What is so good about the 'Good Book'?

quote:

---

Originally posted by nos482:
Originally posted by doctrbill:

​

Writing was invented about 5000 years ago. Was there no war before that?

​

Recorded history started around 10,000 years ago And they still used the same excuses.

---

Ah.... deja vu. I have pointed this out to you before, Nos, in the very first thread in which we butted heads. The earliest example of writing dates nowhere near 10000 years ago. No webpage found at provided URL: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/334517.stmSo how is it that you have been corrected and shown the evidence, yet repeat the same line of rhetoric? Is this akin in some way to the lying you are quick to see in others?

quote:

---

Darwinism isn't a belief system either.

---

Well Nos said it, so it must be true. Do you think you might be able to elaborate?

quote:

---

"But they're not real Christians..."

---

It is painfully obvious that this not the argument doctrbill was making.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by nos482:
You're speaking mainly of Egyptian history.

---

Where did you get the idea that I was talking about Egyptian history? Oldest is oldest. Nor is the article talking about Egyptian history. The fragment was found in a Harrapan civilizations settlement.

quote:

---

They aren't the oldest civilization.

---

Thoroughly and completely irrelavent. We are not talking about the antiquity of any civilization at all, but about the oldest known example of writing.

quote:

---

Recorded history also includes certain cave paintings as well.

---

There is a difference between archealogical evidence and recorded history. Writing is recorded history. We can translate and understand it. Paintings will always be debatable. They are subjective. There is no solid way to translate them.

quote:

---

I didn't say written history.

---

You might consider that in English 'recorded history' and 'written history' are synonymous.

quote:

---

There are many ways to record history other than your limited definition of just writing.

---

Like what? Little fat statues? Painted rocks? This isn't a record of history. It is evidence of a history.

quote:

---

It is a theory, a part of the theory of Evolution. Christianity is a belief system with rites, rituals and other such nonsense. Darwinism has none of this. Do you see the difference or do you just want to be contrary?

---

I always knew what you meant. I just wanted to make you define your terms. You were very terse with doctrBill and the issue is all semantics. A 'belief system' does not have to have rites and rituals. That is the nosfinition, but not the only possible one. I function within a set of beliefs yet have no rites and rituals (Is coffee a rite or ritual?). That could be considered a belief system. [quote]It is painfully obvious that this not the argument doctrbill was making.Mary Mary quite....[/B][/QUOTE]You are quick to snap, young grasshopper. Your gut reaction misled you. Hopefully doctrBill will explain things.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by nos482:
In this context a belief system does include what I had said.

---

Hint: Sometimes context exists outside of your head.Apparently the other participant in this discussion, dctrBill, did not assume the same context that you do and you dismissed him with a non-answer based upon your own internal subjective definition of 'belief system.' Hence my initial comment to you.

quote:

---

Contrary to what you are trying to do.

---

What, dear Nos, am I trying to do?Something you said in another post implies that you understand that language is not exact. Definitions vary. Usage varies. Arguing purely based on a definition is a fallacy. Debating definitions is different; often necessary, often painful and sometimes productive. At least the debatees learn to speak the same language.------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by nos482:
You enjoying yourself? Trying to get me banned again?

---

You don't need my help for that. But no, that is not what I am trying to do.I am trying to get you to fight like an adult and not like a whinnie-baby-name-caller. The ban must have done you some good because you finally seem to making an effort at it.Now can we get back to the thread?------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by nos482:
You prove yourself a liar by somehow bringing this posting back after I had deleted it before anyone could reply to it just to get me into trouble.

---

You see Nos, right here is how YOU GET YOURSELF in trouble. You assume too much and then you start name-calling. In this case you assume that I somehow found your deleted message and reposted part of it. You think I am hacking the EvC network just to cause you trouble? I have NO admin powers here so that must be what you are implying. Add that I am a federal criminal to your accusation that I am liar. I don't think so. I like EvC too much. I could have pulled it from my disk cache I suppose... but I didn't. Until I got this message from you, I didn't even know that you had deleted the previous one. I replied to this like I reply to every other message. I hit the reply-quote button. What probably happened was that I had already hit the reply button before you hit delete. Game over. The whole message is stored on my computer in the browser cache so that I can edit it.

quote:

---

Well, at least I respect women.

---

And here is another way that YOU GET YOURSELF in trouble-- frequent ad hominem attacks and various other attempts to discredit those who disagree.I don't want you banned. I want you to grow up. [/quote]^ Cool. I just figured out that an extra end-quote tag puts that nifty line across the screen. [/quote]^ See!!!
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com[This message has been edited by John, 11-06-2002][This message has been edited by John, 11-06-2002][This message has been edited by John, 11-06-2002]