since i have nothing to say about that.
| xtupie wrote: |
What is really amazing is the common thread running through the bible, that thread is Jesus Christ with over 40 prophesies of His death and resurrection in the Old testament which were fulfilled through Jesus Christ, that is mathematically be calculated at one person fulfilling all these prophesies is somewhere in the region of ten to the power forty-eight. By the way some of the things prophesied were not invented yet like death by crucifixion. |
Well the "new" bible was written after jesus so the fulfilling of prophecies could have been forged and/or changed, if it prophisized and been fullfilled in the past a long time ago it doesn't prove anything and many prophecies could have been fullfilled by anyone, like walking through a gate on a certain time doesn't prove anything.
| xtupie wrote: |
| The bible speaks about many thing which today modern science has proved like the Hydrological cycle, spoke of in the Book of Job. The Pleiades being held together by gravity – also found in Job, only today our “fantastic” scientists have discovered that this is infact true. The bible said the world was round, you know what happened to Galileo when he suggested this – funny it was the church that persecuted him. And I can go on and on for Medical terminology, science, astronomy even references to dinosaurs are discovered in the bible (remember we only woke up to the existence of dinosaurs in the later 1800, that means the bible beat science by 5850 years!!!). |
1. The hydrological cycle is a bit longer around than only a few years, and with a bit of logic anyone can conclude the same thing, people see water evaporating into the air and falling back to the ground really that proves nothing. And i don't even believe its in there exactly like we know it today.
2. Pleiades held together by gravity in the bible? Quote the text please.
3. The bible said the world was ROUND like a PLATE and flat, Not speherical. Galileo was persecuted by the vatican because said that the earth spinned around the sun in stead of the other way around. And just guess what the bible said, yep the Geocentric model.
4. The bible said not there were dinosoaurs but there were giant animals/lizards. With a bit of imagination you could have thought of a big lizard yourself. Hell they talked also of giants (men) haven't found any fossils of those...
| xtupie wrote: |
| So no it is not just a book of fables but a book full of actual events, wisdom, history, sciences, prophecy and a lot more that can be historically and scientifically proven. Where there have been discrepancies science or history have been proved wrong and the outstanding issues will also prove science and history wrong. |
No it's a fable, the wisdom is not wisdom, and the prophecy's are easily forged. Haha science has less times been proven wrong by the bible than the other way around. Actually what time was science been proven wrong by the bible?
| xtupie wrote: |
But lets say it is just another book, I bet you could not get 40 of your buddies together and ask them to individually write a story about there life and the history around them, what happened, who the people where, what date and time things happened, let them even prophesy 40 things that will happen in the next year. Make sure also these friends of yours are at 40 different locations and at least four different countries, with no outside help from your friends or any other reference material, just write what you know and remember.
Now get together and read your accounts, I doubt that even 50% will have a common thread, and even if they do they most probably are not inspirational and most definitely unable to give us much hope, wisdom, insight and especially insight into the future.
Now take your accounts and publish them and let see if they will ever become a best seller even in your home country and top the sales of bibles. |
Lol, the point is the bible is a collection of different story's later on edited and put together, really anyone could make LOTR connect with Harry Potter. There is no proof here either.
| xtupie wrote: |
| As you may or may not know, the Bible is the worlds Number ONE best seller of all time. No other book ever printed has been translated into so many languages of the world, sold more copies, given so much inspiration to so many countless billions of people. There is no other book in existence that can even compare to the bible. |
Firstly if something is published more it doesn't mean it is right, secondly the bible is sold/printed about 5 to 6 billion times.
The red book by MAO
is sold about 5 to 6.5 billion times.
I think you can see where this is going.
| xtupie wrote: |
One last thing, lets compare the bible to just two ancient books on history, which we take as fact and lets look at how many copies there are and how long after the even they were written:
Book Copies The number of years the account
Available was written after the events occurred
Wars of Hannibal 1 400 years
History of Rome 3 300 years
The New Testament >5000 less than 80 years
The Old Testament >10000 Written over a period of 2500 years
No the BIBLE is no ordinary book!!! It is not a set of fables but actual facts and historical accounts of mankind, mainly focused on the Jewish nation with the scarlet thread running right through the bible of Jesus Christ.
The BIBLE is God’s love letter to you, it tells of man’s efforts to please Him and His plan for you to have Eternal life and a relationship with Him. I suggest you start reading it, it is the Very Words of GOD almighty and if you let it, it will change your life. |
When I read (a very small part of) the bible there were many contradictions and things that could not have happened, further science has brought us more than the bible.
What did the bible brought us? 1000 years of intelectual standstill.
What did science brought us? 500 years of increasing devolpent and tripling of the average life spawn.
As for the whole question, the book was put together by different people etc. look at indi, nor were they afraid of dying. A commen story is that the king of the bazyintine empire needed a religion to keep his state together. (He was converted on his deathbed) | Quote: |
| Quote: | | What is really amazing is the common thread running through the bible, that thread is Jesus Christ with over 40 prophesies of His death and resurrection in the Old testament which were fulfilled through Jesus Christ, that is mathematically be calculated at one person fulfilling all these prophesies is somewhere in the region of ten to the power forty-eight. By the way some of the things prophesied were not invented yet like death by crucifixion. |
Well the "new" bible was written after jesus so the fulfilling of prophecies could have been forged and/or changed, if it prophisized and been fullfilled in the past a long time ago it doesn't prove anything and many prophecies could have been fullfilled by anyone, like walking through a gate on a certain time doesn't prove anything. |
I'd just like to point out that the majority of the Dead Sea Scrolls predate Christ and the New Testament and contain some of the Old Testament material (as well as other material not present in the current Bible). Using this to check against the material in the Bible reveals that the majority of the texts have little variation (in the case of the book of Isaiah, approx. 95% of the content is identical; http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/266). As Isaiah is one of the books containing prophecies regarding Christ, the Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that these particular prophecies were not forged or altered to fit events.
| Quote: |
| Galileo was persecuted by the vatican because said that the earth spinned around the sun in stead of the other way around. And just guess what the bible said, yep the Geocentric model. |
If one used specific frames of reference, then yes, Earth would appear to be the centre.
| Quote: |
| The bible said not there were dinosoaurs but there were giant animals/lizards. With a bit of imagination you could have thought of a big lizard yourself. Hell they talked also of giants (men) haven't found any fossils of those... |
The Bible doesn't use the word dinosaur because it did not exist until in the last few centuries. The Bible does, however, mention the Leviathan (Job 40:15-24) and Behemoth (Job 41). While one cannot conclusively state that these passages describe dinosaurs, it is a plausible explanation.
| Quote: |
| Pleiades held together by gravity in the bible? Quote the text please. |
The three references to the Pleiades that I have managed to find are: Job 9:8-10, Job 38:30-32 and Amos 5:7-9. In two cases it merely refers to God as the Creator of the Pleiades. Job 38:31 is where I think that xtupie got that idea. The passage is actually God asking Job whether he can bind Pleiades or loose Orion (in other words, control the stars).Yes the bible does indeed seem to have been written by many different people throughout different times. It's important to remember that people make the mistake of interpreting the bible literally, it's all metaphorical for things such as morale values. Whoever wrote it were extremely intelligent people, especially for the time I'll give it that. Not a big christian lover to be honest but yeah I don't think you can easily rip apart the bible if taken metaphorically.
Well with all the post going on there is one thing that is clear; the bible was not written by one person who was afraid of dying. The bible represents the history and patterns of the life of people in a particular age.
| MeddlingMonk wrote: |
| The Bible doesn't use the word dinosaur because it did not exist until in the last few centuries. The Bible does, however, mention the Leviathan (Job 40:15-24) and Behemoth (Job 41). While one cannot conclusively state that these passages describe dinosaurs, it is a plausible explanation. |
Leviathan is a creature first mentioned in the texts of Ugarit - a civilisation on the Mediterranean coast dating back to about 6000BCE. The Ugaritic texts mention Lotan (the Hebrew for Leviathan) and describe it as a 7 headed sea monster which fights Hadad (Baal) in a mythic battle. There is little doubt that the references in Job are 'borrowed' from the earlier texts and refer to a mythical sea monster, not a Dinosaur.
Behemoth is thought by most bible scholars to be Hippopotamus though some believe it may be an Elephant.
The notion that either Behemoth or Leviathan could be referring to Dinosaurs is just silly, given the time-scales, and only makes sense in the fantasy world of creationism where the earth is taken to be a few thousand years old.Oh, since this topic was bumped...
| Klaw 2 wrote: |
|
I call bs. No units on the y-axis. | Arnie wrote: |
Oh, since this topic was bumped...
| Klaw 2 wrote: | |
I call bs. No units on the y-axis. |
While units would surely make a better case and provide better data, there is no questioning the morale of the graph. It's not exactly a secret that scientific development ceased, if not decreased, during the Christian Dark Ages.Scientific development also locally decreased when the guy created that graph. The truth is probably that it's just a freehand drawing not based on any numerical data at all. May be illustrative to his point, but it sure smells like creating an undeserved extra touch of credibility.
| Arnie wrote: |
| Scientific development also locally decreased when the guy created that graph. |
Thanks Arnie, this sums it up for me as well, you couldn't have put it in better words. 
Just because the graph is just a "satirical cartoon" so to speak it doesn't make it any less true.
Of course, when I forget to give units with my answers (not even necessarily graphs) at physical chemistry, the only reason I lose at least half the points is because the professor is evil. It doesn't make my answers any less meaningful or any less true, because we all know that 1 Pa = 1 kPa = 1 atm = 1 bar = 1 J = 1 mol = 1 piece of rabbit droppings, right?
You don't really need units to get the point of the graph.
| Xanatos wrote: |
| You don't really need units to get the point of the graph. |
Scientists may disagree with that? Especially when you are trying to make a point for "scientific advancement". 
Last edited by deanhills on Tue Feb 10, 2009 1:20 pm; edited 1 time in totalYour trying to read far too much into this. As I mentioned earlier, this is like a political cartoon. Political cartoons don't provide any facts to back up their claims/opinions, those are assumed known by the audience. It is the same with this graph. It is more of a commentary than "Scientific Evidence"
Ooohhh my god....!!!!!!
Why are you suddenly taking the graph al that serious? It was to illustrate a point I don't think we are just 3,4 times more advanced than the people from 500 CE but a lot more. Although it could be a logaritmic scale. It wasn't proof in any way. Besides if a graph hasn't got anything on the X or Y axis it's not automatically bs. If you want to discus the topic discus te points not some graph that was put there to Illustrate a point.
| Klaw 2 wrote: |
Ooohhh my god....!!!!!!
Why are you suddenly taking the graph al that serious? It was to illustrate a point I don't think we are just 3,4 times more advanced than the people from 500 CE but a lot more. Although it could be a logaritmic scale. It wasn't proof in any way. Besides if a graph hasn't got anything on the X or Y axis it's not automatically bs. If you want to discus the topic discus te points not some graph that was put there to Illustrate a point. |
Yeah well, the point was some guy who may have written the bible so that he can give hope for those guys who are dying so that they won't feel too fearful during the dying experience. I can imagine the graph did not much to help in this case Maybe the Irish have a better way of dealing with this
| Quote: |
Famous Atheist has Death Bed Conversion
For immediate release: Deadly Bread (ACPA-London)
Atheist Donald Chapman, famous for having seen an image of the Big Bang in a slice of toast, has had a remarkable death bed conversion. "It was truly beautiful to be there when it happened," said Doctor Stephen Morton a specialist at Huddlesfield Hospice where Chapman is terminally ill. Local Vicar Arthur Pruett conceded that "it was really quite unexpected" adding, "eh yes, I suppose I could be considered the cause of it all."
Chapman, from the North of England, became seriously ill after eating the famous Big Bang Toast (refer News Release below). "I just got tired of the mayhem, people calling at my house day and night, so I ate it to make them go away," Chapman told the Huddlesfield Express. "Unfortunately too many people had handled it and within a few hours I was throwing up. A week later I'm at death's door, some sort of Botulism it seems."
The much talked about conversion took place over two days and started shortly after Vicar Pruett paid a courtesy visit to the famous atheist. "The poor Vicar-they didn't have a decent place for him to sit" said Chapman, "so I borrowed some tools from the maintenance staff and set to work."
The conversion, described as Georgian style with post modern touches to round off the classical edges, was completed with enthusiastic help from other patients and the night shift staff. It includes comfortable seating for 4 visitors, a built in 38 inch TV , small fridge, microwave and mini-bar. Two shelves filled with novels and an adjoining magazine rack complete the conversion and ensure all the amenities of home for patients and visitors alike.
While staff and other patients raved about the changes, hospital administrators were not too pleased. "Yes we regularly have death bed conversions in the hospice," said a clearly irritated administrator Phil Livingston, "but it's usually subtle, maybe a plastic cup-holder or two, a mat for slippers, nothing like this."
Interior Design Magazine which broke the story wrote that "Chapman is clearly very contented since his project finished although I think he might be starting to annoy some of the other patients with constant talk about their need to convert too."
|
| Quote: |
Atheist Sees Image of Big Bang in Piece of Toast
For Immediate Release: Miracle Toast? (ACPA-london)
Excitement is growing in the Northern England town of Huddlesfield following news that local atheist Donald Chapman saw an image of the Big-Bang in a piece of toast. In an exclusive interview with "The Huddlesfield Express" Chapman, 36, explained that he was sitting down to eat breakfast when an unusual toast pattern caught his eye.
"I was just about to spread the butter when I noticed a fairly typical small hole in the bread surrounded by a burnt black ring" said Chapman. "Then to my amazement I saw the direction and splatter patterns of the crumbs with their changing shades emanating outwards from the center of the black hole. It was identical to the chaotic-dynamic non-linear patterns that one would expect following the Big-Bang." "It's the beginning of the world," he added excitedly.
Ever since news of the discovery made national headlines, local hoteliers have been overwhelmed by an influx of atheists from all over the country who have flocked to Huddlesfield to catch a glimpse of the scientific relic. "I have always been an Atheist and to see my life choices validated on a piece of toast is truly astounding," said one guest at the Huddlesfield Arms hotel.
To the surprise of many, the UK National Atheist Association has asked its members not to pay attention to the story despite its potential to inspire less faith. "Given what the religious believe already, this is an easy sell," complained one disgruntled activist who said he was going to Huddlesfield anyway noting that "Seeing is not believing".
|
| Klaw 2 wrote: |
| If you want to discus the topic discus te points not some graph that was put there to Illustrate a point. |
I'm not intending on discussing it with a resulting TL;DR thread that the group of people here is famous for; I'm simply noting that the graph fails to make the actual point, provided that the readers consistently apply critical thinking instead of selectively (e.g. only when they read a professed Christian's text).
In case you wonder why I'm highlighting this graph, that's because it's a perfect illustration (pun intended) of the inconsistent attitude many people have, criticizing their "opponents" for every minor flaw they find but not expecting scrutiny of one's "own party". This attitude is becoming more evident from several replies here (including your "Ooohhh my god....!!!!!!" exclamation). If a unitless graph was made by a Christian to illustrate some point, I'm quite sure people here would be jumping on the bandwagon when this flaw was pointed out, instead of expressing that such scrutiny is unwanted, and that "Your [sic] trying to read far too much into this."
While the participants of this topic, also appearing in a pile of other related Frihost topics, are crucifying (pun intended) Christians and the Bible for a lack of critical thinking and correctness, some are now stating that when it's about someone from "the good side" it shouldn't be a big deal. Thereby losing all credibility.Sometimes I'm astounded by the things people post =O
| Arnie wrote: |
In case you wonder why I'm highlighting this graph, that's because it's a perfect illustration (pun intended) of the inconsistent attitude many people have, criticizing their "opponents" for every minor flaw they find but not expecting scrutiny of one's "own party". This attitude is becoming more evident from several replies here (including your "Ooohhh my god....!!!!!!" exclamation). If a unitless graph was made by a Christian to illustrate some point, I'm quite sure people here would be jumping on the bandwagon when this flaw was pointed out, instead of expressing that such scrutiny is unwanted, and that "Your [sic] trying to read far too much into this."
While the participants of this topic, also appearing in a pile of other related Frihost topics, are crucifying (pun intended) Christians and the Bible for a lack of critical thinking and correctness, some are now stating that when it's about someone from "the good side" it shouldn't be a big deal. Thereby losing all credibility. |
This is a good point Arnie. And a valid one. If the source of the graph would have been to prove a religious point of view, the response would definitely have been the opposite. | Arnie wrote: |
| Klaw 2 wrote: | | If you want to discus the topic discus te points not some graph that was put there to Illustrate a point. |
I'm not intending on discussing it with a resulting TL;DR thread that the group of people here is famous for; I'm simply noting that the graph fails to make the actual point, provided that the readers consistently apply critical thinking instead of selectively (e.g. only when they read a professed Christian's text). |
| Klaw 2 wrote: |
| Ooohhh my god....!!!!!! |
It's a friggin cartoon* IT'S NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY, IT'S NOT A FACT AND I DON"T PRESENT IT AS ONE.
* (Not a real cartoon but uses to illustrate something like a frigging cartoon does.)
But i think the graph DID make a point because most other people understand it.
| Arnie wrote: |
| In case you wonder why I'm highlighting this graph, that's because it's a perfect illustration (pun intended) of the inconsistent attitude many people have, criticizing their "opponents" for every minor flaw they find but not expecting scrutiny of one's "own party". This attitude is becoming more evident from several replies here (including your "Ooohhh my god....!!!!!!" exclamation). If a unitless graph was made by a Christian to illustrate some point, I'm quite sure people here would be jumping on the bandwagon when this flaw was pointed out, instead of expressing that such scrutiny is unwanted, and that "Your [sic] trying to read far too much into this." |
1. If a creationist made a graph without a unit IT wouldn't be critisised right away for not having units, there are graphs that don't use units that are used and a re not wrong.
2. It's to be treated as a cartoon not some researched thing, it's to illustrate a point and scrutiny has nothing to do with it.
3. The om y god was used to express something, bewilderment, seriously your whole point is just an ad hominim argument against a frigging graph. And then go on by saing we are hippocrits. Just a question, if you are taking that graph so seriously and are so critical of it, why don't you do that to your own religion? (Assuming you have one, and judging from your posts you have a religion).
| Arnie wrote: |
While the participants of this topic, also appearing in a pile of other related Frihost topics, are crucifying (pun intended) Christians and the Bible for a lack of critical thinking and correctness, some are now stating that when it's about someone from "the good side" it shouldn't be a big deal. Thereby losing all credibility. |
Hehe it's to be treated as a cartoon, so no one loses credibility. You're just saying everyone on that side is wrong because this graph hasn't got a proper y -axis.
seriously..
Here is another cartoon;
| Klaw 2 wrote: |
| But i think the graph DID make a point because most other people understand it. |
Maybe you need to read Arnie's postings again. Arnie understood it perfectly. In fact, more perfectly than you did. Enough to notice a deficiency in it.Since you are so keen on discussing a friggin graph...
| deanhills wrote: |
| Xanatos wrote: | | You don't really need units to get the point of the graph. |
Scientists may disagree with that? Especially when you are trying to make a point for "scientific advancement". |
There are graphs without a scale on one of the axis. Look it up in on of your books.
| deanhills wrote: |
Yeah well, the point was some guy who may have written the bible so that he can give hope for those guys who are dying so that they won't feel too fearful during the dying experience. I can imagine the graph did not much to help in this case Maybe the Irish have a better way of dealing with this
| Quote: | Famous Atheist has Death Bed Conversion
For immediate release: Deadly Bread (ACPA-London) |
| Quote: | Atheist Sees Image of Big Bang in Piece of Toast
For Immediate Release: Miracle Toast? (ACPA-london) |
|
And what does this have to do with the topic?
| deanhills wrote: |
| This is a good point Arnie. And a valid one. If the source of the graph would have been to prove a religious point of view, the response would definitely have been the opposite. |
No it's not a good point, the graph isn't something that proves something, it just there to illustrate a point. And wheter or not the graph has something on the y-axis it doesn't matter it just as serious as a cartoon.
| deanhills wrote: |
| Klaw 2 wrote: | | But i think the graph DID make a point because most other people understand it. |
Maybe you need to read Arnie's postings again. Arnie understood it perfectly. In fact, more perfectly than you did. Enough to notice a deficiency in it. |
No he doesn't get it. He is taking that graph so serious while it's not to be taken that serious. I understood it, everyone who read the post until arnie didn't have anything to say about it.
It's like taking Donald Duck and saying:
Ducks dont walk like people, ducks dont talk like people, ducks dont make money, ducks dont drive cars, invent stuff, those nephews are still kids but they are around for 50+ years etc.etc.etc. This Comic is bullshit lets burn all Donald Duck comic books.
I mean c'mon what's the point it's just an ad hominem attack against that frigging graph me and everyone who doesn't think the bible is real and doesn't comment on it that "there are no scales on the y axis". If you want to have some discussion come up with some facts on the matter, don't take something that is supposedly wrong and say "AHA therefore everything they say is wrong".
Last edited by Klaw 2 on Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:23 pm; edited 2 times in total | deanhills wrote: |
| Arnie wrote: | In case you wonder why I'm highlighting this graph, that's because it's a perfect illustration (pun intended) of the inconsistent attitude many people have, criticizing their "opponents" for every minor flaw they find but not expecting scrutiny of one's "own party". This attitude is becoming more evident from several replies here (including your "Ooohhh my god....!!!!!!" exclamation). If a unitless graph was made by a Christian to illustrate some point, I'm quite sure people here would be jumping on the bandwagon when this flaw was pointed out, instead of expressing that such scrutiny is unwanted, and that "Your [sic] trying to read far too much into this."
While the participants of this topic, also appearing in a pile of other related Frihost topics, are crucifying (pun intended) Christians and the Bible for a lack of critical thinking and correctness, some are now stating that when it's about someone from "the good side" it shouldn't be a big deal. Thereby losing all credibility. |
This is a good point Arnie. And a valid one. If the source of the graph would have been to prove a religious point of view, the response would definitely have been the opposite. |
That would depend completely on what the hypothetical graph was attempting to illustrate. | liljp617 wrote: |
| That would depend completely on what the hypothetical graph was attempting to illustrate. |
Within the context of what you said below, objectively, do you see the graph as a cartoon, or as a graph?
| Klaw 2 wrote: |
When I read (a very small part of) the bible there were many contradictions and things that could not have happened, further science has brought us more than the bible.
What did the bible brought us? 1000 years of intelectual standstill.
What did science brought us? 500 years of increasing devolpent and tripling of the average life spawn.
|
I don't take it serously cause:
1. The intelectual level didn't plummet like that (and is almost impossible), it probably started when the roman empire started to fall apart and continued on to reach the lowest level somewhere between 500 and 1000.
2. "The hole left by the middle ages" is a wild guess as how advancements would go, a big boost during the renaisance was partially given by muslims, who had gathered a lot of info on greeks philosophers etc. etc. at 500 EC there weren't and muslims around.
3. Scientific descoverys WERE made during the middleages like gunpowoder, crossbow, windmills etc.etc.
4. I was talking about intelectual standstill, and altough it wouldn't have been complete standstill al the works of philosopher from before Christians were either banned or christianed, to fit christians agenda like what happened to platos work by Augustine of Hippo.
5. The scientific advancement of every age is completely linear, (exept the middleages wich is straight down and then linear)
I thought it was obvious.
| Quote: |
it's just an ad hominem attack against that frigging graph
+ a picture of an actual cartoon (not a disguised graph this time) |
This is intriguing.
| Quote: |
| Arnie wrote: | | ...some are now stating... Thereby losing all credibility |
You're just saying everyone on that side is wrong because this graph hasn't got a proper y -axis. |
This is also intriguing.
Other than that, I have nothing more to add. | Arnie wrote: |
| Quote: | it's just an ad hominem attack against that frigging graph
+ a picture of an actual cartoon (not a disguised graph this time) |
This is intriguing. |
Lol why is that intriguing?
I know that you can't really place an ad hominum against a graph because it should be agaisnt a person, but you do get what it means, a fallacious argument in a discussion, wich it was.
| Arnie wrote: |
| Quote: | | Arnie wrote: | | ...some are now stating... Thereby losing all credibility |
You're just saying everyone on that side is wrong because this graph hasn't got a proper y -axis. |
This is also intriguing.
Other than that, I have nothing more to add. |
Whatever everyone becomes some what's the point of this? You found two errors congrats,
On a side note it looks like you lost and you got nothing more to say so you go check some stupid little things that aren't 100% correct seriously what next? Grammar check? | deanhills wrote: |
| liljp617 wrote: | | That would depend completely on what the hypothetical graph was attempting to illustrate. |
Within the context of what you said below, objectively, do you see the graph as a cartoon, or as a graph?
| Klaw 2 wrote: | When I read (a very small part of) the bible there were many contradictions and things that could not have happened, further science has brought us more than the bible.
What did the bible brought us? 1000 years of intelectual standstill.
What did science brought us? 500 years of increasing devolpent and tripling of the average life spawn.
|
|
Somewhat of a cartoon that made a fair, truthful point. I don't see what the problem is. Of course it's not meant to give some great statistical information, it's meant to illustrate the point that religion (particularly Christianity) played (and continues to play) a large role in denying the advancement of knowledge. I don't think there's much argument against that, and I think that's the main point of the graph.
If someone is truly trying to do statistical analysis with the graph, they're incorrect in doing so, but the main point of the graph stands.
Obviously this is my interpretation.Guess what I stumbled upon! This graph was good for 28 pages of /b/ trolling (moderately NSFW)
As is correctly stated at the top of the page... | Quote: |
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact. |
The bible is a long book, you can read....
I love the bible and read it for 3 hours everyday...
My sister never reads it, so I think it is a personal choice.
I see this graph, but this drawed point of europian view. I dont represent history of Rome with continually raising line.
Also that happen when we reading Bible. We read that book at many different point of view. I ask next question many times, when i read: What would try for this God? (I belive His existence)
(@Klaw 2 , sorry for my really bad English skill)
Last edited by Pengeszikra on Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
@ Pengeszikra
Your text is vague and i have trouble understanding it but you shouldn't take the graph too serious.
| peyote wrote: |
The bible is a long book, you can read....
I love the bible and read it for 3 hours everyday...
My sister never reads it, so I think it is a personal choice. |
It's not really much of a choice if you are serious about living your life according to what the Bible says. If you really believe that your moral code is set by what's in the Bible, you better damn well know it inside-out and backwards. | Indi wrote: |
| If you really believe that your moral code is set by what's in the Bible, you better damn well know it inside-out and backwards. |
Would appear that those of faith tend to only study the parts of the Bible that make them feel safe and happy. Sort of in their nature to do that. Sceptics seem to study the Bible from A to Z and pause over the parts that do not make sense to them. In their nature to do that.
