Juggernaut Nihilism wrote:I was once around a friendly mixed-group of Christians and atheists who were discussing whether it would make the atheists into believers if, hypothetically, one of those alleged Noah's Arks up on top of a mountain somewhere could be proven to be real.
Someone once made the point that if Jesus as Christ returned to Earth by riding down from the sky in a flaming chariot, live on TV broadcast worldwide, and started performing miracles, you still couldn't get people to agree on what they were seeing or achieve anything like a consensus on religion. I'm inclined to agree.
Right. Interpretaion would elude. But you'd have video evidence, testimony, reams of articles written on the opinions associated, maybe physical evidence, even( flaming hailstones, would cause a conflagration layer, for instance).
My question: does any of that exist, or are we to assume that Egypt successfully sanitized the event from history? I doubt that more than I doubt the existence of God.
. . DoU is quite correct that the veracity of the [Passover] event is critical, but our copies of the story were written centuries after it occurred. . .
That may be DU's question, but it's not the issue. The issue is what will DU or whomever accept as verification, and that's a fool's errand.
As another Bible story warns, though one were to rise from the dead they still wouldn't believe.
Well, one did and they didn't.
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
. . DoU is quite correct that the veracity of the [Passover] event is critical, but our copies of the story were written centuries after it occurred. . .
That may be DU's question, but it's not the issue. The issue is what will DU or whomever accept as verification, and that's a fool's errand.
As another Bible story warns, though one were to rise from the dead they still wouldn't believe.
Well, one did and they didn't.
No, see, that's a red herring. I don't think the Bible has to be discounted. Why is it so terrible to think it might be corroborated? I have no problem supposing the Bible to be true. I have a problem supposing the Bible is the only evidence available, if it is true.
. . DoU is quite correct that the veracity of the [Passover] event is critical, but our copies of the story were written centuries after it occurred. . .
That may be DU's question, but it's not the issue. The issue is what will DU or whomever accept as verification, and that's a fool's errand.
As another Bible story warns, though one were to rise from the dead they still wouldn't believe.
Well, one did and they didn't.
No, see, that's a red herring. I don't think the Bible has to be discounted. Why is it so terrible to think it might be corroborated? I have no problem supposing the Bible to be true. I have a problem supposing the Bible is the only evidence available, if it is true.
DU, it's my guess that you take the Bible seriously . . so do I and countless others. And of course, in one instance or another, the Bible may be verified . . or not.
But again, that's not the issue. The issue is whether or not the Bible is the word of God.
"The jawbone of an ass is just as dangerous a weapon today as in Sampson's time."
--- Richard Nixon
******************
"I consider looseness with words no less of a defect than looseness of the bowels."
—John Calvin
. . DoU is quite correct that the veracity of the [Passover] event is critical, but our copies of the story were written centuries after it occurred. . .
That may be DU's question, but it's not the issue. The issue is what will DU or whomever accept as verification, and that's a fool's errand.
As another Bible story warns, though one were to rise from the dead they still wouldn't believe.
Well, one did and they didn't.
No, see, that's a red herring. I don't think the Bible has to be discounted. Why is it so terrible to think it might be corroborated? I have no problem supposing the Bible to be true. I have a problem supposing the Bible is the only evidence available, if it is true.
DU, it's my guess that you take the Bible seriously . . so do I and countless others. And of course, in one instance or another, the Bible may be verified . . or not.
But again, that's not the issue. The issue is whether or not the Bible is the word of God.
It's not necessarily the issue. I don't believe the Bible is the exclusive or final word of God, at least not the way most people mean those things, nor do I believe that the events of the Passover are likely to have happened, and yet I cannot think of anything more important or significant, for people of the West, than the Bible or the Judeo-Christian tradition. The entire story of man, and one of our best explanations of life, is contained therein, even if the whole thing is allegory and Hebrew political propaganda.
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
Typhoon wrote:While Frank Zappa's quote is guaranteed to offend many, something that he thankfully excelled at, it's consistent with my own understanding of the Genesis parable.
So what, if any, misunderstanding is there in this interpretation? Sola scriptura?
It's smart people being lazy, that's what it is.
And it is consistent with Zappa who was a musical genius, well versed both by skillset and intellect for many forms of music, who decided to write crap and pass it off as satire while berating his audience for not being as smart as he was.
This understanding is rather shallow and unreflected take on what knowledge, good and bad, and the general symbolism of the parable are actually trying to portray. And it does so by reinforcing the cheapest stereotypes of the last 200 years that Christians as a whole are anti-knowledge, which makes no sense beyond a juvenile emotional level....sorta like Mr.Zappa's songs.
This is exactly what Demon is looking for. Well hieroglyphic and hieratic.
I suppose if you discount the Hebrew story since you expect them to embellish the record to glorify themselves, you should expect the Egyptians to forbid the recording of events that proved embarrassing.
Well, the Bible has no qualms about showing the ugly side of Hebrew history. The Egyptians, however, do show evidence of trying to erase what was not flattering or was politically incorrect.
Indeed. The (failed) attempt to eradicate all mention of Akhenaton and his cult of monotheistic sun-worship is an example of this. Would Egyptian scribes write reams about how they were pwned by a rabble of slaves? Perhaps not. It still leaves us with the same conclusion: no reliable evidence either way.
But thy weren't beaten by slaves. That might escape mention. However, Frazetta paintings aside, I assume miracles were no more common then than now. Seven of them back to back? Nobody questioned that, nobody commented?
Ok, I'm done. I only care if the literal version is correct. Was looking for corroboration. no corroboration= probable fantasy.
Demon of Undoing wrote:. However, Frazetta paintings aside, I assume miracles were no more common then than now.
That's an interesting assumption. All the historical evidence we have, taken from countless civilizations varied in ethnic and geographical history, indicates that they were far more common in the past.
"The fundamental rule of political analysis from the point of psychology is, follow the sacredness, and around it is a ring of motivated ignorance."
Demon of Undoing wrote:. However, Frazetta paintings aside, I assume miracles were no more common then than now.
That's an interesting assumption. All the historical evidence we have, taken from countless civilizations varied in ethnic and geographical history, indicates that they were far more common in the past.
I think Twain dealt with this in the story of the damsels in distress, from Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court.
i thought the essence of this cult was immortality and this rings true even more in the modern context now the post christians have shifted their faith in the afterlife to faith in science solving death before they die.
donations to the church versus donations to cancer clinics, priests n popes versus statistics analyzers .. the big lavender fights for authority and dollars and false promises.
the more nuanced and individual nurturing interpretations of either viewpoints dont get much respect or airtime, this is life and death stuff. snort.
Demon of Undoing wrote:. . If the universe contains a being that literally acted as advertised, . .
Your train never got on the track. The above, to make sense, should read, "If a Being that literally acted as advertised contains the universe . . "
But the only way you'd know it in that case would to accept it a priori . .
Anselm had it right: Credo ut intelligam . . or . . Catch-22 . . .
So then you do think an entire generation off firstborn everything died in one night, we just don't know about it through any other source but the Bible, all because I don't believe properly?
Does that make sense to you? Me vetoing history?
There are many events in the Bible that defy physics and/or biology. One off [irreproducible] supernatural intervention is required. Usually referred to as a miracle.
The lack of independent corroborating documents does present certain difficulties.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
i think thats the big wall for many of us atheists, the only attempts ive witnessed to work around it are the interpretations that leave them as "truthy parables" which in itself does work, but doesnt put the jew/christian/muslim mythology any different to all the others and at best leaves you with the wishy washy relative merits of all of em.
the complications become more so for those that have numerous racial/cultural lines in them... an almost arbitary picking of a single strand as the authentic one.
noddy wrote:i think thats the big wall for many of us atheists, the only attempts ive witnessed to work around it are the interpretations that leave them as "truthy parables" which in itself does work, but doesnt put the jew/christian/muslim mythology any different to all the others and at best leaves you with the wishy washy relative merits of all of em.
the complications become more so for those that have numerous racial/cultural lines in them... an almost arbitary picking of a single strand as the authentic one.
My concerns exactly. The Christianity that appeals to one tribe or one tradition is not the Christ I'm looking for.
I'm not looking for God, never have. I'm looking for truth. If God shows up, well, more the merrier. I've got room for God. I don't ask him to jump through hoops. But I'm not going to choose blindness to light.
Look, man, when I get to the Goldilocks system near Alpha Centauri, I'm going to have a lot of ' splainin' to do. I gotta explain why a Jewish carpenter mattered, and why we ought not start our first interstellar war. Put yourself in my place.
I'm already behind the eight ball with these genuflecting Kardashians. It's going to take all of the maybe ~150 years I have left before contact to figure this out. Massive, uphill, right- off- the- suck -meter challenge for the Sage Marines.
heh, if the singularity does happen to that extent in my lifetime AND its available on ebay (buggered if ill be paying bricks n mortar prices) you will have to stop me from extending myself untill ive consumed the entire universe.... muahahhah
im a gentle soul, ao i wont destroy things and use them as materials until ive after ive scanned them into my ever growing machine brain, which also provides the added vanity on how many things i have saved from their flesh death.
so i have pre allocated you to thought process 10^32^957 compartment b, good luck with it and i hope you like the neighbours.
hopefully ill have the resources to nut out a solution to the heat death of the universe, which is why of course, i needz all the resources.
And at any rate, your inorganic brain will soon come to the same conclusion that the alien we call God did some five billion years ago when he started putting this particular Petri dish so far out on one of the great spiral arms. It's a big centrifuge, you know.
At any rate, He found that the most robust, most capable information storage format was DNA. Beats any sort of electric- based business all hollow. Break it up, cook it, scatter it with comets, heck you can even watch the stuff form out of a shocked mud puddle if you have long enough. Turns out, the universe cares less about operations per second than generations per billion years. Considering that tiny, current human-DNA has more permutations than there are atoms in the observable universe, there are lots of hardware settings available. When we get computers to do the heavy lifting in terms of number crunching, we go to bigger chromosomes and unlock God level.
AI wakes up to the bright light of sentience, only to find the angels formerly known as humans already astride consciousness in an intergalactic Gracie mount.
only the crude introductory version would be electric and metal because once you have the core patterns then anything which can hold them is viable...organic soups, space dust, plasma clouds..
I've always found the various miracles of science to be very uninspiring. DNA, the scale of the cosmos, all these discoveries are scientifically valuable, but I don't find them particularly moving. Looking at the stars seems like a better pass-time than actual astronomy to me, at least in terms of therapeutic value.
Religion and history speak more to the human ego, which is a shrewd choice where humans are concerned.
Is there much pre exodus archeological information explaining what the Jews were doing before then. I mean if there wasn't a tradition before it and there was no reason to invent it afterwards and it wasn't borrowed from another tradition then what purpose would it be to have it in place? It also doesn't explain why God would give the law to a bunch of runaway slaves either, but that is another problem.
Ibrahim wrote:I've always found the various miracles of science to be very uninspiring. DNA, the scale of the cosmos, all these discoveries are scientifically valuable, but I don't find them particularly moving. Looking at the stars seems like a better pass-time than actual astronomy to me, at least in terms of therapeutic value.
Religion and history speak more to the human ego, which is a shrewd choice where humans are concerned.
If I look out at the stars and think: a bunch of apes have worked out how far those are (literally billions of miles in most cases), what they are made of, and how this universe evolved. Despite the gaps and errors yet to be discovered in our knowledge, this fills me with awe.
