Author Topic: And 10 answers  (Read 7809 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #58 on: August 25, 2008, 10:59:18 PM »
That's a pretty good trick since the bible contradicts itself.

It'd be like you saying, "I believe both of the following statements:

2+2 = 6,294
2+2 = 4


FAIL


No...it's not like saying that.  If you followed the thread, you'd understand the difference.

Matt

Offline Vynn

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2091
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • 1st an infidel, then a heretic, now an atheist!
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #59 on: August 25, 2008, 11:14:07 PM »
No...it's not like saying that.  If you followed the thread, you'd understand the difference.

Oh, i understand what you CLAIM is the difference. What you fail to understand, is that i'm immune to SPAG. When you, and others try to slip it in under the radar, i see it for what it is. It's self-righteous, hypocritical, and willful delusion. At least the fundies are honestly stupid, and don't go through contortions and odd mechanisms to make themselves so, like you do.

I notice you didn't comment on the free-will/predestination impossibility.

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #60 on: August 25, 2008, 11:27:34 PM »
What the?!? MIA, anyone with at least 2 brain cells remaining can see you are a "pick and chooser". Yet, you have no basis to do so. IMHO, the bible should be an "all or nothing" proposition: you believe it is all correct or none of it. Why? Because you have ZERO evidence that what you believe as true is indeed true and the same with the amount that is false. You simply cannot do this with a 2000+ year old set of books.

Me, I chose to leave it behind.

I see that "all or nothing" as actually requiring less brain cells than 2.

A difference of perspective, I guess.

Tell me what is true in the bible, and provide evidence that supports your assertion.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #61 on: August 25, 2008, 11:32:37 PM »
No...it's not like saying that.  If you followed the thread, you'd understand the difference.

Oh, i understand what you CLAIM is the difference. What you fail to understand, is that i'm immune to SPAG.

You don't seem to understand that I'm not immune to it.  It's the most important part of a faith in God.

Quote
When you, and others try to slip it in under the radar, i see it for what it is.

How am I slipping it under the radar?  I've said it outright in a few posts that it is an important part of faith.

Quote
It's self-righteous, hypocritical, and willful delusion. At least the fundies are honestly stupid, and don't go through contortions and odd mechanisms to make themselves so, like you do.

By slipping something under the radar that I've out right embraced and talked about?  
Which of us is being dishonest here?

Quote
I notice you didn't comment on the free-will/predestination impossibility.

Can of worms for another thread.  If you start one, I'll reply to it.  But it seems you can't really understand my axioms, so it's hard to really discuss anything beyond that and I avoided it for that reason.  I'll mostly be replying to other people, as a result, though I'll try to answer your questions.

Point out to me here if you do start a thread on it, since I promised to reply to it.  I don't read all the threads due to time constraints and interest levels and I look for specific ones that I've already written in rather than looking over all the titles.

Edit:  Accidentally combined two posts.  Going back and replying to the other one separately.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2008, 11:34:11 PM by MattInAsia »

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #62 on: August 25, 2008, 11:38:14 PM »


Tell me what is true in the bible, and provide evidence that supports your assertion.

First off, let me make sure I understand your question correctly.  You're asking about what is truth, not fact.  Correct?

I don't want to go into discussing what truth is, then have you turn around and ask for what is historical or factual and cause me to write yet another long response.

Matt

Generous George

  • Guest
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #63 on: August 26, 2008, 12:02:52 AM »
Hows things in Korea Matt? You sound like someone we use to know there.

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #64 on: August 26, 2008, 12:10:53 AM »
Hows things in Korea Matt? You sound like someone we use to know there.

I assume OK.  I am not sure, though.  There's still tension between the North and the South. 

There's tension all around Asia.  We currently have missiles pointed at us by China and they're dying to "take us back." 

How are things in Panama?

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #65 on: August 26, 2008, 12:13:06 AM »
Hows things in Korea Matt? You sound like someone we use to know there.

This might help, though.  I found this web site for a Korean Newspaper:

http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/


Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #66 on: August 26, 2008, 05:07:01 AM »


Tell me what is true in the bible, and provide evidence that supports your assertion.

First off, let me make sure I understand your question correctly.  You're asking about what is truth, not fact.  Correct?

I don't want to go into discussing what truth is, then have you turn around and ask for what is historical or factual and cause me to write yet another long response.

Matt

Let's start simple: what parts of the flood myth actually took place and ditto with the Jesus myth.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 17043
  • Darwins +336/-19
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #67 on: August 26, 2008, 08:24:21 AM »


Tell me what is true in the bible, and provide evidence that supports your assertion.

First off, let me make sure I understand your question correctly.  You're asking about what is truth, not fact.  Correct?

I don't want to go into discussing what truth is, then have you turn around and ask for what is historical or factual and cause me to write yet another long response.

Matt

truth and fact are generally the same.  There is an idea that there is a "Truth", some ideal "spiritual" concept but that is entirely subjective.
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #68 on: August 27, 2008, 07:10:51 AM »


Tell me what is true in the bible, and provide evidence that supports your assertion.

First off, let me make sure I understand your question correctly.  You're asking about what is truth, not fact.  Correct?

I don't want to go into discussing what truth is, then have you turn around and ask for what is historical or factual and cause me to write yet another long response.

Matt

truth and fact are generally the same.  There is an idea that there is a "Truth", some ideal "spiritual" concept but that is entirely subjective.

Since you're unfamiliar with how I distinguish them, I can't answer the question to satisfy you.

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #69 on: August 27, 2008, 09:37:51 PM »

Let's start simple: what parts of the flood myth actually took place and ditto with the Jesus myth.

I assumed my reply to this went through, but I don't see it.  So I'll try it again.  Sorry if this is a duplicate post.

I'll begin with Noah, since that is much easier.  I believe that myths are based off an actual person in the culture's history.  I say that because of the few myths we have in our own culture.  George Washington cutting down the apple tree.  We currently have a lot of information we can find about George Washington, but who knows how true that will be in a thousand years?  All that survives, if anything, might simply be this myth we have of him cutting down the apple tree.  And it may have been elaborated on from the simple story it is.  Doubtful, as we don't hold as high a value of sharing stories any more.

So I believe, based off that information, that Noah was a real individual that lived.  If I had to put my best guess of a profile together, I would say he likely had a wife and children, as the story tells us.  He was probably a leader in his community and likely survived a flood at some point that wiped out his village.  And he may have had a love of animals.  He may have also been a great religious leader rather than a political one.  Or he may have been both.

That's my guess on the profile of what the historical figure Noah (assuming the actual person existed) would have been like.

With Jesus, there is the belief in Christianity that Jesus is fully human and fully divine.  So let me address those two natures separately.  First, we must look at the 4 Gospels we have.  I could go into others, but answering this question is not the only thing I have to do today :)

There are 4 Gospels in the Scriptures:  Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.  Each is written with its own Theological perspective, which is important to help understand what is fact and what is Theological. 

Mark's Gospel is believed to be the first of the 4 Gospels to be written.  It is likely written after the death of Peter and before the other Gospels, so its date is believed to be from about 65 to 75 AD.  The focus seems to be one of a persecuted Church, which means it may have been written during the time of Nero (64-68 AD), but there are also some parts that seem to suggest knowledge of the temple being destroyed.  That does not rule out the idea that these were added later, of course.  So it may be dated after the time the temple was destroyed in 70 AD by Titus.  Either way, the message is clearly one of a persecuted church (examples: Chapter 8, 9:35, and towards the end of chapter 10) and likely came before Matthew and Luke (more on that in later discussions).  So Mark's Gospel puts a large Theological Focus on the cost of discipleship. 

Matthew and Luke's Gospel seem to be written independent of each other and at about the same time.  The general belief is that Matthew and Luke used:
--Mark's Gospel as a guide
--A different source (known as "Q" or "Quelle," the German word for "Source).
--Their own sources, independent from each other ("M" for Matthew and "L" for Luke).

For Matthew's date, the earliest quoted reference we have is Ignatius in about 115 AD.  If memory serves me correctly, he made reference to the birth narrative in Matthew.  I can try to dig up that information if anyone is DYING to know.  Considering that it was written after Mark and before 115 AD and considering it may have already been fairly well known since Ignatius used it in his writings, we can place it somewhere after Mark and somewhere before Ignatius.  Given the lack of high Christology compared to John's Gospel, it likely was written in about the mid to late 80s.  Matthew's Theological intent seems to be that he changes the stories to show (paraphrasing Howard Kee's commentary):
*The church is the true Israel
*The church is a true body, with worthy and unworthy members
*The church is called into a new and higher sense of righteousness.

Luke's Gospel shares a special place with me.  I love the Gospel.  Everyone has their favorite and mine is Luke.  Luke's Gospel was written around the same time as Matthew.  He had knowledge of the destruction of the temple (19:41-44 and 21:20-24).  He also knew Mark's Gospel as a source.  There is not the evidence of Ignatius referencing parts of this book so we don't have a definite ending date to put on this work (that I am aware of.  I can't dig through all my commentaries right now).  Most scholars say it fits well into the reign of Domitian and can be placed in that time frame.  I've generally accepted that it is written around the same time as Matthew and found no reason to believe otherwise.  The reason I like Luke is his presentation of Jesus's ministry to those in outcast society.  A Theology professor I had who loved Feminist Theology loved this book because of the role women play in it.  Luke is the only Gospel to mention Mary Magdalene during the life and travels of Jesus (in Chapter 8).

So to recap up the Synoptics' Theological intent:
1)  Mark = cost of discipleship
2)  Matthew = tying together Christianity with the Jewish laws
3)  Luke = Outcasts have a special place for God.  (There's also a sense of moving towards the new Church, but that's a much longer discussion).

For the sake of brevity, I'll point out John's Gospel was written later (about the mid to late 90s) and presents a very High Christology of Jesus. 

So with that in mind, we can now tackle the question of what is fact and what parts are tied in with mythology.

First thing to do is to address this question in light of John's Gospel.  John's Gospel has a High Christology and it is hard to distinguish "what happened and what didn't" for those who are so concerned.  The term
"High Christology" references when a person has an image of Jesus that is "beyond this world."  Jesus is not just a human, He is something more (queue Twilight Zone music).  Even Jesus's sayings become confused and are quite different from the Sermon on the Mount we're used to.  Since in this part, I'm discussing Jesus as a person (and not the Divinity aspect), I will say John has the parts that likely have the least actual true accounts of what really happened, as there is little indication that this was a historical document, rather than a Theological one.  Still, however, we must take into account that John has his own tradition he is drawing from.  So it would be unrealistic of me to discount the stories entirely.  I will say this, though, that the stories themselves have been changed to reflect the Theology.  So while the stories are true, the accounts of the stories are not necessarily accurate descriptions of what happened because each author puts a Theological spin on it and adapts it based upon his own tradition and understanding of the story.

As far as specific axioms I accept, I believe Jesus:
--Was born of the Virgin Mary
--Was a passionate preacher who saw a special ministry to those who are outcast
--Performed miracles
--Challenged authority, something that ultimately lead to his death
--Was raised from the dead.

I could make a big list, but you see that there is an intertwining of understanding Jesus as a person of history (a passionate preacher, challenging to authority) and Theological understanding (born of a virgin, performed miracles), much like how the Gospels are a mix.

I kind of answered 2 questions at once.  Hope it helps!
Matt

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #70 on: August 27, 2008, 09:46:08 PM »

Let's start simple: what parts of the flood myth actually took place and ditto with the Jesus myth.


BLAH BLAH BLAH until...

As far as specific axioms I accept, I believe Jesus:
--Was born of the Virgin Mary

You reduce the flood story to something else and now you want us to believe a deity copulated with a human virgin? Why?

Quote
--Was a passionate preacher who saw a special ministry to those who are outcast

No issue.

Quote
--Performed miracles

Why aren't there any miracles today of the same proportion (e.g., feeding 4000 with a Happy Meal)?

Quote
--Challenged authority, something that ultimately lead to his death

I agree.

Quote
--Was raised from the dead.

I don't agree and there is ZERO evidence of this beyond the bible.

Quote
I could make a big list, but you see that there is an intertwining of understanding Jesus as a person of history (a passionate preacher, challenging to authority) and Theological understanding (born of a virgin, performed miracles), much like how the Gospels are a mix.

I kind of answered 2 questions at once.  Hope it helps!
Matt

Not really. You merely choose to believe some parts of the bible are true and some are not with ZERO basis to do so.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Generous George

  • Guest
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #71 on: August 27, 2008, 10:17:56 PM »
The Bible is fictional.   :o

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #72 on: August 27, 2008, 10:33:25 PM »
Quote
BLAH BLAH BLAH until...

Did you read what I said?

Quote
Quote



As far as specific axioms I accept, I believe Jesus:
--Was born of the Virgin Mary

You reduce the flood story to something else and now you want us to believe a deity copulated with a human virgin? Why?

Who said I want you to believe that.  You asked what I believe.

Quote

Quote
--Performed miracles

Why aren't there any miracles today of the same proportion (e.g., feeding 4000 with a Happy Meal)?

Some miracles would be more gross than helpful.  Yuck! :P

I was hoping you'd ask something more specific, since it is impossible for me to really go through every story and point out exactly how to do this.  Maybe this specific story will help.  

Let me begin by saying I believe that you're taking my statement "Performed miracles" and turned it into "performed specific miracles in the way that the Gospels say he performed miracles."  I want to make that distinction now that what I said is not what you're asking about.  So I am going to answer your specific question and show that no...we would not feed 4000 people a Happy Meal in a miracle.

First off, let's look at the accounts of this story from the Gospels:

First off, Mark's Gospel...since it's the first to be written:
 1During those days another large crowd gathered. Since they had nothing to eat, Jesus called his disciples to him and said, 2"I have compassion for these people; they have already been with me three days and have nothing to eat. 3If I send them home hungry, they will collapse on the way, because some of them have come a long distance."
 4His disciples answered, "But where in this remote place can anyone get enough bread to feed them?"

 5"How many loaves do you have?" Jesus asked.
      "Seven," they replied.

 6He told the crowd to sit down on the ground. When he had taken the seven loaves and given thanks, he broke them and gave them to his disciples to set before the people, and they did so. 7They had a few small fish as well; he gave thanks for them also and told the disciples to distribute them. 8The people ate and were satisfied. Afterward the disciples picked up seven basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over. 9About four thousand men were present. And having sent them away, 10he got into the boat with his disciples and went to the region of Dalmanutha.

 11The Pharisees came and began to question Jesus. To test him, they asked him for a sign from heaven. 12He sighed deeply and said, "Why does this generation ask for a miraculous sign? I tell you the truth, no sign will be given to it." 13Then he left them, got back into the boat and crossed to the other side.

________________________________

Matthew:  
29Jesus left there and went along the Sea of Galilee. Then he went up on a mountainside and sat down. 30Great crowds came to him, bringing the lame, the blind, the crippled, the mute and many others, and laid them at his feet; and he healed them. 31The people were amazed when they saw the mute speaking, the crippled made well, the lame walking and the blind seeing. And they praised the God of Israel.
 32Jesus called his disciples to him and said, "I have compassion for these people; they have already been with me three days and have nothing to eat. I do not want to send them away hungry, or they may collapse on the way."

 33His disciples answered, "Where could we get enough bread in this remote place to feed such a crowd?"

 34"How many loaves do you have?" Jesus asked.
      "Seven," they replied, "and a few small fish."

 35He told the crowd to sit down on the ground. 36Then he took the seven loaves and the fish, and when he had given thanks, he broke them and gave them to the disciples, and they in turn to the people. 37They all ate and were satisfied. Afterward the disciples picked up seven basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over. 38The number of those who ate was four thousand, besides women and children. 39After Jesus had sent the crowd away, he got into the boat and went to the vicinity of Magadan.

__________________________________________________

Luke:
10When the apostles returned, they reported to Jesus what they had done. Then he took them with him and they withdrew by themselves to a town called Bethsaida, 11but the crowds learned about it and followed him. He welcomed them and spoke to them about the kingdom of God, and healed those who needed healing.
 12Late in the afternoon the Twelve came to him and said, "Send the crowd away so they can go to the surrounding villages and countryside and find food and lodging, because we are in a remote place here."

 13He replied, "You give them something to eat."

   They answered, "We have only five loaves of bread and two fish—unless we go and buy food for all this crowd." 14(About five thousand men were there.)

   But he said to his disciples, "Have them sit down in groups of about fifty each." 15The disciples did so, and everybody sat down. 16Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke them. Then he gave them to the disciples to set before the people. 17They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked up twelve basketfuls of broken pieces that were left over.

_________________________________________________
John:

5When Jesus looked up and saw a great crowd coming toward him, he said to Philip, "Where shall we buy bread for these people to eat?" 6He asked this only to test him, for he already had in mind what he was going to do.

 7Philip answered him, "Eight months' wages[a] would not buy enough bread for each one to have a bite!"

 8Another of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peter's brother, spoke up, 9"Here is a boy with five small barley loaves and two small fish, but how far will they go among so many?"

 10Jesus said, "Have the people sit down." There was plenty of grass in that place, and the men sat down, about five thousand of them. 11Jesus then took the loaves, gave thanks, and distributed to those who were seated as much as they wanted. He did the same with the fish.

 12When they had all had enough to eat, he said to his disciples, "Gather the pieces that are left over. Let nothing be wasted." 13So they gathered them and filled twelve baskets with the pieces of the five barley loaves left over by those who had eaten.

 14After the people saw the miraculous sign that Jesus did, they began to say, "Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world." 15Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself.

_________________________________________

As noted in a previous post, John's Gospel is quite different and we see the drastic change to a High Christology.  It's moving towards a Gnostic Theology, where Jesus knows things and ultimately reveals it to people.

Numbers play a significant role in this story.  Why 5 loaves of bread in Luke and John?  It's possibly a reference to 1 Samuel where David is given 5 loaves of consecrated bread by the priest.  I think it's in chapter 20??? The idea here is not so much the bread as bread, but the bread as Jesus - his ministry, his words, his calling, his mission for us.  What may seem like "not enough" truly is with a complete amount (7 baskets and 12 in Luke and John) left over.

The 7 loaves is also a reference to fullness and completion.  I think I discussed numbers in Revelation in that thread.  No sense reinventing the wheel.

The fish may be a reference to Ichthus, which was already around by the end of the first century.  I'll have to dig into that sometime to provide a better answer.  It may also explain why it was mentioned in Mark, but did not play as prominent of a role in that story and was later changed to reflect the story well.

Luke seems to leave out any similar conclusion to the story.  This is because of, as you read, his Theological intent.  Every author shows the Theological intent at the end:
--Luke's Gospel shows Jesus's mission to those in need.  They ate - they were satisfied.  
--Matthew's Gospel is really the beginning of a long thread dealing with the trust and the faith of the early church and stepping away from what is known into an unknown world.  This is especially true of the story of Peter stepping out into the water that immediately follows this story.
--John constantly points towards the death of Jesus.

So we can see where the authors took Mark's Theological story and put their own ideas into it.  Whether it's factual or not is not a Theological question.  The Theological question centers around what exactly the story means, how they are different, why the author changed them, and what we can draw from the stories.

Quote

Quote
--Was raised from the dead.

I don't agree and there is ZERO evidence of this beyond the bible.

OK.

Quote

Quote
I could make a big list, but you see that there is an intertwining of understanding Jesus as a person of history (a passionate preacher, challenging to authority) and Theological understanding (born of a virgin, performed miracles), much like how the Gospels are a mix.

I kind of answered 2 questions at once.  Hope it helps!
Matt

Not really. You merely choose to believe some parts of the bible are true and some are not with ZERO basis to do so.
[/quote]

Nope.  I said it's all true, but not fact.  You seem to be trying to get me to say that it's all provable fact.  I'm not sure why, since this isn't my stance on things.  But you keep addressing my questions as if I'm supposed to agree with that statement.  Am I reading your question wrong or is it something where you are trying to twist what I say so you can have a debate on what's right and wrong vs. a discussion?

Matt

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #73 on: August 28, 2008, 06:33:54 AM »
Let's not proceed further until we look at the very first definition of "true" provided by http://www.answers.com/true

Consistent with fact or reality; not false or erroneous.

Now quit playing around. Are you trying to get a job with the Clintons?
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #74 on: September 01, 2008, 09:25:15 PM »
Let's not proceed further until we look at the very first definition of "true" provided by http://www.answers.com/true

Consistent with fact or reality; not false or erroneous.

Now quit playing around. Are you trying to get a job with the Clintons?

Airyaman's educational system obviously does not allow him to read past #1:

This is from YOUR web site:
   1.
         1. Consistent with fact or reality; not false or erroneous. See synonyms at real1. See Usage Note at fact.
         2. Truthful.
   2. Real; genuine. See synonyms at authentic.
   3. Reliable; accurate: a true prophecy.
   4. Faithful, as to a friend, vow, or cause; loyal. See synonyms at faithful.
   5. Sincerely felt or expressed; unfeigned: true grief.
   6. Fundamental; essential: his true motive.
   7. Rightful; legitimate: the true heir.
   8. Exactly conforming to a rule, standard, or pattern: trying to sing true B.
   9. Accurately shaped or fitted: a true wheel.
  10. Accurately placed, delivered, or thrown.
  11. Quick and exact in sensing and responding.
  12. Determined with reference to the earth's axis, not the magnetic poles: true north.
  13. Conforming to the definitive criteria of a natural group; typical: The horseshoe crab is not a true crab.
  14. Narrowly particularized; highly specific: spoke of probity in the truest sense of the word.
  15. Computer Science. Indicating one of two possible values taken by a variable in Boolean logic or a binary device.

adv.

   1. In accord with reality, fact, or truthfulness.
   2. Unswervingly; exactly: The archer aimed true.
   3. So as to conform to a type, standard, or pattern.


Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #75 on: September 01, 2008, 09:41:53 PM »
Hillary & Bill are still taking resumes.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline Vynn

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2091
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • 1st an infidel, then a heretic, now an atheist!
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #76 on: September 01, 2008, 10:00:18 PM »
Hillary & Bill are still taking resumes.

That depends on what the meanings of "are", are.  ;)

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #77 on: September 02, 2008, 03:13:50 AM »
Hillary & Bill are still taking resumes.

That depends on what the meanings of "are", are.  ;)

Ha!

Offline Airyaman

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4662
  • Darwins +74/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Alignment: True Neutral
    • Moving Beyond Faith
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #78 on: September 02, 2008, 07:16:43 AM »
Hillary & Bill are still taking resumes.

That depends on what the meanings of "are", are.  ;)

I think that is an apt reponse.
I've been struggling with racism lately. I recently came to the realization that I tend to dislike people with fake orange skin and stubby fingers.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 17043
  • Darwins +336/-19
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #79 on: September 02, 2008, 01:51:14 PM »


Tell me what is true in the bible, and provide evidence that supports your assertion.

First off, let me make sure I understand your question correctly.  You're asking about what is truth, not fact.  Correct?

I don't want to go into discussing what truth is, then have you turn around and ask for what is historical or factual and cause me to write yet another long response.

Matt

truth and fact are generally the same.  There is an idea that there is a "Truth", some ideal "spiritual" concept but that is entirely subjective.

Since you're unfamiliar with how I distinguish them, I can't answer the question to satisfy you.
since you have made up your own defintions, I am sure you can't. 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline MattInAsia

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 94
  • Darwins +0/-0
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #80 on: September 02, 2008, 09:32:37 PM »
since you have made up your own defintions, I am sure you can't. 

And happened to describe that definition to Tolkien, Joseph Campbell, any anyone else that studies comparative mythology or mythography?  I don't think so!

I certainly don't have that much time.  And to live in the disillusion that I have that much time is something I cannot possibly comprehend.

Campbell died in 1987, before I even got interested in Theology.  Tolkien died in 1973, before I was born.

Matt

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 17043
  • Darwins +336/-19
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: And 10 answers
« Reply #81 on: September 03, 2008, 11:09:56 AM »
since you have made up your own defintions, I am sure you can't. 

And happened to describe that definition to Tolkien, Joseph Campbell, any anyone else that studies comparative mythology or mythography?  I don't think so!

I certainly don't have that much time.  And to live in the disillusion that I have that much time is something I cannot possibly comprehend.

Campbell died in 1987, before I even got interested in Theology.  Tolkien died in 1973, before I was born.

Matt

so you are claiming that Tolkien, Campbell, et al did this "Since you're unfamiliar with how I distinguish them, I can't answer the question to satisfy you."  I do not recall them assigning personal defintions to "truth" and "fact". 

Oh well.  MIA, it's been fun but it's also been pointless.  Best of luck on your personal religion. 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/