02 Oct 09
Originally posted by WulebgrI don't understand what you're saing?
I wrote concerning "history proves":
Originally posted by Wulebgr
[b]It is a rare sentence beginning with those two words that fails to lie or perpetrate ignorance.
"History teaches ..." is no different.
The lessons of history are never so secure, and it demeans history to pretend that they are.[/b]
Do you believe that the future can be foretold? (Other than a extrapolation or by statistical means?) Or not?
02 Oct 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasI think that sentences beginning "history proves/shows/teaches/demonstrates..." are always lies--sometimes deliberate efforts to deceive, sometimes consequences of self-deception or ignorance--always false.
I don't understand what you're saing?
Do you believe that the future can be foretold? (Other than a extrapolation or by statistical means?) Or not?
Nostradamus foretold the future in which we live. His method was simple: be vague so that interpretations can fit new facts to old metaphors. The deployment of imprecise metaphors and other tropes served the OT prophets well, too.
02 Oct 09
Originally posted by WulebgrRight. Okay, now I understand you.
I think that sentences beginning "history proves/shows/teaches/demonstrates..." are [b]always lies--sometimes deliberate efforts to deceive, sometimes consequences of self-deception or ignorance--always false.
Nostradamus foretold the future in which we live. His method was simple: be vague so that interpretations can fit new facts to old metaphors. The deployment of imprecise metaphors and other tropes served the OT prophets well, too.[/b]
04 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by WulebgrThere may yet be hope for you; you may learn the art of humility, if not courtesy...one day.
Lol. Yes, I thought the question was probably substantive, even though it was a bit off point.
I'm not Jewish, but sometimes write the name of the Creator as g-d out of respect for those that are. Mahao is another name, as is Allah. They all name the same mythical being.
"for a change"--that's funny!
There is no law I know of that requires every question to be "on point", and certainly no law that allows you to decide what is and what isn't.
04 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by PinkFloydThe absence of law to which you refer nevertheless has a name: courtesy.
There may yet be hope for you; you may learn the art of humility, if not courtesy...one day.
There is no law I know of that requires every question to be "on point", and certainly no law that allows you to decide what is and what isn't.
Changing the subject can be rude.
05 Oct 09
Originally posted by daniel58It's called science. Some one does an experiment or makes an observation. If it's true, other people will be able to repeat the experiment or observation with the same result. No one has been able ato live in the belly of a whale, have a virgin birth, or be resurrected from the truly dead, or prove there is a god. When some one does those things I will would like to see sit.
So how do we know anything?
05 Oct 09
Originally posted by 667joeOkay so unless you PERSONALLY did those things you don't have to believe them because they could just be lying?
It's called science. Some one does an experiment or makes an observation. If it's true, other people will be able to repeat the experiment or observation with the same result. No one has been able ato live in the belly of a whale, have a virgin birth, or be resurrected from the truly dead, or prove there is a god. When some one does those things I will would like to see sit.