6
   

Is The Bible Just a Good Book?

 
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 07:03 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
As usual, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I always know what I'm talking about.


Setanta wrote:
Opinions are not facts.

Facts however.... Facts are facts.

That's why I find it so convenient to base all my positions on facts.


Setanta wrote:
What Muslims are trying to murder you and steal your land?

al-Qa'ida and all their offshoots.

Islamic State.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 07:09 am
@oralloy,
So you think the Islamists are going to invade Michigan and take over your parents' basement? You're wackier than i had thought you were.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 07:12 am
You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 07:15 am
@Setanta,


Quote:
You're an ignorant jackass, and, as usual, you don't know what you're talking about. Don't address any posts to me, you low-life scumbag.
You crack me up Set!

0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 07:23 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
So you think the Islamists are going to invade Michigan and take over your parents' basement? You're wackier than i had thought you were.

I am aware that our military is actively defending me from Islamic aggression.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 07:25 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass.

I note your inability to ever point out anything that I am wrong about.
TomTomBinks
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 08:48 am
@Brandon9000,
I'm sorry I wasn't clear. I mean that belief in the infallibility of the Bible, God, the afterlife, etc. is not rational, and so can't be discussed with the same criteria as a rational belief or statement. using the scientific method, logic, reason and evidence is pointless in such a case.
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 09:03 am
@anthony1312002,
A book it is. Is it a good book? That would depend on which version is being read.

Is it even remotely factually true? It has been rewritten so many times that even the names listed are mostly wrong at this point.

Is it a good book, Part-2: it would depend on the height and thickness of said Bible.

The thickness of a bible varies greatly and you must select the correct one, in order to keep the table with a short leg from wobbling.

The height is important as well, since, you want the book shelf display to be neat and even when the books are lined up. The wrong size can screw up a pleasing visual.

Another matter is the weight. If it isn't heavy enough it won't hold papers in place and a stiff breeze will toss them all around.

But....too heavy and it stays always in one place as it's too big to lug around.

farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 09:52 am
@Sturgis,
hominy cd's does it take up?
0 Replies
 
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 10:53 am
@TomTomBinks,
Quote:
God, the afterlife, etc. is not rational, and so can't be discussed with the same criteria as a rational belief or statement. using the scientific method, logic, reason and evidence is pointless in such a case.
As I have already said, there are plenty of things in the bible that can be subjected to verification. If you have no interest in doing the rational scientific work needed to do so, don't fault the book.
TomTomBinks
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 12:32 pm
@Leadfoot,
I'm not saying there are no facts in the Bible; it's full of facts. It's also full of myths, superstitions and faulty conclusions. What I'm saying is that it's not infallible. Belief in it's infallibility is irrational/emotional and one who feels this way can't be swayed by evidence or logic.
Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 02:05 pm
@TomTomBinks,
Others may but I made no claims of infallibility. In my POV, the only thing that matters is the central claim of the book, that there is a God, that he will interact with us in certain specified ways, etc.

The wrangling over which order things happened in the Genesis creation account and similar arguments is kind of irrelevant by comparison.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 02:25 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
Setanta wrote:
You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you in the ass.
I note your inability to ever point out anything that I am wrong about.


Liar--i've already done it today with that bullsh*t account you peddle about the crusades.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 05:11 pm
@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote:
What you said is now on record so I won't argue the point.

But what I said is that science has no answer as to the creation of the universe and likely never will, in that case you can't rule out supernatural causes. You are trying to use ignorance as a reason to do so. I have nothing to offer in light of that kind of argument.

So, to summarize, you believe that a supernatural being created the universe, but cannot provide a single scrap of evidence to support the idea. Believing things with no evidence that they are true doesn't work except randomly.

I know that countless aspects of the universe have been explained by science in a manner that can be repeatedly demonstrated by testing, whereas there is no instance in all human history in which magic has been shown in a testable way to be the explanation of anything. The fact that science hasn't explained absolutely everything is hardly justification for deciding that it must be magic.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 05:12 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Actually, there is a little evidence that people's minds cease to exist. When you damage someone's brain, he usually doesn't think as well. When you damage it a lot, he barely things at all. There is some indication that thinking is the result of physical processes in the brain. Certainly, these physical processes cease upon death.

That doesn't mean that there can't be something happening that we don't understand.

Sure, and we also can't prove that the vanguard of an alien invasion isn't lurking behind Neptune, but that is hardly justification for actively believing it is so.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 05:14 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Setanta wrote:
Brandon's post has nothing to say about the probability of an afterlife.

That is incorrect. It strongly implied that it is an established fact that there is no afterlife.

I said no such thing. I said that there is insufficient evidence to justify the belief that a supernatural being created the universe.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 05:19 pm
@TomTomBinks,
TomTomBinks wrote:
I'm sorry I wasn't clear. I mean that belief in the infallibility of the Bible, God, the afterlife, etc. is not rational, and so can't be discussed with the same criteria as a rational belief or statement. using the scientific method, logic, reason and evidence is pointless in such a case.

Oh, there's a lot of point to it. I have argued that a conclusion is possible. I have argued that there is insufficient evidence to make a belief in such things reasonable. That is a conclusion.

Either these things are true or they are false. To be actively justified in believing that they're true, one would have to have evidence. I have seen no such evidence and no one here seems to be able to provide any.
TomTomBinks
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 10:13 pm
@Brandon9000,
I think we agree on the conclusion. My point was that if one comes to a conclusion in an irrational manner, no amount of rationality will dissuade him.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Apr, 2016 11:47 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
Liar--

As always, everything that I've said is absolutely true. That is why you can never point out a single thing that I am wrong about.


Setanta wrote:
i've already done it today with that bullsh*t account you peddle about the crusades.

It is a fact that the direct causes of the Crusades were the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher by Muslims (which greatly inflamed public opinion in western Europe), and the invasion and conquest of part of the Byzantine Empire by Muslims (which led the Emperor to request military support from western governments).

It is also a fact that Muslims unjustifiably invaded and occupied the Holy Land in centuries previous to the Crusades.

Your denials of these facts do not in any way prevent them from being completely true.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Apr, 2016 01:57 am
@oralloy,
Your bigoted account of actions by the Turks, who were only nominally Muslims, does not in any way authorize the bullshit you post. I'm not going to trash this thread with an account of all the things you routinely get wrong. You live in a twisted right-wing fantasy land, one of the most prominent features of which is an irrational hatred of Muslims.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/22/2019 at 07:57:40