Jump to content

Evidence in the bible (hijack/split from how to turn a believer)


Recommended Posts

The secularist's complete refusal to accept the historical evidence of widespread conversions, in the early days of the major religions, is evidence that they WERE understood at the time, and so potentially contain wisdom.

 

The religion's complete refusal to accept evidence.

 

Maybe unbalanced but equally true.

 

 

I can't agree at all with the first assertion - why would people not accept historical evidence? I should think that the vast majority of atheists would accept the historical evidence of widespread conversions. That does not mean that they accept any of the tenets of those beliefs, just that all the converted were deluded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Manticore, neither your opinion nor mine on the subject of the Bible would compare to Albert Einstein's authoritative knowledge base and proven genius. You opinion seems to derive from the other extre

After that rubbish, I will have one last word here. Most people believe or don't believe in God (by any other name) to some degree. Only those who are gifted with supernatural abilities, or those who

Pymander, there are some very decent people here who actually take time to read and answer your posts in a meaningful way and even take time to engage you in a civil fashion explaining basic coherence

 

I can't agree at all with the first assertion -

 

So you think there's no possibility, at all, that ancient wisdom equates with, so called, modern wisdom?

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying I don't accept this

"The secularist's complete refusal to accept the historical evidence of widespread conversions, in the early days of the major religions, is evidence that they WERE understood at the time, and so potentially contain wisdom."

I'm saying I don't understand it.

 

What are you claiming were understood at the time?

The secularists

Their refusal to accept historical evidence

the major religions

Widespread conversions

or what?

 

And similarly, what potentially contains wisdom?

 

Anyway re."So you think there's no possibility, at all, that ancient wisdom equates with, so called, modern wisdom?"

 

Someone, and I think it was you claimed before that somehow these religions gave insights that were not available to the secular.

I pointed out that it was nonsense, and asked you to cite any example.

You failed.

 

So, to clarify.

As far as I can see, there is no wisdom in any ancient text that isn't "common sense".

If I'm wrong, provide an example.

 

Obviously, if you can do that it's the basis for "turning" people the other way.

Edited by John Cuthber
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So you think there's no possibility, at all, that ancient wisdom equates with, so called, modern wisdom?

 

Hang on - I disagreed with this assertion: "The secularist's complete refusal to accept the historical evidence of widespread conversions....."

 

Which reads differently if you insert a "that":

 

"The secularist's complete refusal to accept that the historical evidence of widespread conversions, in the early days of the major religions, is evidence that they WERE understood at the time, and so potentially contain wisdom.

 

Actually, now I understand what you meant, I still disagree that secularists always refuse to accept this. It is ironic that you challenge me on ancient wisdom because I have spent some time studying it, and I see no clear evidence that modern wisdom is necessarily superior, just different.

 

Edit: cross-posted with the above - I'm glad to see others don't quite understand what you meant.

Edited by DrKrettin
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dimreepr, how can you make an instant leap from "the contents of the bible" to "ancient wisdom" so seamlessly? I promissed myslef I wont participate in threads on religion but we havent finished a conversation on this a couple months back in some other thread thats why I'm engaging. Its mind boggling to me that on one hand you are having beef with seculars not acknowledging the "bible wisdom" but you youreself are not acknowleding the horrible, biggoted, violent, injust contents of the bible (or the Quran for that matter) It is fairly obvious to anyone who has more than 12 functioning neurons that every piece of writing does contain a certain amount of wisdom, especially if majority of it is writen in such a way that its fully open for interpretation. I can bet you that I will be able to find at least 3 universal, noble pieces of wisdom in "Mein Kampf" but so what? (I preffer not to as I never read it thoroughly and I like it to stay that way) I would urge you to have a look at the skeptics annotated bible here:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com

Edited by koti
Link to post
Share on other sites

Dimreepr, how can you make an instant leap from "the contents of the bible" to "ancient wisdom" so seamlessly?

 

Good point that I forgot to mention. When I talked about ancient wisdom, I was not referring to the contents of the bible. I do not see why the two should be considered to be related, let alone equated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[arrogant drivel]

, atheists have also a belief that there is no God

[misguided nonsense]

Atheism is only the lack of a belief in any god.

 

While there are atheists who do have a belief that there is no god, that is definitely not a requirement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If any of you witnessed a miracle, like the hand that materialised in front of Belshazzar and wrote on the wall, your reactions would be the same as his. Your bowels would be loosed! If it requires the study of sources like Edgar Cayce and their works, you will remain safe. Trust your spin doctors and herders, boys, the time for anything more than the latter kind of miracle is past. See you on Polaris, because science has destroyed this world. The North Pole is gone. Ice scating in the Netherlands is abandoned as too dangerous since 1989. Religion gave you the peace you needed to create civilisation and science. Your use of it, and the arrogance you developed as a result, is at fault. Science without religion is blind. Religion without science is lame. (Albert Einstein).

Edited by Pymander
Link to post
Share on other sites

If any of you witnessed a miracle, like the hand that materialised in front of Belshazzar and wrote on the wall, your reactions would be the same as his. Your bowels would be loosed!

This is very true and is the essence of what people here are trying to convey to you. Show us the evidence !

Edited by koti
Link to post
Share on other sites

If any of you witnessed a miracle, like the hand that materialised in front of Belshazzar and wrote on the wall,

 

Nothing like that has ever been noted as anything but a fairytale. It is easy to create such an illusion with simple magicians tricks... not one has ever seen anything like that happen out side of a magic show or an asylum. It's total BS - Be honest to yourself... how many of these miracles have you seen with your own eyes that can't be explained beyond coincidence?

 

Be honest and true to yourself - you have seen NOTHING of this sort of miracle. Stop lying to yourself.... ironically it breaks one of the 10 commandments. Bear no false witness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, to clarify.

As far as I can see, there is no wisdom in any ancient text that isn't "common sense".

If I'm wrong, provide an example.

 

Obviously, if you can do that it's the basis for "turning" people the other way.

 

I completely agree, things like:

 

Forgiveness.

 

Tolerance.

 

Don't judge people, try to understand them.

 

Don't fear a future you can't change.

 

Love your enemy.

 

Etc...

 

Are all things that, in a perfect world, should be common sense; but, given recent politics most people don't understand what you call common sense.

 

But it's not just the individual elements that's important, for most, it's a clear path that leads to understanding why they're common sense.

Dimreepr, how can you make an instant leap from "the contents of the bible" to "ancient wisdom" so seamlessly? I promissed myslef I wont participate in threads on religion but we havent finished a conversation on this a couple months back in some other thread thats why I'm engaging. Its mind boggling to me that on one hand you are having beef with seculars not acknowledging the "bible wisdom" but you youreself are not acknowleding the horrible, biggoted, violent, injust contents of the bible (or the Quran for that matter) It is fairly obvious to anyone who has more than 12 functioning neurons that every piece of writing does contain a certain amount of wisdom, especially if majority of it is writen in such a way that its fully open for interpretation. I can bet you that I will be able to find at least 3 universal, noble pieces of wisdom in "Mein Kampf" but so what? (I preffer not to as I never read it thoroughly and I like it to stay that way) I would urge you to have a look at the skeptics annotated bible here:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com

 

Pretty much every society has had a dark side, that doesn't mean it's incapable of a good side, the same for goes for it's ignorance and wisdom.

If any of you witnessed a miracle, like the hand that materialised in front of Belshazzar and wrote on the wall, your reactions would be the same as his. Your bowels would be loosed! If it requires the study of sources like Edgar Cayce and their works, you will remain safe. Trust your spin doctors and herders, boys, the time for anything more than the latter kind of miracle is past. See you on Polaris, because science has destroyed this world. The North Pole is gone. Ice scating in the Netherlands is abandoned as too dangerous since 1989. Religion gave you the peace you needed to create civilisation and science. Your use of it, and the arrogance you developed as a result, is at fault. Science without religion is blind. Religion without science is lame. (Albert Einstein).

 

The problem is you don't understand your bible and your using blind faith to mask your ignorance; here's a tip that may raise the curtains, read the NT again, but, for heaven read content, for hell read discontent and for god/lord read teacher

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, to clarify.

As far as I can see, there is no wisdom in any ancient text that isn't "common sense".

If I'm wrong, provide an example.

 

It is difficult to understand what you mean here, because the context is confusing. But if it is correct to take that at face value, for you to make that statement, you must have read most ancient texts, including Homer, Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides. If you then claim there is no wisdom there, you must also claim the same for Shakespeare and Goethe, and we must have a very different understanding of what constitutes wisdom.

 

I very much hope that you mean something totally different.

Edited by DrKrettin
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I'm not done yet. Why? Because the pot is calling the kettle black. Everything I am accused of is like the atheists among you is looking in the mirror. Moreover, your grasp of history is for the most part jack. I'm not talking about your ability to memorise black and white text and regurgitate it. I'm talking about which end or the previous regurgitator you got some of it from, ad nauseum. Atlantis is myth, they say. Atlantis is myth, you parrot. How much research have you invested in certifying this, or anything else for that matter. (Remember my fair friends, that I am forced to hand type this.)

 

Text of Reading 958-3 F 31 (Divorced , Secretary, Protestant)

 

This psychic reading given by Edgar Cayce at his home on

Arctic Crescent, Virginia Beach, VA., this 28th day of June,

1940, in accordance with request made by self -

Miss [958], new Associate Member of the Ass''n of Research &

Enlightenment Inc., recommended by her sister, Mrs. [1100].

...

43. This brought consternation to the entity, and also those

influences the application or use of which brought

destruction to the land. And Poseidia will be among the

first portions of Atlantis to rise again. Expect it in

sixty-eight and sixty-nine ('68 and '69); not so far away!

[see 958-3, Par. R5]

 

This long shot prediction eventuated where and when predicted. That's fact. That's prophecy. The "Bimini Road" will raise the fulfilment on the net. That's supernatural, because as Jesus stated, God alone knows the future, and the blind pt byeman could see God's hand in his healing, but you cannot see at all while you shut your eyes and remain willingly ignorant. Cayce was according to the readings, doing the work of the Master of masters. Which brings us to another point.

 

If Atlantis existed, and as Plato's history records in the dialogue "Critias and Timaeus", they had a science hoary with age (25,000 years unlike ours, 11,500 since the Flood or Ice Age), then accordingly, ancient wisdom is most certainly more advanced insofar as it is unembellished and uncorrupted. Isaac Newton, who believed Astrology, an ancient wisdom, had the intellect to investigate the Emerald Tablet and attempt to render its meaning. A cache of such renderings, including his, is not hard to find on the net. You may care to look into it if you are not out and out hypocrites, because I have certainly studied science (falsely so called, if astrology, for one, is not accepted without other justification than "We can't explain it."). But there is only one explanation for any miracle, and astrology, palmistry, reincarnation and fate are miracles, that cannot be explained except by assuming and intelligence greater than our own as responsible. THE HYPOTHESIS THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST CANNOT BE PROVEN. EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY IS EVERYWHERE. THAT EVIDENCE, THOUGH, IS ONLY APPARENT TO THOSE WHO TRY TO LIVE RIGHTEOUSLY (as ye would others do unto you, ...) AND SEEK THE TRUTH.

 

Now, as Plato records, and many of Cayce's past life readings explain, the destruction of Atlantis was, in Cayce's words, because of the abuse of spiritual truths for the material gains of physical power, or as cloak behind which to carry on their activities. They oppressed the less fortunate, and it became the issue that caused the over-use of energy that shifted the poles. Aristotle, Plato's student, and Alexander's mentor, denied Plato's Atlantis existed. He was an imperialist and a slaver, so the story of Atlantis would not ring his bells. Its destruction, and the submergence of the ancient wisdoms, was fated as a direct consequence of the abuse of the knowledge we proved unworthy of.

 

Necessarily, the world, for its fourth age, was thrown back to the stone age for all but a few hubs of civilisation like China, India, and Egypt, all of which were instrumental in the later ages for the upbringing of the Christ and His perfection (Cayce). This returned to Him the power to dematerialise as recorded in the Bible, and discussed at length. His link with Melchizedek (N.T. Melchisedec) is expounded in Hebrews KJV. But mankind had to be raised again from stone-age tribal conflict and ignorance to the intelligence we have at our command today. So the Bible reads like its written for a child in the beginning, advancing through the teachings of the prophets using examples of right and wrong as men evolved again, through to an example of Jesus living all that has been taught, and at the end, presenting in Revelation KJV the mysteries for the worthy who seek God, as Jesus has taught. "Seek first the Kingdom of Heaven, and all these things [that the heathens seek] will be added unto you." But as he has shown by example, he also said "Unto him to whom much has been given, much is also required." Counter examples, of those who have tried to climb up some other way, litter the history books like their monuments litter our cities to inspire the next imperialist and his armies. Through ifor us."t all, developments toward God, and not the destructive forces unleashed to clear the way, remain to take us where we are today. Eventually, we must become none other than the more Christ-like (Cayce). Thus Jesus said, "The mind cannot conceive of outer darkness, nor of the glories that God has prepared for us."

 

Obviously, this species of religion is not to be found in the appendix of Ellen White's brilliant history of the Church since about 1000 AD, downloadable as "The Great Controversy". The 15 Anathemas Against the Doctrines of Origen, Constantinople, 5th council, 553 AD have grossly simplified Christianity, for ease of transmission through the dark ages after the collapse of Rome. Also for the advantage to be gained because of that knowledge. (Cayce)

 

Read carefully, then research my sources here cited, and I will have respect for your opinions. Presently, you know next to nothing of relevance to this discussion.

Edited by Pymander
Link to post
Share on other sites

Atlantis is myth, they say. Atlantis is myth, you parrot.

 

Don't be so bloody ridiculous. Atlantis remains a myth until there is evidence to the contrary. Nothing to do with parroting. That is what bible nut cases do.

 

Edit: I wrote that when the post was just a few lines. What has been added is not worth responding to.

Edited by DrKrettin
Link to post
Share on other sites

DrKrettin, if I may, upon what evidence then do you base your opinion that Atlantis is just a myth?

 

Certainly. Plato mentions it. No more evidence. As it happens, I think that myth usually has some origin in historical events, so he was probably referring to something which happened, and a volcanic explosion of Santorini, the Thera eruption, probably explains the sudden collapse of the Minoan civilisation. At present, this is the most likely explanation, and quite a convincing one. My objection to what you said was the offensive claim of parroting, particularly ironic because this is exactly what people do when quoting from the bible,

 

Your question is interesting, because it highlights a fundamental difference in viewpoints. If something is mentioned in an ancient manuscript, I am entitled to assume it is myth unless somebody can offer evidence that it is fact. You seem to operate on the complete opposite - if an ancient manuscript says something, you take it for a truth unless somebody can prove it is not. That is a seriously perverse way of looking at written documents. Why believe what is written, just because somebody wrote it, with no further evidence?

 

Just for the record, I think that it is highly likely that a lot of myth has historical facts as a root. Any number of mythical characters probably had real people as their origins, but where the historical accuracy has been damaged by constant repetition. I hold it as totally plausible that the Trojan War is based on some event that took place, and that people like Oedipus actually existed. For that matter, I suspect that Jesus actually existed, but that is an entirely different matter than the supernatural characteristics attributed to him.

 

And again for the record, when you say "Atlantis is myth, they say. Atlantis is myth, you parrot. " you insult people like me who have spent many years studying myth, Greek myth in particular, the relationships between myth, history and ritual, and the transmission of ancient texts. My PhD involved a great deal of myth and its influence on religious thought in the ancient world. I have read and analysed enough ancient texts to know that nothing can be taken at face value. So do not assume that you are always talking to people who have not given much thought your references.

Edited by DrKrettin
Link to post
Share on other sites

DrKrettin, thanks for the courtesy of a respectful response. I would like to address it in some detail. I am now in edit mode, required to prevent losing text through crashes and restarting replies. When I'm done, it will be signed off.

 

"Certainly. Plato mentions it. No more evidence." This is so typical of guarded academic discounting. Charles Berlitz has written a book, correlating the "mention" with a wide variety of "no more evidence". For the mentally challenged, it spells a huge and detailed dialogue has been supported with a ton of evidence. After sorties of the Aristocratic flavour, how many bleat likewise, do you think, without a second thought. Trained to absorb lecture content and repeat at examination time with little time to think, and less to research, tackling a variety of courses simultaneously, and gleaning the supplied and suggested texts and sources for assignment purposes, following strict criteria for negotiable points, is a recipe for a herd mentality with one other choice - a very bad investment that is growing, for education, health and legals that should be free and equally available. Why is it otherwise? Luke 11:52-54 KJV.

 

I have proven this much to myself by trying to be thorough, only to fail for lack of time, and deciding to hire myself from the neck down instead, to free my mind from the devil's power (tarot card XV, Revelation chapter XV + I KJV, meaning: domination and spiritual destruction through human weakness) and his bribery. What have I gained? Eternal life, because I have come to accept reincarnation, and its corollary, karma, is no longer a flaming sword, turning every way, preventing me taking of the fruit of the tree of life. Hast thou understood that aright? Compare Genesis 3:24 and Revelation 2:7, children's stories metamorphosing into mysteries.

 

Do you know what will happen to your PhD if you depart your Aristocratic boundaries. You will join Carl Jung, James Maxlow, and believe it or not, even Albert Einstein, and become marginalised under the label "crackpot".

 

I have only addressed the first line of your post, but I'd better leave it here, and allow a response. Over.

Edited by Pymander
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bible itself, the churches, the faiths (belief systems, like yours specialising in science instead of humanity) and a whole lot more are evidence. Your claim is not just false, but hypocritical. Science has a drop in the ocean of evidence for its most media and educational systematically supported HYPOTHESIS, not FACT. If I started a forum (oops, that requires MONEY) that forbade lampooning GOD, I would be the hypocrite. Face it, the real frauds have been debunked, but in the words Jesus often used "Those who have ears to hear, let them hear." (note: more evidence for my FACTS), like your statistical support for the anomaly buster "asymmetric matter-antimatter reactions". You have to be blind too.

 

The only thing the bible is evidence of, is that a bunch of ignorant barbarians once wrote down a mish-mash of every old legend they could remember, steal or invent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manticore, neither your opinion nor mine on the subject of the Bible would compare to Albert Einstein's authoritative knowledge base and proven genius. You opinion seems to derive from the other extreme, or else you are being belligerent. Have you anything more worthwhile to contribute?

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Certainly. Plato mentions it. No more evidence." This is so typical of guarded academic discounting. Charles Berlitz has written a book, correlating the "mention" with a wide variety of "no more evidence". For the mentally challenged, it spells a huge and detailed dialogue has been supported with a ton of evidence. After sorties of the Aristocratic flavour, how many bleat likewise, do you think, without a second thought.

 

I am forming the opinion that you believe everything anybody has written if it is in a book, without the slightest critical judgement. The odd thing is that you are guilty of exactly what you criticise others for. Berlitz wrote about the paranormal, and is generally recognised as promoting pseudoscience and fabricating evidence. It is an insult to the intelligence to expect anybody on a science forum to take him seriously.

 

Yes, that is a typical guarded academic statement by me, because good academic opinion requires solid foundation, and not a flight of fancy with no evidence to support it. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, something Berlitz ignored. You choose to believe what is said in the bible, with no supporting evidence for its veracity. That's your choice, but you can have no concept of how utterly smug and self-righteous you come across. Jesus wouldn't like that.

 

And stop quoting Revelation to me. The only fact it reveals is that John was totally off his head in his cave on Patmos. My avatar is from his writings, by the way, 13.18.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trained to absorb lecture content and repeat at examination time with little time to think, and less to research, tackling a variety of courses simultaneously, and gleaning the supplied and suggested texts and sources for assignment purposes, following strict criteria for negotiable points, is a recipe for a herd mentality

That mentality might get you through a couple of courses, but won't get you a degree in any of the universities and colleges I am familiar with. It is typically expected of students to find their own sources and do their own research.

Link to post
Share on other sites

QUOTE:.."Herd mentality"

 

So - learning is a recipe for herd mentality/behaviour and blind acceptance of any old drivel written in an ancient book which is obviously bollocks is not? Ridiculous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DrKrettin, do you seriously believe that I am not in the slightest measure capable of critical judgement. That assertion, to me, says the same about you, considering the information you have about me. I would not be surprised if the extent of my research far exceeds your own. Upon completion of studies described in the second post of this thread, I decided specifically to investigate, without constraint other than the only determinant of falsehood - inconsistency - whether God exists. Truth, except in mathematics and logic, does not exist, only consistency, and that only as long as it lasts before evidence blows some of our hypotheses away. Remember that time and space were considered absolute, even implicitly, before Einstein detected this implicit but false hypothesis of science. To me, science harbours another just like it, implicitly maintaining that there is no God, and anything therefore which requires God as part of its explanation is false. For this reason, critical judgement is seriously impaired by mainstream scientists concerning everything supernatural. Like absolute time and space, the non-existence of God is, to me, a false hypothesis, contradicted just as the Michelson-Morley experiment contradicted classical physics. Based on a study of the Edgar Cayce readings, and associated research, including a thorough knowledge of the Bible, I have determined that this information, in particular, could not possibly exist unless there is a God. But like all evidence, the hypothesis supported is only more likely true with the weight of evidence, and the best we can do is to ascribe a probability, while contrary evidence is not discovered. On that basis, I would ascribe a very small probability to these phenomena (Bible + Edgar Cayce readings) having another explanation than God for their existence. I am extremely sure that some such explanation is required, like a super-computer messing with Cayce's brain from a highly advanced alien space ship. But none offered on this forum, like Cayce being a fraud, explain the 86.3 MB of Cayce readings I have studied (the Bible and Apocrypha constitutes only 5.04 MB).


Edited by Pymander
Link to post
Share on other sites

. Based on a study of the Edgar Cayce readings, and associated research, including a thorough knowledge of the Bible, I have determined that this information, in particular, could not possibly exist unless there is a God.

 

If that were true then the "babel fish" argument is invoked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

DrKrettin, do you seriously believe that I am not in the slightest measure capable of critical judgement.

 

 

I can only form an opinion based on what you write here. You are displaying absolutely no critical judgement when you refer to Atlantis as though it were a certainty, and referring to unscientific, fanciful and dishonest writings of the likes of Berlitz. Earlier in this thread, you fail totally to engage in any kind of dialogue because you simply refer to the bible in response to any post. This is not the behaviour of somebody who wishes to be taken seriously on a science forum.

 

You make bewildering generalisations about science and scientists as though everybody were automatically atheist. You do not differentiate between atheists and scientific sceptics. You do not differentiate between the "how" of science and the "why" of religion. You treat the bible as an absolute authority which comes across as not only laughable but displaying a total lack of critical judgement. It's in there, so it must be true. Miracles happened in the bible. Evidence? It is written, so it must be true. You might have spent centuries coming to this conclusion, but you say nothing which demonstrates why this should be so.

 

There are plenty of ancient religious texts - why the bible in particular?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.