Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-27-2019 7:17 AM
24 online now:
caffeine, Pressie (2 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,844 Year: 9,880/19,786 Month: 2,302/2,119 Week: 338/724 Day: 1/62 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
4567Next
Author Topic:   Camel's Noses, Trojan Horses, and Cultural Aggression
Coyote
Member (Idle past 279 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 31 of 94 (551079)
03-20-2010 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by New Cat's Eye
03-20-2010 1:47 PM


Re: wild claims -- Not!
Is he actually implying that the missionaries caused the deaths or just noting the correlation?

A bit of both.

Part of the cause of the high death rate was the crowding, poor food, overwork, unsanitary living conditions and demoralization the Indian people experienced at the missions.

Those factors made the introduced diseases much more devastating than they might have been otherwise. But it is unlikely the missionaries were the source of the diseases. That is more likely to have been the sailors and soldiers. Neither were of the best sort, and a wide variety of diseases probably originated with them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-20-2010 1:47 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18498
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 32 of 94 (551081)
03-20-2010 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Coyote
03-20-2010 7:28 PM


Re: wild claims -- Not!
By "death rate" do you actually mean "population decline?" I hope so, in which case there's no argument. But if you instead meant mortality rate then your figures make no sense. You can't kill off even just 75% of a population every year without wiping them out in just a few years.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Coyote, posted 03-20-2010 7:28 PM Coyote has not yet responded

    
Coyote
Member (Idle past 279 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 33 of 94 (551086)
03-20-2010 8:33 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by anglagard
03-20-2010 3:16 PM


Re: To Catholic Scientist and Anglagard
I took death rate to mean population decline rate rather than mortality rate for the very reason a 90% mortality rate makes no sense in this context. However, I can easily see how there could be some confusion over exactly what Coyote meant by "death rate."

Sorry for the confusion.

The figure I was trying to cite was the change in population of the indigenous coastal peoples in the mission zone during the mission era (1769-1834).

This is only a small part of California, so the overall California population change is quite different.

And the ca. 90% figure in the mission zone is altered by the importation of peoples from the interior.

The missions were responsible in part because of the concentration of peoples there. That lead to a higher death rate than perhaps would otherwise have been the case.

But the point may be moot, as some epidemics (as detailed by Sherburne Cook) wiped out huge numbers of interior peoples as well. In the early 1800s whole villages were reportedly killed by diseases in the western side of the Central Valley.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by anglagard, posted 03-20-2010 3:16 PM anglagard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by cavediver, posted 03-21-2010 7:10 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 34 of 94 (551098)
03-20-2010 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Buzsaw
03-20-2010 5:57 PM


Re: Buzsaw Position: Jehovah vs Allah
In both Arabic and Indonesian, Allah is simply the word for God-with-a-capital-G, and is not a proper name. It would certainly be impossible for Christians,as you suggest, to substitute Jehovah or Yahweh, since this is the proper name of God the Father.

So for example Arabic Christians, ever since Christianity came to Arabia, speak of Jesus as الله الابن --- Allah al-ibn --- God the Son; and there is no other way of saying this in Arabic. It would not be correct, would it, to speak of Jehovah the Son.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Buzsaw, posted 03-20-2010 5:57 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Buzsaw, posted 03-21-2010 1:37 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 94 (551105)
03-21-2010 1:37 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Dr Adequate
03-20-2010 11:49 PM


Re: Buzsaw Position: Jehovah vs Allah
Dr Adequate writes:

In both Arabic and Indonesian, Allah is simply the word for God-with-a-capital-G, and is not a proper name. It would certainly be impossible for Christians,as you suggest, to substitute Jehovah or Yahweh, since this is the proper name of God the Father.
So for example Arabic Christians, ever since Christianity came to Arabia, speak of Jesus as --- Allah al-ibn --- God the Son; and there is no other way of saying this in Arabic. It would not be correct, would it, to speak of Jehovah the Son.

Allah was indeed one of the many gods of Mecca and in fact, the primary god of Muhammed's family. It was the only name known to Muhammed and other Arabs at Mecca previous to his contact with Christians. Jehovah of the Bible was not an acceptable or known god of Mecca, according to the books I have on Islam written by objective authors.

Btw, Jesus is the son of Jehovah and not Jehovah, the son according to the terminology of the NT.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-20-2010 11:49 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-21-2010 5:27 AM Buzsaw has responded

  
IchiBan
Member (Idle past 3111 days)
Posts: 88
Joined: 07-07-2008


Message 36 of 94 (551117)
03-21-2010 3:22 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Percy
03-20-2010 8:24 AM


I posted the article here because it was a news item, and it was an illustration of the same approach taken by creationists but in a completely different venue.

You have not sold me on that one.

Regardless, I'll watch coyote back pedal and dance around now that he is caught again and has to act like he really wasn't telling us what he was telling us.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Percy, posted 03-20-2010 8:24 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 37 of 94 (551120)
03-21-2010 5:27 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Buzsaw
03-21-2010 1:37 AM


Re: Buzsaw Position: Jehovah vs Allah
Allah was indeed one of the many gods of Mecca ...

Specifically, the supreme one, which is why he was called Allah, i.e. God.

In Arabic, "ilah" means "god with a little g". And "al" means "the". Allah, therefore, just means "the god", i.e. God-with-a-big-G. It's not a personal name, it's a definite article plus a noun, and one which, from a Christian point of view, is the correct description, in Arabic, of the Christian God.

Btw, Jesus is the son of Jehovah and not Jehovah, the son according to the terminology of the NT.

That's my point. If you want to say "God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost" in Arabic, you cannot use the word "Jehovah" for "God" because that would make a nonsense of Christian theology. The only way you can say it is "Allāh al-ʼab, Allāh al-ibn, wa Allāh al-rūḥ al-quds". And this is in fact what Arabic-speaking Christians have always said.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Buzsaw, posted 03-21-2010 1:37 AM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Buzsaw, posted 03-22-2010 4:26 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1817 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 38 of 94 (551125)
03-21-2010 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Coyote
03-20-2010 8:33 PM


Re: To Catholic Scientist and Anglagard
The figure I was trying to cite was the change in population of the indigenous coastal peoples in the mission zone during the mission era (1769-1834).

And for the record, that is exactly how I interpreted it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Coyote, posted 03-20-2010 8:33 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Percy, posted 03-21-2010 8:01 AM cavediver has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18498
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 39 of 94 (551127)
03-21-2010 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by cavediver
03-21-2010 7:10 AM


Re: To Catholic Scientist and Anglagard
cavediver writes:

The figure I was trying to cite was the change in population of the indigenous coastal peoples in the mission zone during the mission era (1769-1834).

And for the record, that is exactly how I interpreted it.

I guess Ichiban and I are odd men out in seeing the "death rate" label at a 90% level applied to population decline as an invalid attempt at further demonizing that which required no further demonization.

But then maybe the increase in the Spanish population from 150 in 1769 to 4000 in 1832 represents a birth rate of 2700%.

I agree with the population decline figures. I think the mission efforts in California were reprehensible. But using the 90% figure with the term "death rate" is to me a rather obvious attempt at making it seem like the missions had a more direct role in the death of Indians than could ever have been the case.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by cavediver, posted 03-21-2010 7:10 AM cavediver has not yet responded

    
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 94 (551398)
03-22-2010 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Dr Adequate
03-21-2010 5:27 AM


Re: Buzsaw Position: Jehovah vs Allah
Dr Adequate writes:

That's my point. If you want to say "God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost" in Arabic, you cannot use the word "Jehovah" for "God" because that would make a nonsense of Christian theology. The only way you can say it is "Allh al-ʼab, Allh al-ibn, wa Allh al-rḥ al-quds". And this is in fact what Arabic-speaking Christians have always said.

Doc:

1) Jehovah is the proper name of the Christian god as per the Bible. What is the proper name of the Muslim god as per the Quran?

2) Jesus is not god the son, nor is the Holy Spirit god the spirit as is falsely claimed by many. Jesus is the son of Jehovah and the Holy Spirit is both the multipresent spirit of Jesus, son and Jehovah, father/god, god of Jesus and of us. The father, Jehovah and the son, Jesus share the one and same multipresent Holy Spirit, i.e. the same multipresent spirit of Genesis 1, the working agent and the same multipresent spirit which resides in the believer. That's been my position for years here at EvC.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-21-2010 5:27 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-22-2010 5:42 PM Buzsaw has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 41 of 94 (551424)
03-22-2010 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Buzsaw
03-22-2010 4:26 PM


Re: Buzsaw Position: Jehovah vs Allah
1) Jehovah is the proper name of the Christian god as per the Bible. What is the proper name of the Muslim god as per the Quran?

There just isn't one. He's God. From a Muslim point of view it would be positively blasphemous to speculate about God as having a proper name such as "James" or "Caroline" or "Edward". There are various things that you can call God, such as "The Merciful One", or "The Compassionate One", or just "God" --- but he doesn't have a personal name as such.

Why should he? Can you tell me the middle name of the Holy Ghost?

Jesus is not god the son ...

I'll leave you religious folks to fight that one out amongst yourselves. I hope you see the point that I was actually trying to make, theology aside.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Buzsaw, posted 03-22-2010 4:26 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-22-2010 5:47 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded
 Message 57 by Buzsaw, posted 03-22-2010 11:54 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 94 (551426)
03-22-2010 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Dr Adequate
03-22-2010 5:42 PM


Re: Buzsaw Position: Jehovah vs Allah
Why should he? Can you tell me the middle name of the Holy Ghost?

I think its Freakin'


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-22-2010 5:42 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by AZPaul3, posted 03-22-2010 9:13 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded
 Message 44 by Buzsaw, posted 03-22-2010 9:20 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4142
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 43 of 94 (551473)
03-22-2010 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by New Cat's Eye
03-22-2010 5:47 PM


Re: Buzsaw Position: Jehovah vs Allah
Well Holy F. Ghost, I didn't know that! As we live and learn.

I love this place.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-22-2010 5:47 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 94 (551475)
03-22-2010 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by New Cat's Eye
03-22-2010 5:47 PM


Re: WARNING, FRIENDS! :
Catholic Scientist writes:

I think its Freakin'

Careful there, friend! Jesus warned:

Matthew 12:31,

"Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men."

Edited by Buzsaw, : update message title


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-22-2010 5:47 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Coragyps, posted 03-22-2010 9:33 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 46 by Granny Magda, posted 03-22-2010 9:55 PM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 47 by AZPaul3, posted 03-22-2010 10:15 PM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 48 by bluescat48, posted 03-22-2010 10:26 PM Buzsaw has acknowledged this reply
 Message 51 by Coyote, posted 03-22-2010 11:25 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 52 by subbie, posted 03-22-2010 11:26 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 56 by lyx2no, posted 03-22-2010 11:54 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 80 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-23-2010 10:24 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5393
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 45 of 94 (551478)
03-22-2010 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Buzsaw
03-22-2010 9:20 PM


Re: WARNING, FRIENDS! :
Fuck a whole pile of Holy Ghosts, and feed 'em fishheads, I say.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Buzsaw, posted 03-22-2010 9:20 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by IchiBan, posted 04-03-2010 2:04 AM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
Prev12
3
4567Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019