Can science prove or disprove "God"?

[Crazy Horse]

3 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

There’s no evidence that the ancient Midianites knew of an individual who made such a declaration, but ok. Your scenario has more going for it than Biglino’s translation of the Masoretic Text while purposely ignoring previous and more ancient Judeo-Christian texts. 

cormac

Biglinos translations cannot possible ignore any Christian texts,  because he only deals with the first, Masoretic texts of the OT, ie, that are are pre-Christian. Ie, Christ never was a sparkle in even Mary's eye.

[GoldenWolf]

16 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

Well, to be honest MC, I see the gods of the OT to be fcking *******s..

Except the ones who were actually good folk..

Its a little complicated...

I wasn't talking about polytheism.

[Crazy Horse]

1 minute ago, Mystic Crusader said:

I wasn't talking about polytheism.

So you are talking about those guys from the OT, who made themselves to be something bigger, something greater than they actually were..? gods who became The God? 

Through gossip, through violence, through good old b******s!

The OT is a bunch of non-sense... Nonse-sense.. all day.

PIE.

[GoldenWolf]

8 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

So you are talking about those guys from the OT, who made themselves to be something bigger, something greater than they actually were..? gods who became The God?

They exalted themselves by calling themselves prophets.
 

Quote

 

Through gossip, through violence, through good old b******s!

The OT is a bunch of non-sense... Nonse-sense.. all day.

PIE.

 

Exactly, problem is, there is a lot of verses in the new testament that is just rehashed old testament verses.  Don't forget Jesus did not come abolish them, but fulfill them.

[cormac mac airt]

The Masoretic Texts ARE NOT pre-Christian. Look it up before showing your poor research capabilities CH. 

cormac

[Crazy Horse]

3 minutes ago, Mystic Crusader said:

They exalted themselves by calling themselves prophets.
 

Exactly, problem is, there is a lot of verses in the new testament that is just rehashed old testament verses.  Don't forget Jesus did not come abolish them, but fulfill them.

Ok.

So, why are some of the same sentiments of the OT exactly the same as the NT?

From my point of view, just to be clear, I think that the same lies of the OT were mixed in with the NT, but that Christ had a much better grip on reality. At least for His day and age.

My point is, that the lies of the OT were indeed carried over to the NT, but, that in actual fact, the NT has a lot more truth, better sentiments than the diolbolical, filthy, disgusting, ...............................b******s..

Please don't crucify me for giving me opinion.

[Crazy Horse]

7 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

The Masoretic Texts ARE NOT pre-Christian. Look it up before showing your poor research capabilities CH. 

cormac

The Masoretic texts are post Christian?

[cormac mac airt]

1 minute ago, Crazy Horse said:

The Masoretic texts are post Christian?

The earliest Christian texts date to around the second century AD, with the earliest Judaic texts dating to around the second century BC, whereas the Masoretic Texts DO NOT, they date to mid-first millenia AD. The texts I mentioned earlier are ALL older than the MT.

cormac 

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

3 hours ago, Crazy Horse said:

Your first point..

It is not a matter of who translated it, nor even what was actually said, that is not the main issue here!

What is the main issue here is this, that what was written, and what was told to us, are in fact, two different things.

That is in fact - is my only point.

 

 

You still haven't given me any reason to think that your idea is true. Maybe I'm crazy but I actually care about things being true.

When you present an idea that is wrong it doesn't matter how you present it, its still wrong. 

Like I said I don't believe in the idea of a god/gods until presented with evidence to his/her/its existence. Can you do that ? 

If you can't present any such evidence, why should I give your interpretation any more weight that the thousands of other religious denominations ? They all claims to be the one true religion too. They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong.

Maybe it is because English isn't my native language that you don't understand me, because I don't know how I could make my position any clearer ?

[Crazy Horse]

1 minute ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

You still haven't given me any reason to think that your idea is true. Maybe I'm crazy but I actually care about things being true.

When you present an idea that is wrong it doesn't matter how you present it, its still wrong. 

 

Mate, sorry to cut off your..... Thimg.

But, the point I am making is, "that what was said in the OT, isnt what has been told us.

Is not the the same thing!

And that is all..

[cormac mac airt]

8 minutes ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

You still haven't given me any reason to think that your idea is true. Maybe I'm crazy but I actually care about things being true.

When you present an idea that is wrong it doesn't matter how you present it, its still wrong. 

Like I said I don't believe in the idea of a god/gods until presented with evidence to his/her/its existence. Can you do that ? 

If you can't present any such evidence, why should I give your interpretation any more weight that the thousands of other religious denominations ? They all claims to be the one true religion too. They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong.

Maybe it is because English isn't my native language that you don't understand me, because I don't know how I could make my position any clearer ?

English isn’t your problem. You’re crystal clear. 

cormac

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

11 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

English isn’t your problem. You’re crystal clear. 

cormac

Thats nice to know. Your English is good too. 

13 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

Mate, sorry to cut off your..... Thimg.

But, the point I am making is, "that what was said in the OT, isnt what has been told us.

Is not the the same thing!

And that is all..

As for you Crazy Horse, I can't really be bothered to carry on a discussion that seems to be more about sematics, rather than substance. You never gave me any real evidence as to why I should care for your idea and I suspect you never will, so I see very little reason to continue this.

Why is it that so many discussions about religion ends up like this. Long arguments about sematics, with very little, if any, actual substance ? 

Edited March 18, 2018 by Noteverythingisaconspiracy

[XenoFish]

1 minute ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

Thats nice to know. Your English is good too. 

As for you Crazy Horse, I can't really be bothered to carry on a discussion that seems to be more about sematics, rather than substance. You never gave me any real evidence as to why I should care for your idea and I suspect you never will, so I see very little reason to continue this.

Why is it that so many discussions about religion ends up like this. Long arguments about sematics, with very little, if any, actual substance ? 

[Crazy Horse]

36 minutes ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

Thats nice to know. Your English is good too. 

As for you Crazy Horse, I can't really be bothered to carry on a discussion that seems to be more about sematics, rather than substance. You never gave me any real evidence as to why I should care for your idea and I suspect you never will, so I see very little reason to continue this.

Why is it that so many discussions about religion ends up like this. Long arguments about sematics, with very little, if any, actual substance ? 

If only it was about semantics..

Actually it is about the well-faire, the well - being of the whole of humanity.

You can ignore this shocking, horrific, diabolical evidence from Maurio Biglino if you like - up to you..

Ignoramus Par Exultance..

[Crazy Horse]

39 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Be wiser...

Walk towards Nonse-Sence..

In other words - Shut your PIE hole.

Justice will be done.

[cormac mac airt]

1 minute ago, Crazy Horse said:

If only it was about semantics..

Actually it is about the well-faire, the well - being of the whole of humanity.

You can ignore this shocking, horrific, diabolical evidence from Maurio Biglino if you like - up to you..

Ignoramus Par Exultance..

And you can ignore the fact that the Masoretic Texts ARE NOT pre-Christian all you want but that wont make your ignorance true. Nor will it make Biglino’s translation true. It is, at best, a bastardization of the original texts and you’ve bought into it. 

cormac

[Crazy Horse]

20 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

And you can ignore the fact that the Masoretic Texts ARE NOT pre-Christian all you want but that wont make your ignorance true. Nor will it make Biglino’s translation true. It is, at best, a bastardization of the original texts and you’ve bought into it. 

cormac

Well, if you have any earlier texts...

 

[cormac mac airt]

25 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

Well, if you have any earlier texts...

 

Just what part of Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls ALL of which predate the Masoretic Texts do you NOT understand? Well known amongst Judeo-Christian scholars and linguists is the fact that the Masoretic Texts deviate significantly from earlier, more contemporary J-C religious texts. In short, Biglino is using a non-contemporary text with his own unevidenced translation to say something NOT FOUND in the earlier texts. I’ve read enough of the extant original translations to know that you’ve been BS’d, and apparently fallen for it if your posts here are any indication. Sorry to hear it. 

cormac

Edited March 18, 2018 by cormac mac airt
Spelling

[Crazy Horse]

12 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Just what part of Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls ALL of which predate the Masoretic Texts do you NOT understand? Well known amongst Judeo-Christian scholars and linguists is the fact that the Masoretic Texts deviate significantly from earlier, more contemporary J-C religious texts. In short, Biglino is using a non-contemporary text with his own unevidenced translation to say something NOT FOUND in the earlier texts. I’ve read enough of the extant original translations to know that you’ve been BS’d, and apparently fallen for it if your posts here are any indication. Sorry to hear it. 

cormac

Fair enough..

I totally understand why millions of folk have been murdered, burnt, genocided, etc, etc, etc, .....

Dress it up any way you like.

The OT has been used to kill, rape, enslave..

 

[cormac mac airt]

8 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

Fair enough..

I totally understand why millions of folk have been murdered, burnt, genocided, etc, etc, etc, .....

Dress it up any way you like.

The OT has been used to kill, rape, enslave..

And you’ve been promoting a lie with Biglino’s translation. How is that any better? 

cormac

[Crazy Horse]

1 minute ago, cormac mac airt said:

And you’ve been promoting a lie with Biglino’s translation. How is that any better? 

cormac

Please, tell me what lie I am promoting?

[cormac mac airt]

12 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

Please, tell me what lie I am promoting?

Seriously? Are you now going to try and tell me and others that it wasn't YOU who said the following?

Quote

You can ignore this shocking, horrific, diabolical evidence from Maurio Biglino if you like - up to you..

and

If you are really interested look up the work of Mauro Biglino. He translated the OT for the Vatican before they fired him. The actual story in the OT and the theology we are given are two completely different things.

and

For anyone who is interested in what the OT does actually say, ie, anyone who doesn't want to remain mired in ignorance, then I suggest taking a look at this fascinating talk given by Biglino. A literal translation without bias or prejudice. You want the actual truth concerning the OT? Then invest an hour 14 minutes and start to get to grips with the lies and misinformation pushed by organised religion.

As seen above you've promoted Biglino's lie, as the truth, THREE times within this very thread. 

This can only mean, IMO, that either you knowingly lied or you're not a competent researcher in this area. There is no other way around it. 

cormac

Edited March 18, 2018 by cormac mac airt
Cleanup

[Crazy Horse]

7 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Seriously? Are you now going to try and tell me and others that it wasn't YOU who said the following?

As seen above you've promoted Biglino's lie, as the truth, THREE times within this very thread. 

This can only mean, IMO, that either you knowingly lied or you're not a competent researcher in this area. There is no other way around it. 

cormac

The truth needs no promotion..

It can stand on its own two feet..

All the lies, deception, corruption, these things need back-up.

Our history proves our present. Eg, war, poverty, crime, corruption.... 

Need I say more?

[cormac mac airt]

7 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

The truth needs no promotion..

It can stand on its own two feet..

All the lies, deception, corruption, these things need back-up.relie

Our history proves our present. Eg, war, poverty, crime, corruption.... 

Need I say more?

What truth? Biglino hasn't spoken any and apparently you've promoted his version anyway. That makes you just as bad IMO. That there has been much promoted over the last 2000+ years due to misrepresentations/misunderstandings/mistranslations of the Bible does, IN NO WAY, relieve you from the fact that you've promoted Biglino's lie as in any way factual when his translation (and I do use that word loosely) is embarrassingly, even humiliatingly wrong. Be a man and at least take responsibility for what you've promoted in his name.

To put it another way, if you want to rail against the corruption done in the name of the Judeo-Christian texts and deity then by all means do so, but STOP promoting someone who takes the least accurate and amongst the youngest known translations of Biblical texts and promoting him as some sort of expert when in fact HE IS NOT. 

cormac

[cormac mac airt]

For anyone following my above post it should be pointed out that Biglino translated the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia from the late 60s/early 70s which was an updated edition to the Masoretic Text from the Leningrad Codex, itself written in 1008/1009 AD. This is, in no way, contemporary to the original texts I've mentioned previously in this thread. 

cormac