Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9071 total)
58 online now:
CosmicChimp, PaulK, vimesey (3 members, 55 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Upcoming Birthdays: Percy
Post Volume: Total: 893,040 Year: 4,152/6,534 Month: 366/900 Week: 72/150 Day: 3/42 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


(1)
Message 12 of 2058 (559206)
05-07-2010 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Flyer75
05-07-2010 11:41 AM


Mod's last post is a pretty good. I think creation should be taught in school but not right beside evolution.

That's easily done. There should be no real objection to a COmparative Religions class, where students are taught about various religious beliefs. I don't think it's harmful to expose students to different cultures and beliefs - rather, I think it benefits them in the long run. I'd much rather have kids know what Muslims and Atheists and Hindus and Buddhists and Christians and Jews etc. actually believe instead of the stereotypes that inevitably form in the absence of real education.

Obviously, as Comparative Religion is not related to Biology, there should be no case of evolution being taught in the same classroom as religion.

There are ways to do it even without bringing the religious aspect into such as the cross and the resurrection.

Creationism is the religious aspect, and is no more or less religious or scientific than the resurrection.

That said, in a Comparative Religions class, learning about the beliefs of Christians (along with other major religions) would be the point of the class, and I see no reason either Creationism or the resurrection should be excluded.

Make it elective or something if kids want to take a class on creation. Also, it could be taught (here in America) as a Biblical/Western culture history class or something like that.

I'd much rather see an actual Comparative Religions class, not limit the class to only Christianity (which would violate the Constitutional mandate that government not specifically endorse one religion over another, and offering a Bible studies course but not an equivalent for all other religions would be exactly that). We live in an ever-globalizing society, and I think it's helpful to learn about the beliefs and cultures of those around us, rather than working from popular conceptions. After all, the average Christian's understanding of the beliefs of a Muslim or a Hindu, for example, is starkly inaccurate and incomplete.

But I think somebody else mentioned it...the class is only as good as the teacher and for the most part, these HS teachers blow. I still remember my sophomore high school biology teacher. Good grief, this guy had no clue, none, nada, about science or evolution or biology, ect. He literally just read from the text book...no discussion, experiments, ect. Just awful. Conversely, in that same school, I had a tremendous English literature teacher who went above and beyond the call of duty.

I think that comment can apply to the entirety of our educational system. In our society, all too often the teachers are under-qualified and/or unmotivated, while the students are even worse. NYC has a disgusting 50% graduation rate from their High Schools.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Flyer75, posted 05-07-2010 11:41 AM Flyer75 has taken no action

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


(1)
Message 484 of 2058 (741468)
11-12-2014 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 480 by Colbard
11-12-2014 8:13 AM


Re: Back on track
Genuine Biblical studies are not philosophical, but the beginning of faith,

I'm not sure what this means.

whereas science is a study of doubt, hence everything needs to be documented and dissected and approved by a board.

That's...not at all what science is.

Science is the practice of determining the most accurate way to describe reality. It's about proposing different hypotheses to explain real-world phenomenon, and then testing their predictions. Hypothesis A and B could both possibly explain our observations; scientists aim to determine what differentiates A from B, and then perform tests to determine whether A or B is the most accurate explanation.

There is no "committee" that votes on science, because science is not politics or a popularity contest. There is peer review, the process by which independent researchers analyze someone's findings to make sure the results were not a statistical fluke or error, that the methodology was sound, and that the conclusions logically follow.

The student of faith watches the frog by the pond catching insects and eating them. He examines the poop and discovers parts of insects in it, so he concludes that the frog eats insects and has proof.

That doesn't seem to have anything to do at all with faith by any definition found in any dictionary. Can you explain?

The student of science, kills a hundred frogs and has a hundred scientists from different parts of the world cut them open and document the gizzards as well as write up an essay to a recognized peer reviewed magazine.
After some years, students will be allowed to buy text books containing this information, and know that frogs eat insects. And be tested on it, and if they fail they will have a mundane career.

...I'm pretty sure scientists would just do the first thing you said. Dissections have their place, but observing frogs eating insects is sufficient evidence that they do, in fact, eat insects. Fecal examinations might be able to determine what else the frog may have eaten that wasn't directly observed. Dissection would be useful in determining how the frog digested the bugs.

I understand this was hyperbole to mock science, but it's not terribly helpful in a debate to be so wildly inaccurate.

The student of faith still has a pond and is now studying tadpoles.

The students of science are sitting in class, hitting each other out of boredom, because the frogs were killed off and there is a plague of insects outside.

Your implication that science destroys that which it studies is categorically false.

But even if it were true, an appeal to consequence is still a logical fallacy.

The scientific method is the best known method to distinguish truth from falsehood and to distinguish more accurate explanations of the real world from less accurate explanations.

Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 480 by Colbard, posted 11-12-2014 8:13 AM Colbard has taken no action

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 488 of 2058 (741483)
11-12-2014 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 486 by Faith
11-12-2014 3:24 PM


Re: Coyotes call
I'm no longer trying to argue the science issues, been there done that, and I still think rather well, the point is that God said there was a worldwide Flood, and the numbers of years calculable from His word show it occurred about 4300 years ago. This is the testimony of the most trustworthy of witnesses and I believe Him and since your observations are at odds with His you need to rethink them.

This is not debate, then.

You're just going to continue an appeal to authority on every possible point. There are no arguments that can possibly sway you because they contradict your interpretation of the supposed word of your claimed authority.

If any direct observations are made which contradict that interpretation of those supposed words from that claimed authority, you would say that we need to get our eyes checked.

When reality tells you something, and the Bible tells you something else, your position is literally that you must have heard reality wrong, because the Bible supersedes all observation.

I understand that you're fully convinced of this, Faith, but it's not a position that is likely to convince anyone outside of your choir, or indeed likely to even foster any sort of interesting discussion. After all, we already know what your answer will be.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 486 by Faith, posted 11-12-2014 3:24 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 489 by Faith, posted 11-12-2014 4:49 PM Rahvin has taken no action

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 491 of 2058 (741487)
11-12-2014 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 490 by jar
11-12-2014 4:52 PM


Re: Coyotes call
But God said there were two entirely different Biblical Floods that were mutually exclusive, or haven't you ever read the Bible?
Which account of the Biblical Flood is true and which is just a lie?

Faith

If you read the Bible and think that it's self-contradictory, then you're reading the Bible wrong.

Whatever the Bible says is true, period. Any apparent contradiction is just your fallen mind using fallen logic.

/Faith

Faith, how'd I do?


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 490 by jar, posted 11-12-2014 4:52 PM jar has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 499 by Faith, posted 11-12-2014 7:07 PM Rahvin has taken no action

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


(2)
Message 494 of 2058 (741493)
11-12-2014 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 493 by PaulK
11-12-2014 5:52 PM


Re: Coyotes call
I don't think that telling obvious lies is doing "rather well". If you're reduced to trying to pretend that the evidence doesn't exist, then you really don't have a rational case.

She's not lying. She's honestly misguided. She's also perfectly logically consistent.

The issue is merely the fact that Faith bases any and all arguments on her interpretation of a specific version of the Bible, as we all know. That interpretation is held to be the absolute highest possible authority on all topics it possibly speaks to.

Her conclusions do in fact appear to follow from this basic assumption. She's shown herself willing and able to admit that she's wrong under the condition that the alternative to the mistaken position must also fit as well or better with her interpretation of her version of the Bible

She'll go so far as to say that any observations made can in fact be hallucinations, even her own observations, if they contradict the Bible.

There's simply no arguing such a position, because there is literally no possible argument that can disprove the Bible's authority: she'll simply say that whatever the argument is based on is wrong because the Bible is right.

There's no reason to agree with her, but it's hard, even impossible to argue with someone who will doubt her own sensory perceptions and those of every other person before she will doubt her interpretation of her authority.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 493 by PaulK, posted 11-12-2014 5:52 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 495 by Tangle, posted 11-12-2014 6:15 PM Rahvin has replied
 Message 496 by PaulK, posted 11-12-2014 6:16 PM Rahvin has replied

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 497 of 2058 (741497)
11-12-2014 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 496 by PaulK
11-12-2014 6:16 PM


Re: Coyotes call
Unfortunately that's not true. And no, she isn't consistent either. Like most apologists she will say anything to pretend she's right.

Logically consistent. That's not the same as being consistent.

Her position is that her interpretation of her version of the bible is the ultimate authority. If the authority is wrong for absolutely any reason, then the reason is at fault, not the actual authority.

There's nothing logically inconsistent about that. It flows from a premise we don't agree on, but it does flow from that premise.

She'll say anything because everything is suspect except her authority. If her own arguments turn out to be at odds with her authority, she'll doubt her own arguments. She'll doubt her own eyes. She'll doubt any and all scientific instruments you can show her.

She honestly and genuinely believes that her interpretation of her version of the Bible is the ultimate arbiter of fact. If the Bible says pi=3, and she performs the actual measurement herself and finds that it's not, she'll claim that the circle wasn't perfect, or her measuring method was wrong, or even that she hallucinated before she concludes that her authority is mistaken.

I've known her to repeat things she's been told are untrue. I've known her to be called a liar. She's been known to make outrageous and outlandish claims. She's been known to change her arguments. But I've never known her to actually say something that she herself did not believe to be true.

Faith simply believes that the buck stops at the Bible. Again, there's nothing logically inconsistent with that. It's not a reasonable position, but it doesn't make her a liar.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 496 by PaulK, posted 11-12-2014 6:16 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 505 by PaulK, posted 11-13-2014 12:46 AM Rahvin has replied

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 498 of 2058 (741498)
11-12-2014 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 495 by Tangle
11-12-2014 6:15 PM


Re: Coyotes call
Given all that - which is obviously true - why the fuck do we bother arguing with her? That's something I've been wondering about for a while.

Because despite the fact that her position is virtually impossible to change, she's still one of the most well-informed and articulate Creationists who have visited the site.

Because she continues to post, and there's something that drives us to reply when someone says something we disagree with.

Because she makes arguments that sometimes appear easy to falsify, and we just like to argue, even though we know we won;t change her mind.

Because sometimes the audience for the debate is not the participants, but those who lurk and read the debates.

Because some of us just like to argue.

Because sometimes we forget how frustrating it can be.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 495 by Tangle, posted 11-12-2014 6:15 PM Tangle has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 501 by Faith, posted 11-12-2014 7:12 PM Rahvin has replied

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


(2)
Message 503 of 2058 (741506)
11-12-2014 8:27 PM
Reply to: Message 501 by Faith
11-12-2014 7:12 PM


Re: Coyotes call
Most of the reasons you give for arguing with me are my own for why I stick it out here. Arguing at EvC is absolutely the most frustrating experience I've ever had, and talk about not ever changing, nobody here has ever changed a single thing in response to anything I've said, why would you expect me to change in response to your arguments? It isn't going to happen. You are as committed to your Source of Truth as I am to mine.

I think that's close to the heart of it. We ultimately disagree on what methods are valid to determine what is or is not true.

I believe that the Universe is the ultimate arbiter of fact. Any and all of my hypotheses and beliefs must conform to and should in fact be dictated by actual observation. To convince me to change my mind, simply provide evidence in the form of observations, logically consistent argument, and math as required to show that my belief is less accurate than yours in predicting actual observable reality. I'm always looking for ways to be less wrong in my beliefs, but the wrongness of my beliefs is solely the result of comparison against observation.

You believe that your interpretation of a specific re-translation of a specific collection of specific ancient and often-re-translated and altered texts is the ultimate arbiter of fact. Observation is ultimately meaningless - what matters is your Bible. You might actually observe something that contradicts your Bible, but if so, it would only be a passing curiosity to you - internally you would simply say that either you were mistaken in your observation, or that the truth will be revealed at a later time and that this to-be-reveled truth will be in accordance with the Bible.

If either of us were to actually make an attempt to change the other's mind, we have three choices:

1) play "devil's advocate" and argue from the other's position. I could try to convince you to change your understanding of the Bible using only the Bible as evidence for its own interpretation, for example, or you could try to make me change some view of my own using observation and math and so on.

2) Argue about some topic on which the Bible is silent. Some political discussions, perhaps.

3) Try to convince each other to change our personal standards for determining truth from fiction. You would need to try to convince me that observation is not the ultimate authority, for example, and I'd have to try to convince you that the Bible isn't a good source of information. This would be particularly difficult, as I wouldn't be convinced by appeals to the Bible, and you wouldn't be convinced by appeals to observations which appear to contradict the Bible.

Frustrating as it can be Faith, I do still enjoy debating you (that opinion sometimes changes in the moment, of course). For me, debate is a way to practice my own skills at argument and writing, as well as a way to test my beliefs against people who disagree with me. A false belief should be destroyed.

Remember, I've changed my mind on the God question here on this forum before. Look back to my earliest posts; I wasn't a Creationist or a Biblical literalist, but I was certainly a Christian. I believed in the existence of the Judeo-Christian God, believed that Jesus was His Son who died on the cross to forgive me of all my sins. I occasionally look back to my original positions as a reminder of the most significant time I've ever changed my mind about something.

It's conceivable that it could happen here again.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 501 by Faith, posted 11-12-2014 7:12 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 504 by Faith, posted 11-13-2014 12:35 AM Rahvin has replied

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 542 of 2058 (741639)
11-13-2014 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 504 by Faith
11-13-2014 12:35 AM


Re: Coyotes call
1) "My interpretation" has been honed by thousands of books and sermons so that it is not "mine" but that of the orthodox line of thought on the Bible. I might sometimes take a stab at my own understanding of a text but if the commentaries show a better understanding I will certainly go with that.

Sorry for the confusion - I should have been more clear.

When I say "your interpretation," I don't necessarily mean that it's an interpretation you, personally, came up with. I understand that this is not the case.

What I mean by "your interpretation" is "the specific interpretation you believe to be correct." We would both acknowledge that others have different interpretations of the same text.

2) I don't know what you mean by "a specific re-translation." The Bible I most trust is the King James which is 95% the same translation into English that Tyndale did, and which they also compared with the many copies they had of the Greek and Hebrew texts and with all the other translations in English and all the translations into other languages they had available. You try to make it sound like they had one text and they "re" translated it. No. You have a very wrong idea of the history of Bible transmission.

Again, apologies for a lack of clarity. When I say a "specific re-translation," I mean specifically the King James version, which is one English translation of some specific Greek New Testament components and Hebrew and Aramaic Old Testament texts (there are of course many other candidate source materials for each of the component texts; the texts chosen for the KJV were considered to be the best available at that time).

3) The Greek text was many times copied down the centuries, not "re-translated." Copying does allow for errors to creep in. But they have five thousand Greek manuscripts and fragments of manuscripts of the Bible now for the sake of comparison and those who study those things know how to trace even the errors back to an original source and reconstruct the original text quite reliably.

Let's just say that you and I are going to starkly disagree on how well the King James text represents an error-free representation of the original source materials, and leave it at that. I think we both can accurately predict how such a debate would proceed - I'd bring up examples like John 8 ("So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." John 8,7, KJV) which are well-known to be later additions to the original text completely absent from all older versions from multiple branches of copying history, and you'd either contest that or rationalize its continued presence in the authoritative Bible in some way despite the full knowledge that it's a known deviation from the original source material, and we'd both just walk away frustrated having gone nowhere.

I regard the Bible we have now as the same Bible that was produced in the first century.

Again, I think this is something you and I would disagree on, and we can predict the course of a potential debate.

After studying the situation I concluded that the KJV is the most trustworthy, although it needs some updating into modern English, because there is another line of Greek manuscripts that were introduced in the 19th century that are corrupt, possibly even forgeries, that all the modern translations are based on. This is a huge controversy and I've concluded from much reading on the subject that the KJV is based on the most trustworthy line of texts. Nevertheless people do manage to get the same basic truths out of the other versions, there are just some areas where they are untrustworthy. And that's all I want to say about that big flap.

I appreciate your remarks in general though if you hadn't said what you did about the Bible I might have spent some time pondering them to have an answer to some of it, but please don't misrepresent the Bible. That's a form of poisoning the well and trying to discredit my argument before we've even had an argument.

The reason, Faith, is of course that you and I starkly disagree on what is or is not authoritative. The fact that I'm able to understand your reasoning fairly well doesn't mean I think that reasoning is valid. We've had enough arguments and read enough of each other's other arguments that it's difficult to avoid known positions tainting our present and future approaches. I'll always be tempted to add descriptive commentary to my understanding of your positions, and it's generally going to reflect that I think your positions are absurd (I really hate to use that word; it makes it sound like I'm trying to attack you here, and I'm really not. It's just the simple truth. I imagine you feel similarly toward some of my positions).


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 504 by Faith, posted 11-13-2014 12:35 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 546 by Faith, posted 11-13-2014 3:46 PM Rahvin has taken no action

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 543 of 2058 (741643)
11-13-2014 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 505 by PaulK
11-13-2014 12:46 AM


Re: Coyotes call
She claimed that absolutely every part of the Bible is important for doctrine.
In the same conversation I was pointing out that the opening of Luke was at odds with her ideas of how the Bible was written.
If she was logically consistent she couldn't just wave that away - those verses are important. But she did.

She's logically consistent in positions that follow from considering the Bible to be the final authority on all matters on which it takes a position.

I think we all understand and agree (including Faith) that your opinion of her interpretation of the Bible or mine would differ strongly from her own.

This is why I specifically mentioned that it's her interpretation of the Bible that she considers to be the ultimate authority.

Now we get to it. Yes, it's much more about her pride than it is about the Bible. She only cares about the Bible because of her beliefs about it - which are much more important to her than the Bible. But that is true of all inerrantists.

That's not remotely what I said. I don't see Faith as "prideful." I simply see her as willing and able to doubt literally anything and everything before doubting her preferred interpretation of the Bible. I think she considers her own reasoning and logic to be just as "fallen" as yours or mine - she trusts only her understanding of the Bible.

To the point where she will honestly, truly believe that she didn't say what she said ? Where she will claim that she obviously didn't mean what she obviously did ? She's done that. She will rewrite the history of past interactions to paint herself as being in the right and everyone who disagreed with her as being irrational and wrong.

That's perfectly normal human behavior, unfortunately, and I'm referring to you as much as to her. You paint her as a liar, but internally she certainly doesn't see herself that way, and I'd bet that at the time she makes a statement she genuinely believes that statement to be true.

When we look at other people we don;t see their entire histories or their internal dialogue. We see a limited subset of statements and actions. You might see a man kicking a desk angrily and think "that is an angry man," assigning a permanent and enduring personality trait where your observation would be better explained s the result of specific circumstance. Perhaps he's just received a foreclosure notice when he actually owns his house outright - anyone would be angry in that circumstance.

And, of course, I'm not using quite the same definition of "lying" as you are. I don't require that she knows that what she says is false at that time, only that she has damn well ought to know that what she says is false. It's a more practical standard on a forum like this.

I question your definition, then.

"Lying" is nto and never has been defined as making a statement that one knows or should know is false. A "lie" is a statement made when the person knows the statement to be false.

You're basically accusing Faith of the same sort of thing that some Creationists accuse Atheists of - that she secretly knows and agrees that what she's saying is false, despite her protestations, just as Atheists secretly know and agree that God exists.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 505 by PaulK, posted 11-13-2014 12:46 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 545 by PaulK, posted 11-13-2014 3:41 PM Rahvin has taken no action
 Message 549 by Faith, posted 11-13-2014 4:50 PM Rahvin has replied

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 191 days)
Posts: 3966
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 550 of 2058 (741676)
11-13-2014 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 549 by Faith
11-13-2014 4:50 PM


Re: Coyotes call
You're a good guy, Rahvin, fair and decent.

Not always, but I do try. Hopefully I'm getting better.

Too bad you gave up on Christianity.

It's not so much that I "gave up on Christianity," and more that I realized that I held some mutually exclusive beliefs and had to re-analyze what I believed.

In a nutshell, the result was that I rejected faith as a valid methodology for gaining accurate beliefs about reality. Since my Christianity was entirely based on faith, it was a casualty in that conflict.

I can go into detail if you'd like. I don't think I've ever done one of those "why I'm an atheist" threads that pop up here now and again.

But your basic fairness may come from having been raised under Christian teaching. Do you think I'm wrong about that?

Too difficult to tell. I can't easily separate what parts of my personality and values originally came from Christian values.

I can say that "fairness" is part of the ethical development system for all humans, regardless of culture and religion. At a certain age (think elementary school, if I recall correctly), you'll notice kids start caring an awful lot about what's "fair." Before that age they just go with what the Authority (their parents) says. You'll notice the same general trend in every culture. It's tied to the continued development of the brain, in this case specifically the part responsible for empathy.

For myself, I care less about "fairness" and more about accuracy. Whether it's fair to you or not, I want to have an accurate understanding of your positions. The best way available for me to do that is to make the same assumptions you do to the best of my ability, and imagine how I'd react under the same circumstances. Only by building an accurate representation of your position can I accurately predict which arguments will or will not work.

It's also really great to practice beating down that urge to simply mock an opponent's views. I succumb to that a lot, and it's just not helpful. Fun, sometimes, and it can sway fence-sitters on occasion, but usually it just means that you wind up creating a strawman.

If we were to discuss my positions on crime and punishment, you might find that I throw "fairness" almost completely out the window.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.” - Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." - Barash, David 1995...

"Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then be not too eager to deal out death in the name of justice, fearing for your own safety. Even the wise cannot see all ends." - Gandalf, J. R. R. Tolkien: The Lord Of the Rings

Nihil supernum


This message is a reply to:
 Message 549 by Faith, posted 11-13-2014 4:50 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 551 by Faith, posted 11-13-2014 5:34 PM Rahvin has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022