Pataky Pal does exist

[Corven]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

cowardly dj
ZangerBob
Last Activity: 11-06-2006 01:33 AM

not since this thread

[miketpoto]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

Has anyone heard from crazypants lately?

[thesightless]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

can someone find a real conservative and hardline imam to participate in this mess.

[Kat]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

nope.

now get back to the kitchen.

[KinKyJ]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

nope.

now get back to the kitchen.

[Kat]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

I havent read the whole thread so someone pls tell me if theres a proof to be found in it before I loose my precious time again reading some bs quotes...

... not you CDJ!

[Yao]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

I think his point is to rule out the error in translation here, but as I know fuckall about those texts or what they look like, I cannot really argue about the things he says. Other than translation, there's also the error in interpretation by the way...which is something that takes place every time a human being reads a holy book IMO.

[sammwalk]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

The Quamran texts are at most a thousand years older than the Aleppo Codex, which was written in Israel about A.D. 900 as was, until 1947, the oldest-known Hebrew manuscript containing the full text of the Bible. What hsa surprised most scholars is that in spite of the millenium of hand copying that separates them, the Aleppo Codex and the books of the Old Testament unearthed at Quamran are virtually identical. One of the oldest of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating to about 200 BC is the Book of Isaiah. Only thirteen minor variations from the Aleppo text (and from its modern decendants) have been identified. Duringthe approxamately three and a half centuries separating the Quamran Book of Isaiah from the version originally compiled in Babylon, one might be tempted to posit even fewer changes than during the eleven centuries separating Quamran and Aleppo. If this assumption is correct then the modern Hebrew Bible is, in most essentials, the same Bible one would have found in Babylonabout 550 BC. Evidence supporting this assumption can be found in Jerusalems silver scroll which is, next to the writing on the 750 BC wall of Deir Alla the earliest fragment of biblical text presently known. The scroll of beaten and inscribed silver was contained in a 1 inch diameter jprayer amulet. Construction workers found it in AD 1981 when they accidentally broke into a grave site under New Jerusalems cinema district. The verses on the scroll are literally microscopic and are indistinguishable from the priestly benediction in Numbers 6:24-26. The biblicalfragment dating between 700 and 500 BC is almost an exact contemporary with the Babylonian compilations and reads: "The Lord bless thee and keep thee: The Lord make his face to shine upon thee: and give thee peace." The modern biblical version reads "The Lord bless thee and keep thee: The Lord make his face to shine upon thee: The Lord lift up his countenance to thee and give thee peace." More than 2500 years...yet we witness no mutation of the text. The DNA of moths living on the Hawiian Islands has undergone vastly greater change in thta same time frame It is a testamony to the amazing fidelity of transmission, through dozens fo generations of pious scribes, once the old song stories and oral histories were commited to writing.

so what?

[cowardly dj]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

The Quamran texts are at most a thousand years older than the Aleppo Codex, which was written in Israel about A.D. 900 as was, until 1947, the oldest-known Hebrew manuscript containing the full text of the Bible. What hsa surprised most scholars is that in spite of the millenium of hand copying that separates them, the Aleppo Codex and the books of the Old Testament unearthed at Quamran are virtually identical. One of the oldest of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating to about 200 BC is the Book of Isaiah. Only thirteen minor variations from the Aleppo text (and from its modern decendants) have been identified. Duringthe approxamately three and a half centuries separating the Quamran Book of Isaiah from the version originally compiled in Babylon, one might be tempted to posit even fewer changes than during the eleven centuries separating Quamran and Aleppo. If this assumption is correct then the modern Hebrew Bible is, in most essentials, the same Bible one would have found in Babylonabout 550 BC. Evidence supporting this assumption can be found in Jerusalems silver scroll which is, next to the writing on the 750 BC wall of Deir Alla the earliest fragment of biblical text presently known. The scroll of beaten and inscribed silver was contained in a 1 inch diameter jprayer amulet. Construction workers found it in AD 1981 when they accidentally broke into a grave site under New Jerusalems cinema district. The verses on the scroll are literally microscopic and are indistinguishable from the priestly benediction in Numbers 6:24-26. The biblicalfragment dating between 700 and 500 BC is almost an exact contemporary with the Babylonian compilations and reads: "The Lord bless thee and keep thee: The Lord make his face to shine upon thee: and give thee peace." The modern biblical version reads "The Lord bless thee and keep thee: The Lord make his face to shine upon thee: The Lord lift up his countenance to thee and give thee peace." More than 2500 years...yet we witness no mutation of the text. The DNA of moths living on the Hawiian Islands has undergone vastly greater change in thta same time frame It is a testamony to the amazing fidelity of transmission, through dozens fo generations of pious scribes, once the old song stories and oral histories were commited to writing.

[robinhood]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

I just love my gold, the gold that I and my Merry Men steal from the rich.

[Yao]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

Kinky is right Cowardly, I was in Ghana getting robbed, accused, scammed, dodging STD's and women with hairy legs, beards and moustaches .

In answer to your question, I do think you're right partially about people not willing to accept that the bible was inspired by a higher being - the logic of this is, of course, that you must believe in that higher being to believe it could have inspired a book (wether your belief in the higher being was there before or after reading that book does not matter here).

The bible does not mean to me what it means to you for example, since I do not believe in God for starters: this also means that using the bible and it's logic to convince or my err in life is futile from the start. You might say I 'believe' in science, which simply means I do not accept any truth without either a solid logic or physical proof to back it. But then again when it comes to logic, I myself am also fallable of course. But that, I have accepted, as well as that I accept that man doesn't know everything and might not ever. This is my time on this planet and life is too short to be looking for all the answers: I just want to make my time worthwhile and enjoy it...

Kinky also has a good point that in translation, there is an error margin - which by default makes any translation of the original text fallable. Language is also a denomiator of knowledge you know...you cannot know what you cannot name. Reverse, there are a lot of things that exist but which we cannot name yet. You can easily find the truth behind this by comparing vocabularies of different languages in the world on a given set of items (the oldest trick in the book for lingu?sts) - you'll always find that there are items that do exist in one lingo, which are not (yet) named in another. You might argue here that it means that possibly god does exist even though we cannot see or touch him, but my opposite reasoning here is that maybe back then religion was a perfectly valid way to name things we didn't understand (yet).
Another reasoning is that the bible is through the use of language (on top of the content) a culturally inspired book, as much as books written in the renaissance are a product of that zeitgeist....

Hopefully this illuminates my way of seeing things a bit, as well as the reason why yu might not seem to 'get through' to people on this board (or anyone else that reacts the same, for that matter).

[KinKyJ]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

Very interesting post yao. Been wondering where you have been.

he's been dodging machetes and solving famine by taking off his shirt in Gheyna for two months. Still recovering from the heat strokes and the furry legs of the local women imo

But what I gather from most of the responses is that people do not give much credit to the Bible as being inspired from a higher being.

Is that the case?

Is that about what it boils down to?

I guess that is in fact what it boils down to yes. The Bible may be inspired by God, but it's written from a human perspective (... according to John, ... according to Timothy, Romans, the book of Job, ...). God might have dictated the 10 Commandments to Moses, but he didn't tell the authors of the Bible directly what to write.

Apart from that, there's also the historical distortion caused by translators (and probably also by censorship and manipulation by the Vatican throughout the ages).

When you compare the Bible to the Qur'an, this human perspective becomes even more obvious. The link between the verses in the Qur'an and the word of Allah is much stronger than the link between the word of God and the Bible. Why? Because Allah basicly "dictated" the Qur'an through the angel Gabriel to Muhammed (who couldn't read or write btw). The word "Qur'an" means "the recitation", in other words it's the literal word of Allah.

Whereas the original text of the Bible has undergone some distortion because of the translations to Latin, the Qur'an is being read in the original language it was written in. The official version is still the original text.

[cowardly dj]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

Been following this thread for a bit now, and getting increasingly amazed.

That last answer from CDJ explains a lot of the behaviour (missionarism particularly) of christians now and in the past to me. But it also points out a fundamental issue: for CDJ everyone has through his/her ancestors been given the chance to choose the 'right path', but fro someone like me who thinks of evolution as the preferrable explanation, this cannot be true at all, since every religion has it's own geographical origin. Basically this means that it all depends on the spread from it's point of origin wether someone is likely to have heard from this or not, much like languages spread for example.

But bsully, you're missing one point from CDJ which he has not explained himself either: the bible is a book, and if you take it liteally then the reasoning you and I would follow (good morals being worth more than following rulz) becomes totally worthless; no discussion is possible on this subject, because we do not use a rigid text as a guideline but our own dynamic ability to reason, think, deliberate and decide. We can change, the text CDJ uses cannot.

A mistake in CDJ's reasoning is also that to people who do not believe in the bible or god, it takes more than just a text to prove the existence of god. For him it is self-evident, but we don't see a 2000-year old text as proof: solid reasoning with logical outcome is a step ahead, and testing of theories with visible result is another. Added to that, many assumptions have been proven wrong over the course of history, but while the text of the bible is rigid, it also leaves open so many holes that it can easily be fitted to serve more than one logic. But it never proves anything beyond ust saying it is so.

Very interesting post yao. Been wondering where you have been.

I guess I did miss the point of bsully's question. I am going to go back and read it again and give it another whirl.

But what I gather from most of the responses is that people do not give much credit to the Bible as being inspired from a higher being.

Is that the case?



Is that about what it boils down to?

[Yao]

Re: Pataky Pal does exist

Been following this thread for a bit now, and getting increasingly amazed.

That last answer from CDJ explains a lot of the behaviour (missionarism particularly) of christians now and in the past to me. But it also points out a fundamental issue: for CDJ everyone has through his/her ancestors been given the chance to choose the 'right path', but fro someone like me who thinks of evolution as the preferrable explanation, this cannot be true at all, since every religion has it's own geographical origin. Basically this means that it all depends on the spread from it's point of origin wether someone is likely to have heard from this or not, much like languages spread for example.

But bsully, you're missing one point from CDJ which he has not explained himself either: the bible is a book, and if you take it liteally then the reasoning you and I would follow (good morals being worth more than following rulz) becomes totally worthless; no discussion is possible on this subject, because we do not use a rigid text as a guideline but our own dynamic ability to reason, think, deliberate and decide. We can change, the text CDJ uses cannot.

A mistake in CDJ's reasoning is also that to people who do not believe in the bible or god, it takes more than just a text to prove the existence of god. For him it is self-evident, but we don't see a 2000-year old text as proof: solid reasoning with logical outcome is a step ahead, and testing of theories with visible result is another. Added to that, many assumptions have been proven wrong over the course of history, but while the text of the bible is rigid, it also leaves open so many holes that it can easily be fitted to serve more than one logic. But it never proves anything beyond ust saying it is so.

[BSully828]

Re: God does exist

So how does all this relate to the man in the bushes of Australia? While Jesus walked the earth he taught that he was the Son of God and that through him all had the ability to return to Gods grace. (On a side note; the Jews rejected Jesus as the Christ and that is why the Jews are destined to be lost.) Jesus commanded his apostles to go into all the world and teach the gospel. That means every person had the choice to believe or not. You can read in the Bible that every man heard of the gospel of Christ. That makes sense because how could God hold a person responsible for believing that Jesus was His son and that through Jesus said person could find redemption if said person was not aware of the fact.
Now to narrow it down to the man in the jungle. You have to believe that at one time every man who lives today came from a decendant who was aware of the choice to follow Jesus or not. As stated all were made aware of the gospel at one time. So some did and some did no choose to believe.t. Therefore those who chose not to follow Jesus dismissed the claim and it died when He did. No one will pass on a legacy of Jesus to his children and his childrens children if he thinks it is bogus. Are you with me still?
So from the choice made by a distant descendant of the jungle man somewhere along his family line God was forgotten. BTW that is the very reason you find people going out into the world to try to teach these people about the grace of God. It was the main reason for the crusades although the methods employed by the crusaders was absolutely inappopriate and not born of God. God gave man a choice and the crusaders said follow God or die. Not much incentive to truly love God from your heart there is it.
Now the man in the jungle who has not heard of God may be a good person. He may be the most honest and clean-living soul in the world today. But the reason why he will be lost is not because God has an ego. Not because God wants to see man tormented. We are told through the Bible that God wants to see all men come to repentance and be saved. The reason why that man in the jungle will be lost is because his ancestors rejected God and he has no redemption because he can not come into contact with the blood of Christ through baptism. Remember that bnaptism is the point where one is put back into the grace of God so no baptism means no redemption.
Now you understand why Christians are so adamant about spreading the word. Because every day people die that needed to hear about God and be given the choice to obey the gospel. It is paramount to a sincere loving Christain to help people see that the only way to heaven is through Jesus by means of baptism.
I know this was a long read but it was nescesary to paint the entire picture from start to finish.
I hope this has cleared things up. If not read it a few times and then feel free to ask any questions.

Thoughtful answer CDJ, but I think you missed my point. How is any of this relevant to the person who has never heard of Christ? Do you think the Aussie Bushman or my boy Frank from the Amazon really care if they are "lost" in the eyes of some phantom deity of whom they have no concept of or relation to? So you say that their great-great-great-great grandfather rejected Christ way back when and now Frank is left guilty by association and doomed to be out of God's light. But do you think that makes any difference to Frank? He already has a God who he honors and follows, who has heard his prayers and comforted his heart. A God who has been with Frank since his earliest days, who has helped him through troubled times and fills him with the same spiritual security that you enjoy. A God who Frank feels loved by and who he loves in return. He has a rich, complete life confident that his prayers are heard and his worship is worthwhile. What difference does it make to Frank when he hears that you feel he is "lost", exiled because twelve generations ago his forefather fucked up?

Again, I ask you, what is more important: The name you address your prayers to at night, or the sincerity, honesty, love and compassion with which you fill those prayers? God - that indefinable, indescribable being beyond all beings is not concerned with form but the function. Do you live a truthful life, do you treat those around you with kindness and caring, do you do what you can to better the world around you even in the smallest of ways - those are the questions that matter to whatever higher power is out there, not the church you choose to pray in or the name you choose to use when calling Him.