Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is the better explanation, the use of probability.
I am thinking my inference cannot be made. The only thing that can be said is "I can't infer a god exists yet."
An inference is made from logic and reason.
We do it everyday of our lives, and that's what judges and juries do.
We can read the texts for both the Old and New Testaments and see numerous variances, conflicts, contradictions, errors and omissions, orthographic errors, spelling errors, improper word usage, improperly dividing words and amendations.
From that, we can infer that the authors/translators were not in communication with any god-thing, nor were they inspired by any god-thing nor were they filled with the Holy Flatulence.
Because if they were, then there would be no variances, no conflicts, no contradictions, no errors, no omissions, no amendations, no orthographic errors, no spelling errors, no improper word usage and no improper word divisions.
Right?
I mean for 2,500 years a particular Psalm was translated incorrectly, because no one understood the proper division of a word, and so it was rendered "silver lips" which is really stupid and makes no sense in the context of the Psalm.
It was only after they discovered the original Ugaritic text which the Hebrews plagiarized that the word was improperly divided, and so now it's correctly divided and is rendered "like silver" which makes a helluva lot more sense.
And, the idiots who translate the King Joke Vision don't understand that all Semitic language are connotial, meaning words have connotations.
There are five different roots that express "forget" but each with a different connotation.
The morons who write the King Joke Vision would incorrectly translate a passage as "I forgot about my garden this year." The correct translation is: "I neglected my garden this year." You know your garden is there and you didn't forget about it, but you did neglect it, because you didn't stake up your tomatoes and beans and didn't weed your garden and let it get over-run with weeds, insects and vermin.
Another root expresses "forget" through carelessness. Another through ignorance. Another through lack of remembrance and so on.
So the dumb Hebrews have a passage that says, "If I forget you Jerusalem, let my right hand forget" because they too damn stupid to understand the meaning of the root.
Then the morons at the King Joke Vision compound the error by changing the translation to: "If I forget thee O Jerusalem let my right had forget her cunning."
That particular root expresses "forget" through the connotation of wasting.
The makes the correct translation: "If I do not remember you Jerusalem, let my right had wither/shrivel."
So, who's the idiot, the god-thing or the morons at the King Joke Vision?
Because if they were in contact with some god-thing, they should have been able to translate it correctly.
We do it everyday of our lives, and that's what judges and juries do.
We can read the texts for both the Old and New Testaments and see numerous variances, conflicts, contradictions, errors and omissions, orthographic errors, spelling errors, improper word usage, improperly dividing words and amendations.
From that, we can infer that the authors/translators were not in communication with any god-thing, nor were they inspired by any god-thing nor were they filled with the Holy Flatulence.
Because if they were, then there would be no variances, no conflicts, no contradictions, no errors, no omissions, no amendations, no orthographic errors, no spelling errors, no improper word usage and no improper word divisions.
Right?
I mean for 2,500 years a particular Psalm was translated incorrectly, because no one understood the proper division of a word, and so it was rendered "silver lips" which is really stupid and makes no sense in the context of the Psalm.
It was only after they discovered the original Ugaritic text which the Hebrews plagiarized that the word was improperly divided, and so now it's correctly divided and is rendered "like silver" which makes a helluva lot more sense.
And, the idiots who translate the King Joke Vision don't understand that all Semitic language are connotial, meaning words have connotations.
There are five different roots that express "forget" but each with a different connotation.
The morons who write the King Joke Vision would incorrectly translate a passage as "I forgot about my garden this year." The correct translation is: "I neglected my garden this year." You know your garden is there and you didn't forget about it, but you did neglect it, because you didn't stake up your tomatoes and beans and didn't weed your garden and let it get over-run with weeds, insects and vermin.
Another root expresses "forget" through carelessness. Another through ignorance. Another through lack of remembrance and so on.
So the dumb Hebrews have a passage that says, "If I forget you Jerusalem, let my right hand forget" because they too damn stupid to understand the meaning of the root.
Then the morons at the King Joke Vision compound the error by changing the translation to: "If I forget thee O Jerusalem let my right had forget her cunning."
That particular root expresses "forget" through the connotation of wasting.
The makes the correct translation: "If I do not remember you Jerusalem, let my right had wither/shrivel."
So, who's the idiot, the god-thing or the morons at the King Joke Vision?
Because if they were in contact with some god-thing, they should have been able to translate it correctly.
In another thread you were highly critical of people who referenced Wikipedia...as opposed to you who typically references nothing.
We do it every day of our lives, and that's what judges and juries do.
We can read the texts for both the Old and New Testaments and see numerous variances, conflicts, contradictions, errors and omissions, orthographic errors, spelling errors, improper word usage, improperly dividing words and amendations.
From that, we can infer that the authors/translators were not in communication with any god-thing, nor were they inspired by any god-thing nor were they filled with the Holy Flatulence.
Because if they were, then there would be no variances, no conflicts, no contradictions, no errors, no omissions, no amendations, no orthographic errors, no spelling errors, no improper word usage and no improper word divisions.
Right?
<Snip>
Wrong. Who decided that inspirations received by ignorant and very fallible human beings would NOT have such variances, conflicts, contradictions, errors, omissions, amendations, orthographic errors, spelling errors, improper word usage, and improper word divisions? Inspiration is NOT dictation.
That only applies if you are addressing the claim that God is real and that he exists. And that is your clain. If the inquiry is to wetter or not a God exists one can approach it with the concept of looking at the evidence and data and to proceed from there. First of all one needs to define what a God is and I guess also define all the other words to address your own claims.
true or false does not apply to choice of music, poetry, art, food, path of religion/spirituality.
if your question is this, " the question is how is anyone to come to a religious or spiritual truth "
the answer is (for me anyway):
prayer, study, resonance, affinity, intuitive response, emotional response, logic, family lineage, admirable role models, texts that make sense, intellectual depth, spiritual depth, integrity, wisdom, guide for self-improvement, ethics, personal experience, positive outcomes, practical application, improves quality of daily life, increased sense of peace and well-being, joy, upliftment, inspiration, classes, useful guidance from sages, positive results, increased closeness to the Creator.
it is not about satisfying or convincing anyone else of anything. just myself.
it is about nurturing and fostering closeness to God in my daily life.
so it is a personal choice, which varies from person to person.
just like food, art, music, poetry.
it is not one size fits all. there is no single truth, no single path.
it is a relationship with the Creator. it is nourishing the soul.
Did the Great full Dead have more hits than the Eagles? Yes or no?
Is Christopher Pratt paintings super realists or post modernism?
Is pork vegan?
Yes one can ask true or false statements about music, art or religion?
Is there evidence for the existence of a God? Are there reasons we should respect religious beliefs more than we respect fantasy beliefs or conspiracy theories?
Should we ignore any and all scientific or historical evidence that contradict religious beliefs?
Sure it is not a true or false question of is yours the correct religion but what about did the dinosaurs die out long before mankind evolved? Your comments appear to claim that we cannot ask questions about any subject in which you can have personal opinions or favourites.
You can't ask if too much cream is bad for your health because you like strawberry jam.
You can't ask if there is any evidence for Christ because you are a Jew
You can't ask about who started or what started rap music because you like jazz.
The above 3 examples are attempts to show the fallacy of your claim.
ufo's contradict science all the time. They make a mockery of science & display vast intelligence. Science has zero knowledge about them. So that proves science is a loser & there is at least one higher intelligence running rings around them. Now if they are dumb, & we know they are, then we should not let them tell the world that there is no God or spiritual side.
And cameras are scientific instruments. Audio recorders are scientific instruments. And those instruments all capture ghosts & spirits visually & audibly. Science instruments have proven the spiritual world exists. And that is what religion is claiming exists. So science cannot be used as an excuse to say there is no God or spiritual side of life
ufo's contradict science all the time. They make a mockery of science & display vast intelligence. Science has zero knowledge about them. So that proves science is a loser & there is at least one higher intelligence running rings around them. Now if they are dumb, & we know they are, then we should not let them tell the world that there is no God or spiritual side.
And cameras are scientific instruments. Audio recorders are scientific instruments. And those instruments all capture ghosts & spirits visually & audibly. Science instruments have proven the spiritual world exists. And that is what religion is claiming exists
Did the Great full Dead have more hits than the Eagles? Yes or no?
Is Christopher Pratt paintings super realists or post modernism?
Is pork vegan?
Yes one can ask true or false statements about music, art or religion?
Is there evidence for the existence of a God? Are there reasons we should respect religious beliefs more than we respect fantasy beliefs or conspiracy theories?
Should we ignore any and all scientific or historical evidence that contradict religious beliefs?
Sure it is not a true or false question of is yours the correct religion but what about did the dinosaurs die out long before mankind evolved? Your comments appear to claim that we cannot ask questions about any subject in which you can have personal opinions or favourites.
You can't ask if too much cream is bad for your health because you like strawberry jam.
You can't ask if there is any evidence for Christ because you are a Jew
You can't ask about who started or what started rap music because you like jazz.
The above 3 examples are attempts to show the fallacy of your claim.
You can ask questions about anything you want, and I can reflect back to you how they sound.
for instance you ask "Should we ignore any and all scientific or historical evidence that contradict religious beliefs?" does it concern you that Picasso's faces contradict science. That the buildings of Escher have no historic evidence. Should people ignore those contradictions?
You ask, "Are there reasons we should respect religious beliefs more than we respect fantasy beliefs or conspiracy theories?" are there reasons you should respect jazz more than acid rock or string quartets?
" what about did the dinosaurs die out long before mankind evolved? "
huh? what about the Hotel California where you can check out any time you want but you can never leave? are you indignant that is a poor business model? What about the Eagles admitting that when they wrote the song it was not about a hotel at all.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 09-16-2019 at 11:29 PM..
Did the Great full Dead have more hits than the Eagles? Yes or no?
Is Christopher Pratt paintings super realists or post modernism?
Is pork vegan?
Yes one can ask true or false statements about music, art or religion? Is there evidence for the existence of a God? Are there reasons we should respect religious beliefs more than we respect fantasy beliefs or conspiracy theories? Should we ignore any and all scientific or historical evidence that contradict religious beliefs?
Sure it is not a true or false question of is yours the correct religion but what about did the dinosaurs die out long before mankind evolved? Your comments appear to claim that we cannot ask questions about any subject in which you can have personal opinions or favourites.
You can't ask if too much cream is bad for your health because you like strawberry jam.
You can't ask if there is any evidence for Christ because you are a Jew
You can't ask about who started or what started rap music because you like jazz.
The above 3 examples are attempts to show the fallacy of your claim.
think of your favorite band, your favorite music, your favorite songs they sing. you know how the songs make you feel. you know what the songs are about. you know what the songs mean. you listen to them over and over. you know what the singer is expressing. the songs and music are beautiful to you.
Now think of someone who doesn't like that band, doesn't like that kind of music, doesn't like those songs. they tell you the songs don't make sense. they tell you the lyrics are not supported by historic and scientific evidence. they tell you the songs have contradictions in them. they ask you if there is evidence of the existence of what the singer is singing about. they challenge you how you can believe what the song is saying, because what about the dead dinosaurs. they ask why should that music deserve respect. the music which is so beautiful to you is utterly discordant to this person, a lot of screechy noise.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 09-17-2019 at 12:18 AM..
Wrong. Who decided that inspirations received by ignorant and very fallible human beings would NOT have such variances, conflicts, contradictions, errors, omissions, amendations, orthographic errors, spelling errors, improper word usage, and improper word divisions? Inspiration is NOT dictation.
But you are making the same logical error - in fact the universal and common one - assuming as true what you are arguing for. If we start from Not assuming that Inspiration is anything but the stuff that pops into the individual human mind, then the assertion that it is from a Cosmic Intelligence immediately runs (rather as the Gospel -story runs into serious contradictions) into such conflicting messages that the assertion that it comes from a single transmitting intelligence faces an explanation. What is your explanation. That it has been garbles by the human mind.
Why then would not the smart (and logical) money go on "Well the simpler explanation is that the messages originate within the individual minds. The similarities can be explained by common instincts, culture/indoctrination and even coincidence.
In short, like the god -claim, the argument has not met its' burden of proof and there is no reason to believe it. This is the logic and it is only Faith that reverses your logical thinking so that it fails every time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
think of your favorite band, your favorite music, your favorite songs they sing. you know how the songs make you feel. you know what the songs are about. you know what the songs mean. you listen to them over and over. you know what the singer is expressing. the songs and music are beautiful to you.
Now think of someone who doesn't like that band, doesn't like that kind of music, doesn't like those songs. they tell you the songs don't make sense. they tell you the lyrics are not supported by historic and scientific evidence. they tell you the songs have contradictions in them. they ask you if there is evidence of the existence of what the singer is singing about. they challenge you how you can believe what the song is saying, because what about the dead dinosaurs. they ask why should that music deserve respect. the music which is so beautiful to you is utterly discordant to this person, a lot of screechy noise.
Personal preference. There may be be debate about what in the song is unknown. 'Heartnreak hotel' is just in a song and is symbolic, but the writer based it on a real event. Those are incidentals that can be questioned and perhaps researched and answered in any book, whether it is LoR (is there some hidden truth in the fantasy?) or the account of the battle of Kadesh. Is it factual despite obvious boasting? Is it basically true enough to say 'what happened'? (which most historians seem to go with. It is totally invention as one historian at least claims.
That's a matter of historical research, like the meanings of pop -songs.
But it is nothing to do with whether one likes or dislikes the music or not, and the Hotels, Battles and the reason the dinosaurs died is 'Fact'. No matter what we may believe about it, and even if we never find what the actual truth is.
No mater how much you try to muddle the issue, Tzaph. It is going to come out the same.
It's rather the same with the supposed paradox of the complex question that can't ne answered yes or no, so there are some things that can't 'Have an answer'. The complexity of it means that each component can be answerable, some Yes, some No. Each one has an answer. (even if we may not actually know it and given that some may require human convention to judge on . But put it back together to address the question and some yes and some no still does not come to clear yes or no for the whole question. Though best on balance answer can come out of it.
These Complex (or foggy) matters almost always fall into three basic categories; true (so far as the evidence indicates - as on a sliding scale of confidence)
Human invention (which could be right, like scientific hypotheses - but will require validation)
Unknowns. Which are -unknown and evidence of nothing.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-17-2019 at 12:31 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. But put it back together to address the question and some yes and some no still does not come to clear yes or no for the whole question. Though best on balance answer can come out of it.
