Mathematical Proof Of God

[Guest nat]

 

 

 

Wow! The depths you go to when you can't admit something as black and white of you saying I said the Torah mentions eugenics and I did not.

 

Sheesh!!!

 

 

 

 

I went back through the thread and pin pointed the exact spot where you made the claim that your religion had always opposed eugenics.  I also discovered that you edited your post to remove the word "always".  Editing isn't bad in itself but making false accusations regarding the part you edited is wrong.  Now it takes a lot of work for me to sift through hundreds of posts and it takes no work at all for you to lie so why should we continue?  If you are not going to be honest then this is pointless. 

 

On page 37 post 739 you most certainly did write:

"Bhim,

 

Whether or not there are Torah verses you or anyone else finds objectionable, that particular verse is as clear as you can get in disapproving of eugenics.

 

Think about it. You love this wife. She is pretty and talented, has all the good breeding traits. Then there is this other wife. You can't stand her. She has everything you want to get away from. What does eugenics say? It says to engineer the good breed. Make him special and carry on his traits. What does the Torah say?

 

It says no!

 

Clear as day. Straight from the Torah."

 

Underlining added to trap you in your lies.  These were your words so stop trying to paint me as a bad guy.  

 

I said it disapproves of eugenics.

 

I said it is clear as day straight from the Torah that it is wrong.

 

Where did I say that the Torah MENTIONS eugenics?

[Guest nat]

 

 

 

 

Nevertheless mainstream scientists got it wrong and had a moral failure.

Moreover, the moral failure would be even if they were right, they were still bigots. 

 

 

Repeating a lie won't make it true.  When can I expect the list of Bible verses that state that eugenics is wrong?  It's just like all the support for all the other claims you have made in this thread - never going to happen.

 

The propaganda of Nazi germany is not science.  Cranks and pseudo science is not science.  When did the scientific method give us an inferior answer but religion has given us a better answer?  (hint - the answer is never)

 

Look up there. You wanted me to bring verses and said it wouldn't happen. And when I brought a verse, you criticized me for quoting the Torah because of your views on it.

 

Idiot!! 

 

 

You have produced no Bible or Torah verse that says eugenics is wrong.  None!  What you did is produce a verse that says when a man owns two or more women he has to give the first born rights to his first born son regardless of which mother the father likes better.  Only a fundie could imagine that being about eugenics.

 

Meanwhile there are many Old Testament verses that say the Children of Israel should only marry their own kind and the other nations are not good enough for marriage.  Do I really have to look those up in order to show you they exist?  The Torah was written by racists men who thought genocide against their neighbors was a good idea.  It's hardly a good example for the moral failure of Nazi eugenics.  Rather it's partly the inspiration for Nazi eugenics.

 

(Note to other readers:  Further back in the thread nat introduced the concept of the Torah as a moral victory over Nazi eugenics.  I didn't go there.  He did.  I'm just pointing out why nat's claims about it are wrong.)

 

Whether I produced a verse to support my claim is irrelevant to that you are an idiot for asking me to bring a verse and then criticize me for bringing bible verses.

[Guest nat]

Quote

Repeating a lie won't make it true.  When can I expect the list of Bible verses that state that eugenics is wrong?  It's just like all the support for all the other claims you have made in this thread - never going to happen.

 

Quote

 

Your Torah is not a good example of morality.  In looking for the moral failure of scientists you cite a book that calls for racism, genocide, war, the death penalty for thought crime, the death penalty for witchcraft and so on.

 

 

 

Can the two quotes above come from a sound mind?

Ask me for bible verses and then ciritsize me for bringing bible verses?

 

[Guest nat]

 

For those who remain silent:

 

Edmund Burke (1729-1797) - English statesman:

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

 

Triumph of evil... in a web forum? Who is evil? You or your adversaries on the thread?

 

Nobody here is evil. But some of things said here were wicked.

[Guest nat]

Quote from MM

 

Meanwhile there are many Old Testament verses that say the Children of Israel should only marry their own kind and the other nations are not good enough for marriage.

 

COMPLETE FAIL

 

The Torah's restrictions on marriage have to do with religion, not race or genes.

 

If the non Jew converts, he/she can marry a Jew. It is not the body of the person that is the issue, but the beliefs.

 

Eugenics is about genes and race, not religion and beliefs.

 

I thought you were smarter than that. 

[mymistake]

 

Quote

Repeating a lie won't make it true.  When can I expect the list of Bible verses that state that eugenics is wrong?  It's just like all the support for all the other claims you have made in this thread - never going to happen.

 

Quote

 

Your Torah is not a good example of morality.  In looking for the moral failure of scientists you cite a book that calls for racism, genocide, war, the death penalty for thought crime, the death penalty for witchcraft and so on.

 

 

 

Can the two quotes above come from a sound mind?

Ask me for bible verses and then ciritsize me for bringing bible verses?

 

 

 

Nat, try to pay attention.  The proper response to my rhetorical question should have been "The Torah doesn't have anything to say about eugenics".  That was why I said it would never happen.  It can't because it is impossible.  It was a rhetorical question because I already knew the Torah doesn't say anything about eugenics.  You know it too but needed some encouragement before you were ready to admit it.  Are you ready to admit it now?  If it isn't in the Torah then the Torah doesn't have anything to say about a topic.

[Guest nat]

 

 

Quote

Repeating a lie won't make it true.  When can I expect the list of Bible verses that state that eugenics is wrong?  It's just like all the support for all the other claims you have made in this thread - never going to happen.

 

Quote

 

Your Torah is not a good example of morality.  In looking for the moral failure of scientists you cite a book that calls for racism, genocide, war, the death penalty for thought crime, the death penalty for witchcraft and so on.

 

 

 

Can the two quotes above come from a sound mind?

Ask me for bible verses and then ciritsize me for bringing bible verses?

 

 

 

Nat, try to pay attention.  The proper response to my rhetorical question should have been "The Torah doesn't have anything to say about eugenics".  That was why I said it would never happen.  It can't because it is impossible.  It was a rhetorical question because I already knew the Torah doesn't say anything about eugenics.  You know it too but needed some encouragement before you were ready to admit it.  Are you ready to admit it now?  If it isn't in the Torah then the Torah doesn't have anything to say about a topic.

 

Another complete FAIL

 

You thought I was going to answer it based on your views of the Torah? Or based on my views?

 

I have to answer based on your views?

 

You said, When can I expect a list of bible verses. You said it can't happen. That was your view.

 

I have to agree with your view in order to be valid?

 

If I bring a verse because of your direct challenge, that isn't good because it is not in line with your view?

 

I have to bow down and kiss your tuchess and say what you want me to say????

 

What planet are you from?

 

Are you debating with yourself or with me? 

[ContraBardus]

Contra, I appreciate your feedback.

 

As we are getting off track from the purpose of this thread, I'll keep my response brief, and if anyone is interested to pursue this particular subject further, I can start a new thread in the theology section.

 

Unlike 'Lord of the Rings', the NT is a collection of stories based on real nations and historical events.  It requires some delving to appreciate and understand what is going on in this particular story of the gentile woman.  I've found this brief article that beautifully explains what is really going on in the story.  Please check it out, so you will see the 'whole picture'. 

 

 http://krwordgazer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/even-dogs-eat-crumbs-jesus-and-syro.html

 

It was an interesting article, but I stand by my original statements.

 

Let me add this though, the book 'North and South' also takes place in a real nation during real historical events, it uses real historical figures who really lived during that time, but it's also a work of complete fiction. None of it actually ever really happened outside of the broader historical background present in the book. The fact that this or any other Bible story 'took place' during historical events and is set in a real place does not make it any more factual. It's still a book of mystical stories that probably never actually happened.

 

You could say the same thing about the story of Robin Hood. Real place, real events as a backdrop, even real people, but the story is complete fiction. There is little if any actual fact in it at all, and it's folklore. The Bible is Middle Eastern Folklore, and I still say that there is nothing 'beautiful' about that story. In all likelyhood it never really happened.

 

I see no reason to think that Jesus of the Bible is any more factual than Robin Hood. Both may or may not have been based on real people who actually lived, but the stories surrounding them are complete fabrications. They have been so bastardized by time, and a constant oral retelling, that they bear little to no resemblance to who those people likely really were at all. They have become legends, folklore and tall tales with no real historical basis any longer. Whoever [if anyone] inspired their characters has been so buried by their own legend that they are lost to the winds of time.

 

I see no reason to think that any of the stories in the NT have any more than the vaguest of similarity to reality at all, and that's being generous. It's entirely possible that neither Jesus, nor Robin Hood were based on anyone at all and were completely made up, or they may even be composite characters that use several different people as their source material.

 

That being said, I still think it's a horribly written moral tale. It's out of place for Jesus to behave that way, even to teach a lesson to his merry band of twelve. It doesn't fit with his character well, and is just a poorly executed fable. I read the article, and I still say it's trying to make a pile of chocolate out of a pile of shit. Giving excuses and attempting to over explain away the problems with it by jumping through hoops.

 

I just don't think it's a relevant story, and it certainly has no actual bearing on the reality of how Christians or Jews treated women a the time. Like I said, it probably never actually happened to begin with. The Bible is not a history book, and I see no reason to think that either the OT or the NT are an accurate account of anything that ever really happened. It's not relevant evidence that Christians were better about how they treated women than anyone else.

 

Where I do not find the Torah, or the NT to be actual accounts of anything, the Talmud does actually have some basis as historically grounded commentary. The authors of it have evidence that they existed, there is evidence they actually did write the passages themselves [the OT and NT are completely uncredited second hand accounts and/or credit of authorship is attributed by 'tradition' rather than evidence], contemporary accounts support a lot of what is written in it and who was writing it, and a lot of the Talmud is commentary on actual social structure, history, and real people who have plenty of evidence to support their existence and behaviors, and that the Jewish laws were enforced as well as what those laws were in any given period in Jewish history. It is largely made up of first hand accounts, unlike the Bible and the Torah which are second hand at best, and in all honesty, they are more than likely further removed accounts than that. Yes, the Talmud does have a whole, whole lot of commentary on their magic book 'the Torah' but it also gives a glimpse into Jewish life, laws, and social structure in ways that can be credibly backed as accurate.

 

I can believe that a good majority of the people who contributed to the Talmud existed for the same reasons I can believe that Cesar or Mark Antony existed. They all have similar evidence that they were real people.

 

Jesus and Moses do not have any such evidence. I see no reason to think they are anything but folklore, perhaps loosely based on some real people, but any truth or detail about them as real people has been forever lost and destroyed by their own legend and myth.

[mymistake]

 

 

Another complete FAIL

 

You keep using that word.  I do not think it means what you think it means.

/Inigo Montoya

 

 

 

You thought I was going to answer it based on your views of the Torah? Or based on my views?

 

My hope was that you would answer truthfully.  The truth isn't a matter of opinion.

 

 

 

I have to answer based on your views?

 

You said, When can I expect a list of bible verses. You said it can't happen. That was your view.

 

And thus it was clear that I didn't expect a verse that mentions or describes eugenics.  I was right.  No such verse exists in the Torah.

 

 

 

I have to agree with your view in order to be valid?

 

No.  You have to build an argument that uses a valid form in order for your argument to be valid.  This is Logic 101 stuff.

 

 

 

 

If I bring a verse because of your direct challenge, that isn't good because it is not in line with your view?

 

You brought a verse that was irrelevant because it didn't describe eugenics and it didn't mention eugenics - just like I predicted.  I didn't make you disagree with the facts.  Next time agree with the facts and you won't have this trouble.

 

 

[Guest nat]

Meanwhile there are many Old Testament verses that say the Children of Israel should only marry their own kind and the other nations are not good enough for marriage.

 

 

Another Complete FAIL

 

First you say that you can't apply the Torah's teachings to Eugenics because Eugenics wasn't around, and now you want to say that the Torah supports eugenics????????????????????

 

 

HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO????????????????

 

 

What planet are you from????????????????

 

How many times did they twist your mind????????????????????

[mymistake]

I never said that the Torah supports eugenics.  Of course it doesn't.  I have stated many times that this was impossible because the men who wrote the Torah were ignorant of all that would be happen in modern times.

 

As for the Torah being racist:

 

Lev 20:24 "But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people."

 

1 Sam 15:3  "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destory all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."

 

 

Also Numbers 31:15-18

[Guest nat]

You said, When can I expect a list of bible verses. You said it can't happen. That was your view.

 

And thus it was clear that I didn't expect a verse that mentions or describes eugenics.  I was right.  No such verse exists in the Torah.

 

So unless I kiss your tuchess and agree with you, you can criticize me for bringing a Torah verse in response to a direct challenge.

[Guest nat]

I never said that the Torah supports eugenics.  Of course it doesn't.  I have stated many times that this was impossible because the men who wrote the Torah were ignorant of all that would be happen in modern times.

 

So why talk about verses of Torah law regarding marriage in relationship to eugenics????????

[BlackCat]

 

Contra, I appreciate your feedback.

 

As we are getting off track from the purpose of this thread, I'll keep my response brief, and if anyone is interested to pursue this particular subject further, I can start a new thread in the theology section.

 

Unlike 'Lord of the Rings', the NT is a collection of stories based on real nations and historical events.  It requires some delving to appreciate and understand what is going on in this particular story of the gentile woman.  I've found this brief article that beautifully explains what is really going on in the story.  Please check it out, so you will see the 'whole picture'. 

 

 http://krwordgazer.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/even-dogs-eat-crumbs-jesus-and-syro.html

 

It was an interesting article, but I stand by my original statements.

 

Let me add this though, the book 'The Civil War' also takes place in a real nation during real historical events, it uses real historical figures who really lived during that time, but it's also a work of complete fiction. None of it actually ever really happened outside of the broader historical background present in the book. The fact that this or any other Bible story 'took place' during historical events and is set in a real place does not make it any more factual. It's still a book of mystical stories that probably never actually happened.

 

You could say the same thing about the story of Robin Hood. Real place, real events as a backdrop, even real people, but the story is complete fiction. There is little if any actual fact in it at all, and it's folklore. The Bible is Middle Eastern Folklore, and I still say that there is nothing 'beautiful' about that story. In all likelyhood it never really happened.

 

I see no reason to think that Jesus of the Bible is any more factual than Robin Hood. Both may or may not have been based on real people who actually lived, but the stories surrounding them are complete fabrications. They have been so bastardized by time, and a constant oral retelling, that they bear little to no resemblance to who those people likely really were at all. They have become legends, folklore and tall tales with no real historical basis any longer. Whoever [if anyone] inspired their characters has been so buried by their own legend that they are lost to the winds of time.

 

I see no reason to think that any of the stories in the NT have any more than the vaguest of similarity to reality at all, and that's being generous. It's entirely possible that neither Jesus, nor Robin Hood were based on anyone at all and were completely made up, or they may even be composite characters that use several different people as their source material.

 

That being said, I still think it's a horribly written moral tale. It's out of place for Jesus to behave that way, even to teach a lesson to his merry band of twelve. It doesn't fit with his character well, and is just a poorly executed fable. I read the article, and I still say it's trying to make a pile of chocolate out of a pile of shit. Giving excuses and attempting to over explain away the problems with it by jumping through hoops.

 

I just don't think it's a relevant story, and it certainly has no actual bearing on the reality of how Christians or Jews treated women a the time. Like I said, it probably never actually happened to begin with. The Bible is not a history book, and I see no reason to think that either the OT or the NT are an accurate account of anything that ever really happened. It's not relevant evidence that Christians were better about how they treated women than anyone else.

 

Where I do not find the Torah, or the NT to be actual accounts of anything, the Talmud and how Jewish law was enacted does actually have some historical grounding. The authors of it have evidence that they existed, there is evidence they actually did write the passages themselves [the OT and NT are completely uncredited second hand accounts], contemporary accounts, and other evidence that they were real people and a lot of the Talmud is commentary on actual social structure, history, and real people who have plenty of evidence to support their existence and behaviors, and that the Jewish laws were enforced. It is largely made up of first hand accounts, unlike the Bible and the Torah which are second hand at best, and in all honesty, they are more than likely further removed accounts than that. Yes, the Talmud does have a lot of commentary on the Torah, but it also gives a glimpse into Jewish life, laws, and social structure in ways that can be credibly backed as accurate.

 

I can believe that a good majority of the people who contributed to the Talmud existed for the same reasons I can believe that Cesar or Mark Antony existed. They all have similar evidence that they were real people.

 

Jesus and Moses do not have any such evidence. I see no reason to think they are anything but folklore, perhaps loosely based on some real people, but any truth or detail about them has been forever lost.

 

 

Thank you for checking the article.  I obviously strongly disagree with your overall assessment of this subject.  I agree with a lot of what you say.  I'm not saying that this story actually happened.  I'm defending the understanding of this story, with regards to the ancient Middle Eastern customs that bear on the meaning of it.  I maintain that it is a beautiful story once you understand the cultural meanings behind it (as seems to be the case for many other misunderstood stories in the Bible) that is based on real customs and cultural beliefs of that time and people. 

[Guest nat]

 

 

 

 

If I bring a verse because of your direct challenge, that isn't good because it is not in line with your view?

 

You brought a verse that was irrelevant because it didn't describe eugenics and it didn't mention eugenics - just like I predicted.  I didn't make you disagree with the facts.  Next time agree with the facts and you won't have this trouble.

 

 

 

Another Fail.

 

Quote: Your Torah is not a good example of morality.  In looking for the moral failure of scientists you cite a book that calls for racism, genocide, war, the death penalty for thought crime, the death penalty for witchcraft and so on.

 

 

You criticized me for bringing a verse from what you perceive is a racist book. Your criticism was irrelevant to whether the verse was relevant to the issue or not.

[florduh]

Are you guys still having fun with this Jewish Thumbelina? Let me know.

[mymistake]

 

You said, When can I expect a list of bible verses. You said it can't happen. That was your view.

 

And thus it was clear that I didn't expect a verse that mentions or describes eugenics.  I was right.  No such verse exists in the Torah.

 

So unless I kiss your tuchess and agree with you, you can criticize me for bringing a Torah verse in response to a direct challenge.

 

 

Dude, I'm not the slightest bit attracted to you so can you kindly drop the sexual suggestions?

 

The challenge was to show that there was no such Bible verse.  I predicted that you could produce none and it turns out I was right and you could produce none.  It's not my fault if your Torah calls for genocide and racism.  You brought Nazi propaganda into this conversation as an example of your religion's moral triumph over scientific failure.  That was very funny.

[Guest nat]

 

 

You said, When can I expect a list of bible verses. You said it can't happen. That was your view.

 

And thus it was clear that I didn't expect a verse that mentions or describes eugenics.  I was right.  No such verse exists in the Torah.

 

So unless I kiss your tuchess and agree with you, you can criticize me for bringing a Torah verse in response to a direct challenge.

 

 

Dude, I'm not the slightest bit attracted to you so can you kindly drop the sexual suggestions?

 

The challenge was to show that there was no such Bible verse.  I predicted that you could produce none and it turns out I was right and you could produce none.  It's not my fault if your Torah calls for genocide and racism.  You brought Nazi propaganda into this conversation as an example of your religion's moral triumph over scientific failure.  That was very funny.

 

Kissing Tuchess has nothing to do with attraction. It has to do with subservience.

 

It is irrelevant to whether the verse I brought was a good defense or not. You challenged me to bring a verse and then criticized me for bringing a verse from a book full of racism.

 

Keep trying.

[Guest nat]

Are you guys still having fun with this Jewish Thumbelina? Let me know.

You are jealous that this thread has much more posts than the others.

[mymistake]

Are you guys still having fun with this Jewish Thumbelina? Let me know.

 

 

Ah, I'm done with this thread.  Do whatever you wish.  It's too bad we can't make them mud wrestle.  That would be fun.

[Guest nat]

I never said that the Torah supports eugenics.  Of course it doesn't.  I have stated many times that this was impossible because the men who wrote the Torah were ignorant of all that would be happen in modern times.

 

As for the Torah being racist:

 

Lev 20:24 "But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people."

 

1 Sam 15:3  "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destory all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."

 

 

Also Numbers 31:15-18

Another FAIL.

 

It was not be cause of race. It was because of beliefs.

[florduh]

nat, do you know Thumbelina? We'd like to arrange a mud wrestling match between you two. You guys should hit it off like two peas in a pod.

[Guest nat]

Kiss my arse!  (British & Australian taboo!) also Kiss my ass! (American & Australian Taboo)

something that you say in order to tell someone that you will not do what they want you to 

 

Nothing to do with attraction.

 

(I was even more clear, I said I would not kiss your arse.)

[florduh]

...I wonder if the mud could make them any more slippery...

[Guest nat]

nat, do you know Thumbelina? We'd like to arrange a mud wrestling match between you two. You guys should hit it off like two peas in a pod.

You are just jealous of the amount of posts on this thread.