tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post6928865246662160744..comments2023-09-30T10:36:23.154-05:00Comments on Accidental Historian: Ravi Zacharias Disproves Biblical LiteralismGedshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15047239425466517786noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-73246629251383151022010-08-11T15:26:21.141-05:002010-08-11T15:26:21.141-05:00America, ain't it grand? Where people who wou...America, ain't it grand? Where people who would normally fight against each other come across the sea and have sex.<br /><br />You should see my kids bloodline, it gets the insanity of my blood mixed with being a great great nephew of Robert E. Lee and great great grandson of convicted witch Sarah Pease.BeamStalkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17772110446629492132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-16573252167794400772010-08-11T10:33:25.851-05:002010-08-11T10:33:25.851-05:00Wow, BeamStalk. Are you genetically required to r...Wow, BeamStalk. Are you genetically required to repress yourself on a regular basis? And also to take violent action against said repression?Gedshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15047239425466517786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-49471748096236674452010-08-11T10:23:08.875-05:002010-08-11T10:23:08.875-05:00That is of course not mentioning the Native Americ...That is of course not mentioning the Native American blood that is not talked about on my mother's side of the family.BeamStalkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17772110446629492132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-24046177346801142212010-08-11T08:12:44.731-05:002010-08-11T08:12:44.731-05:00Being of Irish and Scottish (we will ignore the En...Being of Irish and Scottish (we will ignore the English and French blood for now and yes Geds my bloodline is at war constantly with itself) descent I say we use both.BeamStalkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17772110446629492132noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-78175236492746565922010-08-11T00:16:45.534-05:002010-08-11T00:16:45.534-05:00Rum users will be burned at the stake. Or, perhap...Rum users will be burned at the stake. Or, perhaps, not be offered a delicious flame-grilled steak at the cookout. Yeah, let's go with that second one.<br /><br />Unless they're vegans, at which point all heretical rum users will be required to consume a steak.<br /><br />The only non-whiskey sacrament that will be considered is <a href="http://www.pocotequila.com/antour/mexicanmoon.html" rel="nofollow">Roger Clyne's Mexican Moonshine</a> tequila.Gedshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15047239425466517786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-71113401023028467602010-08-11T00:11:48.945-05:002010-08-11T00:11:48.945-05:00Just as soon as we resolve the Scotch vs. Irish Wh...Just as soon as we resolve the Scotch vs. Irish Whiskey question. (The actual question being, "What should we use for communion?") There's a persuausive, but entirely heretical, argument to made in favor of rum as well.Michael Mockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233321050691782148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-89166937284841545472010-08-10T20:47:23.535-05:002010-08-10T20:47:23.535-05:00So...
*eyes dart left and right suspiciously*
Wh...So...<br /><br />*eyes dart left and right suspiciously*<br /><br />When are we starting the Holy Church of Moby Dick?Big Ahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01534995604187556023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-84890060495773317932010-08-10T15:01:37.188-05:002010-08-10T15:01:37.188-05:00jessa:
Yeah, I can't parse that argument as i...jessa:<br /><br />Yeah, I can't parse that argument as it literally does not make any sense. Even if you watch it in the video it doesn't make any sense. It literally boils down to, "The Muslims say the Qu'ran is perfect, but in order for it to be perfect it has to be entirely god-breathed. Therefore it's not perfect. We don't say the Bible is perfect, therefore it is."<br /><br />There's no coherent thought structure to it at all.<br /><br />GailVortex:<br /><br />Yes. <i>Moby Dick</i> happened. We have a 100% certainty that it did because we can still find the original text. Or, at least, the first edition.<br /><br />See, it's that easy!Gedshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15047239425466517786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-46575540271602086262010-08-10T14:56:44.308-05:002010-08-10T14:56:44.308-05:00Ah...Ravi…always good for a rousing round of word ...Ah...Ravi…always good for a rousing round of word trapeze. <br /><br />One thing that struck me was his talk about “verifying the truthfulness of those affirmations.” My question to him would be, “Verify with…what?” And if it doesn’t align, which do we believe—the Bible or this external source?<br /><br />Imagine I had a length of pipe. And I claim it was 1 meter in length. In order to verify that, we need to compare it to something else, external to the pipe, that we hold in <i>higher</i> certainty to being 1 meter. Like a measuring tape. When verifying, we always utilize something with greater credibility. (And indicating, “well, the pipe has ‘one meter’ stamped on it” is not verification.) <br /><br />By virtue of looking for external verification, we have already conceded questions about reliability. (Unfortunately—as you know—when dealing with history we are often left with little or no verification at all, so we muddle through the best we can with what we have.)<br /><br />The hard part is that pouring through all the possible verification is…well…hard. As you point out, one can spend hours responding to claims made in less than a minute, demonstrating all the ways the claims are wrong. Start citing sources, and soon you will have a month-long project just to explain how ridiculous the claim Quirinius instituted a census in Judea prior to Herod the Great’s death.<br /><br />Most people don’t want to spend the time. And if you (or I) do, they will probably reject it out of hand, because of a desire to believe the Bible. Thus demonstrating they aren’t attempting to verify the truthfulness of its affirmations—they are cherry-picking facts to support what they want to be true.DagoodShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04557451438888314932noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-34373607139004689052010-08-10T14:06:57.745-05:002010-08-10T14:06:57.745-05:00Okay, yes - that was very long. Fortunately, it wa...Okay, yes - that was very long. Fortunately, it was also fascinating, which completely makes up for the length. Good thing I wasn't trying to get any work done today, though...Michael Mockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06233321050691782148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-38291981938601337622010-08-10T11:57:27.985-05:002010-08-10T11:57:27.985-05:00Wait.
Is Moby Dick fact or not?
You're conf...Wait.<br /><br />Is Moby Dick fact or not? <br /><br />You're confusing me.GailVortexnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-12427664187822155962010-08-10T09:15:09.874-05:002010-08-10T09:15:09.874-05:00That's an extremely good point that I kind of ...That's an extremely good point that I kind of touched on but really didn't have the time or space to explore more fully. Thanks for tossing in the run-down of what the earliest "copy" actually is.<br /><br />I may yet do a follow-up on the whole thing and attempt to explicitly separate "documentary accuracy" from "historical accuracy." It's reasonably easy to show how the Bible doesn't necessarily have historical accuracy (or, at least, historical confirmation). Documentary accuracy is a harder thing to explain, especially when we have apologists pretending that big numbers mean something and that if there's one fragmentary copy of the Bible from 100 years after it was written and another complete copy of the Bible from 1000 years after, that means we have two complete copies of the Bible from 100 years after it was written and, therefore, two accurate copies.<br /><br />That's what we in the business like to call "bullshit."Gedshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15047239425466517786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-43481065957515217342010-08-10T09:01:33.489-05:002010-08-10T09:01:33.489-05:00lulz CARM.
I love that chart, it is comparing app...lulz CARM.<br /><br />I love that chart, it is comparing apples and oranges, you don't think that maybe religious writings are held to higher standard because they are supposedly the word of God and that might be why we have more copies? <br /><br />Also most of those copies are from the 1500's and up.<br /><br />Lastly, I love how they act like P52 (the "copy" of John dated at 117 to 138 CE) is a full copy of the Bible. Here is what it says:<br /><br />ΟΙ ΙΟΥΔΑΙΟΙ ΗΜΙ<br />OYΔΕΝΑ ΙΝΑ Ο Λ<br />ΠΕΝ ΣHΜΑΙΝΩ<br />ΘΝHΣΚΕΙΝ Ε<br />ΡΙΟΝ Ο Π<br />ΚΑΙ ΕΙΠ<br />AΙΩ<br /><br />On one side and on the other:<br /><br />ΥΤΟ ΓΕΓΕΝΝΗΜΑΙ<br />ΣΜΟΝ ΙΝΑ ΜΑΡΤY-<br />EΚ ΤΗΣ ΑΛΗΘΕ<br />ΛΕΓΕΙ ΑΥΤΩ<br />AΙ ΤΟΥΤO<br />ΤΟΥΣ Ι<br />EΜΙ<br /><br />That is it, that is all of this "copy" from about 100 years after it all occurred.<br /><br />The translation for that?<br /><br />Side 1:<br /><br />the Jews, "For us<br />anyone," so that the word<br />spoke signifying<br />to die. Entered<br />rium Pilate<br />and he said<br />Jews?"<br /><br />Side 2:<br /><br />this I have been born<br />world so that I would<br />of the truth<br />Said to him<br />and this<br />the Jews<br />not one<br /><br />To claim this as a "copy" is a form of obfuscation and lying.BeamStalkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17772110446629492132noreply@blogger.com