Personal experience argument
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-07-2015, 12:50 PM (This post was last modified: 10-07-2015 12:56 PM by jennybee.)
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 12:16 PM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(10-07-2015 11:29 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  click here, read, absorb, ponder...

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_prophecies

Uhoh, trouble in Christianland:

Any church or preacher that claims that 1948 AD fulfilled Bible prophecy when modern Israel gained statehood, is a false teacher and ignorant of the bible. These false teachers are called "premillennialists, dispensationalists" and believe in the Rapture.

Additionally, 1948 was not what Ezekiel was referring to. Q, you are taking the passage completely out of context. The book of Ezekiel is referring to the goings on during that time period--not anything happening years in the future (i.e. 1948). Nowhere in the passage does it say you are supposed to add, multiply, divide, subtract 390 and 40. That is something author Grant Jeffrey's came up with. It is also important to point out that Jeffrey and his "mathematics" came up with 1948--not the exact day, month. Anyone can take numbers in the Bible and add, subtract, multiply and come up with some distorted reasoning for the Bible's ability to predict the future.

*I believe this is also the same author who found the Holocaust predicted within the Bible's pages.

** Ezekiel 4 is the same passage where Ezekiel used human excrement to cook in his food as directed by God. Is this really a passage you can take seriously as predictive of 1948??
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like jennybee's post
10-07-2015, 01:28 PM (This post was last modified: 10-07-2015 01:47 PM by Simon Moon.)
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 10:39 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Why would I dismiss their claim? Why wouldn't I say the Hindu visitation was a spiritual, demonic visitation?

You would dismiss it as a personal experience with their god.

And again, from an outsider's view (me), how am I to determine that the Hindus's claim of a personal experience with their god is actually an encounter with a demon, as you say? And not an actual experience with their god?

How am I to determine that a Christian's claim of a personal experience with Jesus is not actually a visitation from a demon of another religion?

You aren't giving me an algorithm to tell the difference. It shouldn't be too tough for you, since you seem to be able to do it.

You should be able to give me a method to follow to determine if any claimed personal experience with a god, is a genuine experience with a god, a visitation from a demon, or a misinterpretation of a natural brain state.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Simon Moon's post
10-07-2015, 02:55 PM (This post was last modified: 10-07-2015 04:18 PM by Reltzik.)
RE: Personal experience argument
(10-07-2015 10:45 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 02:06 PM)Reltzik Wrote:  The four Biblical types of "science" are also some of its approaches to prophesy.

Approach 1: Say shit that could easily have been discovered in that day and age, like the fact that the oceans have currents or that sheep give birth to sheep rather than chickens. Let later generations (such as our own) hype and shill this as some vast god-given knowledge, when really any schmuck could have written it down. This is like finding an existing bullet hole and target on the broadside of the barn and then bragging that you were the one who shot the bullseye.

Approach 2: Say a whole bunch of vague, poetic stuff. When some of that vague poetic stuff bears a passing resemblance to things that science later discovers if you squint really hard, declare victory. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD YOU CLEARLY STATE THE SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY IN PRECISE AND UNAMBIGUOUS TERMS. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD YOU EVER ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT NOT ONE BELIEVER EVER TOOK THIS VERSE FOR WHAT IT "TRULY" MEANT UNTIL SCIENTISTS HAD ALREADY FOUND THE TRUTH ON THEIR OWN. This is like plugging thousands of bullets into the broad side of the barn, and then jumping around like overjoyed incontinent monkeys when the scientists figure out where the target actually was and, surprise, there's a bullet sorta kinda near it. ... of course, sometimes there isn't, like with the Theory of Evolution and the age of the Earth. Those incontinent monkeys get really nasty when that happens.

This approach is usually the basis for the "Bible predicted the expanding universe" claim. It's usually predicated on phrases about how God spread the heavens over our heads like a tent, which is neither a clear enunciation of a currently-expanding universe, nor unambiguous in its meaning (and seems, on plain reading, to be talking about the momentary action of putting in place a static, physical roof or ceiling, rather than a dynamic expansion of stars, or to simply be flowery metaphor), nor caused a great many believers to believe in an expanding universe until Hubble taught them otherwise. The other verses cited as this scientific claim are that God "bows the heavens", which is even vaguer, even more ambiguous, even less like the actual science on plain reading, and proved just as great of a failure in cluing people in.

Approach 3: Pretend it's science because it's in the Bible, even when real science disagrees with it. This is akin to missing the target on the barn wall... and the entire barn... and then going to the tree you accidentally hit and drawing a bullseye around the bullet hole.

Approach 4: Ignore every example of false "science" in the Bible. Ever. Such as, say, rabbits chewing their cud, or human languages diverging from a single location in the Middle East only a few thousand years ago. In particular, ignore all the thousands of ways that the extremely vague flowery language can be loosely interpreted as BAD science, and just focus on the equally-loose interpretation that matches up. That stretched-out-the-heavens line? Maintain, now and always, in true Orwellian fashion, that does not AND NEVER DID mean the firmament, despite that being what Christians thought it meant for most of Christian history until the scientists showed them better and got severely persecuted for it. No. The Bible always meant that this was an expanding universe, just as you have always been at war with Eastasia. This is akin to riddling the barn into more holes than wood with a Gatling gun, and then refusing to acknowledge any of the holes save the five that actually hit the target, but instead brag incessantly about those five.

One thing to note of all these approaches, is that they are not things that people do when they actually give a damn about finding the truth, or honestly evaluating some method for its capacity to arrive at the truth. They're what people do when they care more about looking good than being correct. When they want to spin their failures, pull the wool over the eyes of others, put on a veneer of unearned respectability, and steal credit from others. These are tactics of fundamentally and unwaveringly dishonest people: con artists, hoodwinkers, and apologists.

An interesting perspective, except I say God wrote all the Bible and YOU say it was a bunch of different, hack writers. ALL the hacks said THIS about the known universe, that it is expanding! I've posted over a dozen verses on another thread that "God stretches out the heavens."

No, under the hypothesis I'm inclined towards ONE of the authors (maybe the author of Psalm 104, it's likely the oldest reference, let's go with that for the sake of argument, it doesn't really matter which) described God as stretching "out the heavens like a curtain" or garment. Following authors like the poetry and repeat it in their own writings. What all of them refer to is there being a celestial sphere which God supposedly, at the moment of creation, spread over their heads like the ceiling of a tent, and that this great feat was to God's glory.

So no, they did NOT say it was expanding. They said the heavens were stretched over their head like a tent or curtain.

THEN, three thousand years later, a scientist with a telescope, a spectrograph, and a willingness to question established thought discovers that the universe is expanding.

ONLY THEN do people like you start screaming that those ancient authors were saying that the universe is expanding.

And that is why, in this narrow question of whether to treat those verses as if they are claiming that the universe is expanding, it does not MATTER to me whether those verses were authored by humans or by the God of the Bible.

Because if I was a genuine believer, and did think they were authored by God, then I'd actually give a fuck about what the verse is REALLY supposed to mean, rather than trying to pervert it away from its original purpose into a cheap and transparent sales tactic.

In that case, even as a believer, I'd STILL be saying that the Bible doesn't claim an expanding universe. I would recognize such claims as coming from people with little faith, so despairing of what they saw as a discord between science and the Bible that they would invent any concoction, twist any passage, distort any and every verse of God's Word if it could just buy for them the slightest veneer or hint of respectability in the eyes of their secular critics. Or, more likely, if it would help them muddy the waters enough to keep their parishioners in their seats and the money flowing into the offering bowls. I'd recognize them as such and I would disdain them as whoring out the Word of God, as debasing the faith, twisting it to match the new discoveries of science. I would point out that in your eagerness to twist and distort the passages to this new, scientifically-informed meaning, you were depriving us of their original, unperverted meaning. I would, rightly, name it a blasphemy. I would be more interested in honestly seeking the truth of these passages and because you would be more interested in turning those passages into a flim-flam job, I would denounce you then as strongly as I do now.

And THAT is what we're really disagreeing about here. The difference between you and I that this exchange illustrates is not, as you would have it, a disagreement over authorship. We'd be arguing this point even if I believed in God and that he was the author. The difference is that I believe in pursuing the truth, you believe in peddling horseshit, and I believe in calling you out on it. And that would be the difference between us regardless of whether or not I was a believer.

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Reltzik's post
10-07-2015, 08:14 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
(09-07-2015 10:17 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(08-07-2015 10:35 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Using the bible to prove archaeological discoveries is a waste of time. For example, we now know that the 40 years in the desert story is a myth with zero evidence supporting it. See Jewish antiquities for information on that.

The slaughter of the infants is also unsupported by evidence and is an earlier story or myth.

The Bible is also wrong about things such as stars and the cosmos. It is an ancient work that has been surpassed by superior information.

Give it a rest.

I'm sorry but it is unreasonable to expect to find evidence for desert wanderings upon shifting sands where only tents and no permanent structures resided. You are also underestimating the size of the desert in question and how much digging would be needed to find artifacts--say, the dolls of children or some skeletal remains.

The slaughter of the infants in context was not more than 30 children--all had to be in a little town area of Bethlehem and under age 2. It might have been 10 children. You are less well versed in Roman histories than I if you think soldiers killing 10 kids in the Ancient Near East was "scroll worthy news".

The Bible has been proved correct in certain matters of astronomy and cosmology. For example, the astounding (true) claim that the universe is in expansion.

Quote:I'm sorry but it is unreasonable to expect to find evidence for desert wanderings upon shifting sands where only tents and no permanent structures resided. You are also underestimating the size of the desert in question..

And yet archaeologists have found evidence of nomadic tribes that predate Moses in these same shifting sands. These were nomadic tribes that leave very little evidence behind but archaeologists found it. No evidence has been found of the mega Moses groups though, which would be the size of a large city, much larger than the city I live in today. Archaeologists have used and closely followed descriptive passages right out of the Bible to try and trace the Moses Million. Nothing has turned up.

The Sinai Desert is one of the smaller deserts. People like to think it's vast like the Sahara Desert which is 9,000,000+(km2) or 3,300,000+(sq mi) but the Sinai is only 60,000 (km2) or 23,166 (sq mi) and it's not all shifting sand either.

Here's a list of the major deserts of the world in size and the Sinai doesn't even make the list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deserts_by_area

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like dancefortwo's post
10-07-2015, 09:08 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
Q, you talk about Bethlehem as if it is old. It is not on a real scale.

I recommend you take a holiday to Australia and visit Mungo National Park. The site of not only the world's oldest kitchen, but also human footprints dating back some 20,000 years.

I've been to Mungo. It is amazing. Just to see a sunrise is worth the trip.

Oldest footprints, Mungo national park Australia.

[Image: Mungo-Mungo.jpg]

Your bible is not old. Mungo, is old. Wink

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Banjo's post
13-07-2015, 01:21 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
All,

A number of interesting issues were raised herein.

First, we are all aware of how archaeology works. What I think is being discounted here unfairly is the depths of sand covering shifting deserts, and the length and breadth of the regions to search to find Exodus remains. Clearly in Exodus short-several day journeys were taken to sites where the Israelites would tent for months or years at a time. Once you can dot all those spots on the desert map--then you can tell the archaeologists where to search to find either evidence or a lack of it. The line of argument--
"it's a small desert and easy to sift/dig" is like saying "it was a small ocean that airplane crashed into, we'll just go ahead and find the missing plane and bodies today". Of course, this whole canard of Exodus archaeology argument assumes the Israelites walked around leaving their stuff all over the place--when we know from the Bible that not one spoon of the tabernacle implements, and not one extra piece of manna was to be left sitting around!

Second, Ezekiel prophesied a number of years of captivity. After, in modern times, skeptics notes the Ezekiel prophecy was unfulfilled. Then, some Christians notes the seven times factor of prophecy, did the multiplication and came up with not only a year in the Gentile calendar but a DAY--May 15, 1948. Something special (actually fulfilling ten Bible prophecies if not more) happened on May 15, 1948. Do you know what happened on that date? Google it, perhaps.

"Q".

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-07-2015, 01:45 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
Wow, Q, an impressive misrepresentation of what they were saying about the Moses Million. Almost strikes me as willful, rather than accidental.

Leaving out the fact that the path from Goshen to the Red Sea requires a detour of nearly 200 miles to the south before even beginning to head eastward toward the Sinai, through the primary control-area of Egypt, and that Egypt owned Canaan as a province, during that historical era, making it an unlikely destination...

They're saying that in all these years of searching a relatively small area, and turning up plenty of evidence of much smaller groups, there is nothing that shows a MILLION PEOPLE moving through an area for 40 years... something that definitely would show evidence, because it's literally larger than anything else moving around in the 14th century BCE, larger than almost every city on earth at that time. The Archaeologists are not wandering around listlessly with a brush, hoping to find something; they know what to expect and where to look, and they know that a migratory group that size would leave clues that stand out like a beacon on a hill at night!

So rather than accepting that you're dealing with an origins-myth/story that made up a few facts it did not realize would one day be fact-checkable, you keep trying to push the implausible. Yes, lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, but when it's something in a story that should be clear as day if it really happened, but there isn't a shred of evidence, you should probably take anther close look at that story.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
13-07-2015, 01:47 PM (This post was last modified: 13-07-2015 02:27 PM by jennybee.)
RE: Personal experience argument
(13-07-2015 01:21 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

A number of interesting issues were raised herein.

First, we are all aware of how archaeology works. What I think is being discounted here unfairly is the depths of sand covering shifting deserts, and the length and breadth of the regions to search to find Exodus remains. Clearly in Exodus short-several day journeys were taken to sites where the Israelites would tent for months or years at a time. Once you can dot all those spots on the desert map--then you can tell the archaeologists where to search to find either evidence or a lack of it. The line of argument--
"it's a small desert and easy to sift/dig" is like saying "it was a small ocean that airplane crashed into, we'll just go ahead and find the missing plane and bodies today". Of course, this whole canard of Exodus archaeology argument assumes the Israelites walked around leaving their stuff all over the place--when we know from the Bible that not one spoon of the tabernacle implements, and not one extra piece of manna was to be left sitting around!

Second, Ezekiel prophesied a number of years of captivity. After, in modern times, skeptics notes the Ezekiel prophecy was unfulfilled. Then, some Christians notes the seven times factor of prophecy, did the multiplication and came up with not only a year in the Gentile calendar but a DAY--May 15, 1948. Something special (actually fulfilling ten Bible prophecies if not more) happened on May 15, 1948. Do you know what happened on that date? Google it, perhaps.

"Q".

Jeffreys did not come up with an exact day. He came up with a time frame--spring 1948. Ezekiel 4 is not referring to Israel becoming a nation. As you mentioned, Ezekiel's prophecy was incorrect as it was unfulfilled.

The 7x factor you mentioned is coming out of Leviticus. Why not use Jeremiah's prophecy of 70 years of Babylonian captivity instead and multiply 70 x 7 instead of 360 x7? 70 x 7 would be just as feasible--if not more so. Obviously Jeffreys could not use that as it would not work mathematically. Do you see how Jeffreys is just finding numbers in the Bible and adding/multiplying at will with no scriptural justification whatsoever?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jennybee's post
13-07-2015, 01:50 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
BTW, I thought I would post what Q is talking about re: Jeffrey's prophecy for those unfamiliar with it:

http://www.alphanewsdaily.com/mathprophecy2.html
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jennybee's post
13-07-2015, 01:54 PM
RE: Personal experience argument
Why 70 x 7 would make more sense if you really wanted to "math" it up:

http://www.gotquestions.org/Babylonian-c...exile.html
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: