The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-10-2011, 10:15 AM
RE: The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
(13-10-2011 07:53 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  And if whether the title, "The OP's Arithmetic is in error" would be a more fitting title?

Not trying to be a smart-alec, but just wondering if anyone other than myself would acknowledge this.

Right. Now you're just lying. First off, my math isn't in error. Or, at least, no one has shown me it is. I have, in the first post, listed my math step by step. You're welcome to point out where I screwed up.

Second, I have stated, twice, that one of my premises is faulty. Y'know, that maybe the materials went into an expansion of the temple.

So now you're not just blindly following the decrees of a blood god, but also telling blatant lies that can be disproven by checking the previous posts and doing a search for the word 'expansion'. Check page three for the first one.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2011, 11:10 AM
RE: The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
(13-10-2011 10:15 AM)Sines Wrote:  
(13-10-2011 07:53 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  And if whether the title, "The OP's Arithmetic is in error" would be a more fitting title?

Not trying to be a smart-alec, but just wondering if anyone other than myself would acknowledge this.

Right. Now you're just lying. First off, my math isn't in error. Or, at least, no one has shown me it is. I have, in the first post, listed my math step by step. You're welcome to point out where I screwed up.

Second, I have stated, twice, that one of my premises is faulty. Y'know, that maybe the materials went into an expansion of the temple.

So now you're not just blindly following the decrees of a blood god, but also telling blatant lies that can be disproven by checking the previous posts and doing a search for the word 'expansion'. Check page three for the first one.

I still do not understand how you maintain your arithmetic is correct. The problem itself, and the accompanying math, is in error because it is based upon incorrect factors. If you wish to point out that the math itself is correct, I will not argue that. But to overlook the conclusion (and perhaps I should say THE) as in error because part of the equation can be seen as in order does not deny the conclusion is...wrong.

If I add four apples and four oranges and say I have eight oranges, you are going to take me to task for my conclusion, and likewise question my arithmetic.

That blood is associated with both Christianity and Judaism, I cannot deny.

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2011, 04:38 PM
RE: The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
I notice how you continue to blatantly ignore my acknowledgement of a false premises. My math works perfectly fine. I am not adding apples and oranges, I am dividing masses by densities to get volumes. That is how you get volumes from a known mass and density.

My premise was that you could not fit all of that material in the specified volume. I have proved that, and I will stand by my math, because, whatever we are talking about, I mathematically proved that you cannot fit that much gold and silver in a building that small.

What you have failed to acknowledge three times now, is that I accepted that the materials could have been used for the expansion of the temple. As you seem to not understand what I have said three times, let me spell it out for you. An expansion to a building is to take the existing building, and construct extra rooms and walls onto it. You do this by adding new materials, such as iron or bronze, to the sides of the building, making additional rooms where before there was only the outside. Then, you would likely use the gold and silver to decorate those extra rooms, because rooms often have things in them, especially valuable things in a sacred building, which has much cultural and spiritual value to the builders. Understand?

Meaning that my original calculations, while correct, were completely irrelevant to the problem at hand. I'm defending my math, because my math is fine. My fault was in the premises, and I admitted in my very first post that my premises could be incorrect.

(03-10-2011 12:31 PM)Sines Wrote:  Biblical inerrancy is mathematically out the window. 'Interpretations' aren't allowed here, because, I'm sorry, numbers don't get interpreted. The only way out is to admit that the Bible has some mistakes in it. Or point out to me how these two temples (Which are reference in different books) aren't the same. That's not unreasonable, I never bothered to check the bible (Because reading the bible is not nearly as fun as math). Or lastly, point out that this page does not properly convert the ancient units. But if they are the temples are the same, and the pages math and my math are correct, this is a contradiction in the Bible that no amount of apologist clap-trap can even attempt to reconcile. There is simply no way to make the numbers match up.

You are a blatant liar, and mindless cheerleader for a genocidal tyrant. Either that, or you are simply an idiot who can't read even short posts on several occasions, thus missing my acceptance of a mistake.

...and a mindless cheerleader for a genocidal tyrant.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-10-2011, 07:49 PM (This post was last modified: 14-10-2011 05:32 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
(09-10-2011 07:37 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  And understand also, the addictions were not the problem, it was myself that was the problem. ... I thought that my addictions were basically my worst problems. The fact is, they weren't. It is very difficult for someone that has never had this problem to understand this. Those who have or are in the throes of addiction would, for the most part, understand exactly what I am saying.

Sure, I understand exactly what you're saying and where you're coming from. But it is ignorant at best and arrogant at worst to presume that your path to sobriety gives you warrant to proselytize. I mean, sobriety doesn't live up to its press anyway.

(13-10-2011 07:53 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(12-10-2011 07:31 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  This thread is seriously starting to remind me of the weed scene from Animal House.

So you have read it now?

S.T.

Yeah, I spent over an hour reading through this jibber jabber. Gist of it is that you're a recovering addict using religion to keep you sober. And you focus on the minutiae of your sponsor's message to keep you sober. I got no issue with that. Whatever it takes. But I couldn't give less of a shit about the minutiae of your sponsor's message. I'm more interested in cutting through the bullshit to the brass tacks. Your sponsor promises a postmortem preservation of identity. I would like to know how that is even imaginable (any reasonable mechanism of action will do), let alone tenable.

Peace and Love and Empathy, S.T. Ranger.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2011, 09:02 AM
RE: The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
(13-10-2011 04:38 PM)Sines Wrote:  I notice how you continue to blatantly ignore my acknowledgement of a false premises. My math works perfectly fine. I am not adding apples and oranges, I am dividing masses by densities to get volumes. That is how you get volumes from a known mass and density.

My premise was that you could not fit all of that material in the specified volume. I have proved that, and I will stand by my math, because, whatever we are talking about, I mathematically proved that you cannot fit that much gold and silver in a building that small.

What you have failed to acknowledge three times now, is that I accepted that the materials could have been used for the expansion of the temple. As you seem to not understand what I have said three times, let me spell it out for you. An expansion to a building is to take the existing building, and construct extra rooms and walls onto it. You do this by adding new materials, such as iron or bronze, to the sides of the building, making additional rooms where before there was only the outside. Then, you would likely use the gold and silver to decorate those extra rooms, because rooms often have things in them, especially valuable things in a sacred building, which has much cultural and spiritual value to the builders. Understand?

Meaning that my original calculations, while correct, were completely irrelevant to the problem at hand. I'm defending my math, because my math is fine. My fault was in the premises, and I admitted in my very first post that my premises could be incorrect.

(03-10-2011 12:31 PM)Sines Wrote:  Biblical inerrancy is mathematically out the window. 'Interpretations' aren't allowed here, because, I'm sorry, numbers don't get interpreted. The only way out is to admit that the Bible has some mistakes in it. Or point out to me how these two temples (Which are reference in different books) aren't the same. That's not unreasonable, I never bothered to check the bible (Because reading the bible is not nearly as fun as math). Or lastly, point out that this page does not properly convert the ancient units. But if they are the temples are the same, and the pages math and my math are correct, this is a contradiction in the Bible that no amount of apologist clap-trap can even attempt to reconcile. There is simply no way to make the numbers match up.

You are a blatant liar, and mindless cheerleader for a genocidal tyrant. Either that, or you are simply an idiot who can't read even short posts on several occasions, thus missing my acceptance of a mistake.

...and a mindless cheerleader for a genocidal tyrant.

So you will admit that perhaps a renaming of the thread...may be in order?

(13-10-2011 07:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(09-10-2011 07:37 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  And understand also, the addictions were not the problem, it was myself that was the problem. ... I thought that my addictions were basically my worst problems. The fact is, they weren't. It is very difficult for someone that has never had this problem to understand this. Those who have or are in the throes of addiction would, for the most part, understand exactly what I am saying.

Sure, I understand exactly what you're saying and where you're coming from. But it is ignorant at best and arrogant at worst to presume that your path to sobriety gives you warrant to proselytize. I mean, sobriety doesn't live up to its press anyway.

If sobriety were the only issue, as it is in the lives of many that quit using, you may have a point. However, one can be sober...and still be the same person they were when they drank or used.

Removal of the substance does not guarantee that growth will take place.

So you were a user or alcoholic. and have since become sober?


(13-10-2011 07:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(13-10-2011 07:53 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(12-10-2011 07:31 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  This thread is seriously starting to remind me of the weed scene from Animal House.

So you have read it now?

S.T.

Yeah, I spent over an hour reading through this jibber jabber.

This is not something I linked...what does it have to do with the conversation?

But...Mr. T is cool, isn't he? Thanks.

(13-10-2011 07:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Gist of it is that you're a recovering addict using religion to keep you sober.

If that is what you have concluded, that is okay. There are worse things to be called.

But I would clarify, I am no longer an addict. I do not believe that saying, "Once an addict, always an addict."

That you confuse my faith with religion is understandable, also.


(13-10-2011 07:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  And you focus on the minutiae of your sponsor's message to keep you sober.


My Sponsor? Shall I post a SNL video and declare SNL...your sponsor?

(13-10-2011 07:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I got no issue with that. Whatever it takes. But I couldn't give less of a shit about the minutiae of your sponsor's message. I'm more interested in cutting through the bullshit to the brass tacks. Your sponsor promises a postmortem preservation of identity.

If this is true, why is it that the discussion has so far bounced around to things I have not even brought up? Mr. T is my sponsor?

You give me more the impression that you are used to what you say being accepted without question.

Well, is this still Animal House?

(13-10-2011 07:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I would like to know how that is even imaginable (any reasonable mechanism of action will do), let alone tenable.

Tough question to answer, seeing that the conversation has had trouble staying on topic, but then...it has not really been a conversation, but merely declarations of judgment that I guess are supposed to have stemmed from a concrete infallible analysis of the discussion.

Mr. T?...lol.

(13-10-2011 07:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Peace and Love and Empathy, S.T. Ranger.

Take it light, GM. A sense of humor helps greatly in some of these conversations.

S.T.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2011, 11:06 AM
RE: The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
I believe the inclusion of Mr. T, has completely confused you S.T. I believe it was more a reference to the term Jibber Jabber, hence the use of the words to contain the link. Girly man has an extremely valid point and if you take the time to reread his post you may see it.

P.S. I think after doing some perusing of the site some more you will come to find that GirlyMan has a fantastic sense of humor. I.E. Mr. T.

Now I'm out because I honestly am terrible at math. Eww Math. [Image: math-hard.jpg]

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2011, 07:37 PM (This post was last modified: 17-10-2011 09:06 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
(17-10-2011 09:02 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  So you were a user or alcoholic. and have since become sober?

Me? Fuck no, I got no incentive to live a sober life. I tried it, it's fucking boring as hell.

(17-10-2011 09:02 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(13-10-2011 07:49 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  But I couldn't give less of a shit about the minutiae of your sponsor's message. I'm more interested in cutting through the bullshit to the brass tacks. Your sponsor promises a postmortem preservation of identity. I would like to know how that is even imaginable (any reasonable mechanism of action will do), let alone tenable.
Tough question to answer, seeing that the conversation has had trouble staying on topic, but then ...

As far as I'm concerned, it's the only metaphysical question even worth considering. Kinda like the canonical metaphysical question. And you don't appear to have an answer anymore than anyone else.

(17-10-2011 09:02 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  Mr. T is my sponsor?

Mr. T's not your sponsor, Jesus is your sponsor. Mr. T's just pointing out that you take a rather roundabout way of getting to your points.

(17-10-2011 09:02 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  Take it light, GM. A sense of humor helps greatly in some of these conversations.

A sense of humor is requisite for my survival, I'm even starting to think that's it all I fucking got. This place we find ourselves in is either fucking ludicrous or fucking desperate, either way it's absurd. I laugh so I that don't cry. The former is heaven, the latter is hell. Either way, it'll be over soon enough.

(17-10-2011 11:06 AM)lucradis Wrote:  I think after doing some perusing of the site some more you will come to find that GirlyMan has a fantastic sense of humor.

I credit it with keeping me here for the last 30 years, lucradis.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2011, 09:13 PM
RE: The Bible is Mathematically Impossible
(17-10-2011 09:02 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  So you will admit that perhaps a renaming of the thread...may be in order?

Sure, how about, "Startling News! Apologist finally makes legitimate point, then proceeds to waste good will by ignoring concession, defending murder, denying science!" They'd have to go through several posts to understand the title. Also, it might not fit. Don't really know how to change the title either.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: