info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Is The Bible Evidence?
203 views
Skip to first unread message
Ivan The Terrible
May 20, 2020, 11:09:32 PM5/20/20
to
The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
Miloch
May 21, 2020, 12:15:58 AM5/21/20
to
In article <78f4bc29-2828-4304...@googlegroups.com>, Ivan The
Terrible says...
>
>The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know w=
>ho wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foo=
>lish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All =
>our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science b=
>ooks and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what =
>e all deceased?=20
>
>The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness te=
>stimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimo=
>ny or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for c=
>s credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? We=
happen.
*
Terrible says...
>
>The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know w=
>ho wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foo=
>lish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All =
>our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science b=
>ooks and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what =
>he wrote?
>Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
>Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supre=
>Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
>me Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
>
>Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
>How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they ar=
>
>Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
>e all deceased?=20
>
>The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness te=
>stimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimo=
>ny or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for c=
>onsideration by the judge or jury.
>
>We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate hi=
>
>s credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? We=
>re the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
>
>
Say what ya want, Igor...but there's no "film at 11"...video or it didn't
>
>
happen.
*
Oko tillo
May 21, 2020, 12:52:48 AM5/21/20
to
On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
==
For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
minority view. The work does not identify its author, and the early tradition
attributing it to the apostle Matthew is rejected by modern scholars.
The Gospel of Mark is anonymous. It was written in Greek for a gentile audience,
probably in Rome, although Galilee, Antioch (third-largest city in the Roman
Empire, located in northern Syria), and southern Syria have also been suggested.
Early Christian tradition attributes it to the John Mark mentioned in Acts, but
scholars generally reject this as an attempt to link the gospel to an
authoritative figure
Luke-Acts does not name its author. According to Church tradition this was Luke
the Evangelist, the companion of Paul, but while this view is still occasionally
put forward the scholarly consensus emphasises the many contradictions between
Acts and the authentic Pauline letters. The most probable date for its
composition is around AD 80-110, and there is evidence that it was still being
revised well into the 2nd century
Like the three other gospels [John] is anonymous, although it identifies an
unnamed "disciple whom Jesus loved" as the source of its traditions. It reached
its final form around AD 90-110, most likely within a "Johannine community", but
the reconstruction of this community, and therefore the social, religious and
historical context of the gospel, has presented scholars with considerable
difficulties
How about the books of the Pentateuch? How much is known with total certainty
about their authors?
And how much is just tradition?
Oko
==
> The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
Do we?
For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
minority view. The work does not identify its author, and the early tradition
attributing it to the apostle Matthew is rejected by modern scholars.
The Gospel of Mark is anonymous. It was written in Greek for a gentile audience,
probably in Rome, although Galilee, Antioch (third-largest city in the Roman
Empire, located in northern Syria), and southern Syria have also been suggested.
Early Christian tradition attributes it to the John Mark mentioned in Acts, but
scholars generally reject this as an attempt to link the gospel to an
authoritative figure
Luke-Acts does not name its author. According to Church tradition this was Luke
the Evangelist, the companion of Paul, but while this view is still occasionally
put forward the scholarly consensus emphasises the many contradictions between
Acts and the authentic Pauline letters. The most probable date for its
composition is around AD 80-110, and there is evidence that it was still being
revised well into the 2nd century
Like the three other gospels [John] is anonymous, although it identifies an
unnamed "disciple whom Jesus loved" as the source of its traditions. It reached
its final form around AD 90-110, most likely within a "Johannine community", but
the reconstruction of this community, and therefore the social, religious and
historical context of the gospel, has presented scholars with considerable
difficulties
How about the books of the Pentateuch? How much is known with total certainty
about their authors?
And how much is just tradition?
Oko
Ivan The Terrible
May 21, 2020, 12:59:10 AM5/21/20
to
On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre
Ivan The Terrible
May 21, 2020, 12:59:55 AM5/21/20
to
michellemalkingmail.com
May 21, 2020, 1:12:25 AM5/21/20
to
How do you like that?
michellemalkingmail.com
May 21, 2020, 1:14:51 AM5/21/20
to
Your posting history is perfect evidence.
Cloud Hobbit
May 21, 2020, 4:07:15 AM5/21/20
to
On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
Because it is fatally flawed as history and as a philosophy it is time to through it out and find a more reasonable code of conduct and accept that the bible teaches evil things that human beings cannot hope to succeed at, plus the paranoia that comes from the ide that God is watching you every moment of your life. Worst of all if you even THINK something wrong in the eyes of God it is the same as doing the thing you thought about.
It seems very much like the authors are doing their best to instil fear into the minds of the flock so they would behave as the authors wanted. Like sheep.
Kevrob
May 21, 2020, 4:32:35 AM5/21/20
to
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 4:07:15 AM UTC-4, Cloud Hobbit wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
> >
> > Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> > How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
> >
> > The Rules of evidence in all 50 states....
> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
> >
> > Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> > How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
> >
Are irrelevant outside a court of law.
"Historical evidence" is what is relevant.
Try reading some of this:
https://www.hist.cam.ac.uk/prospective-undergrads/virtual-classroom/historical-sources-what
One can't cross-examine a long-dead author of a "sacred
scripture," who may not have originated a text, but might
have been committing to parchment, vellum, etc long existing
oral tradition. The same for the "editors" who decided which
books to include and which to leave out.
> >allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it
> >is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross
> >examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for
> >consideration by the judge or jury.
> >
> > We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to
> > evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was
> > Moses an honest man?
to write a description of his own funeral - and, of course.
Mark Twain.
> > Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John
> It is evidence that people who wrote the bible were not thinking clearly
> and made up rules from their imaginary deity that they did not understand
> the consequences of those rules.
>
> Because it is fatally flawed as history and as a philosophy it is time to through it out and find a more reasonable code of conduct and accept that the bible teaches evil things that human beings cannot hope to succeed at, plus the paranoia that comes from the ide that God is watching you every moment of your life. Worst of all if you even THINK something wrong in the eyes of God it is the same as doing the thing you thought about.
>
> It seems very much like the authors are doing their best to instil fear into the minds of the flock so they would behave as the authors wanted. Like sheep.
written decades after events described within were to have happened
and the canon not agreed upon for several centuries. The length
of time for compilation of the written Torah and other OT books is
even longer.
--
Kevin R
a.a #2310
Yap Honghor
May 21, 2020, 5:55:25 AM5/21/20
to
Those writers of science and facts were dead, but their findings can be checked and verified!
Con stories of bible could not be verified or checked....find one person in present day who can walk on water and we could say it might be possible for the then stupid Jesus to walk on water!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How about that???????????????????????????????????????????
Yap Honghor
May 21, 2020, 6:00:41 AM5/21/20
to
And for witness to testify any one walking on water, it had to be repeatable, not a magical once in occurrence!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kurt Nicklas
May 21, 2020, 6:00:43 AM5/21/20
to
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 12:55:25 PM UTC+3, Yap Honghor wrote:
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 11:09:32 AM UTC+8, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
> >
> > Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> > How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
> >
> > The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
> >
> > We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
>
> You really are mad....
As mad as you are, WuMao?
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 11:09:32 AM UTC+8, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
> >
> > Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> > How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
> >
> > The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
> >
> > We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
>
> You really are mad....
Ivan The Terrible
May 21, 2020, 6:08:06 AM5/21/20
to
SkyEyes
May 21, 2020, 5:28:44 PM5/21/20
to
On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> ==
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>
> Do we?
>
> For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
>
>
> Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
> with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
> minority view.
And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> ==
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>
> Do we?
>
> For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
>
>
> Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
> with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
> minority view.
Brenda Nelson, A.A. #34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skye...@cox.net
kitw...@gmail.com
May 21, 2020, 6:42:30 PM5/21/20
to
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:28:44 PM UTC-4, SkyEyes wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > ==
> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
> >
> > Do we?
> >
> > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
> >
> >
> > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
> > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
> > minority view.
>
> And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
>
That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers! How did they grow up? Please check your facts before posting.
> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > ==
> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
> >
> > Do we?
> >
> > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
> >
> >
> > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
> > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
> > minority view.
>
> And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
>
-- Kit (kitw...@gmail.com)
JWS
May 21, 2020, 6:58:09 PM5/21/20
to
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:42:30 PM UTC-5, kitw...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:28:44 PM UTC-4, SkyEyes wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > > ==
> > > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
> > >
> > > Do we?
> > >
> > > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
> > >
> > >
> > > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
> > > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
> > > minority view.
> >
> > And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
> >
>
> That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers! How did they grow up? Please check your facts before posting.
How old does a woman have to be to have a child?
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:28:44 PM UTC-4, SkyEyes wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > > ==
> > > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
> > >
> > > Do we?
> > >
> > > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
> > >
> > >
> > > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
> > > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
> > > minority view.
> >
> > And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
> >
>
> That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers! How did they grow up? Please check your facts before posting.
Cloud Hobbit
May 21, 2020, 7:11:33 PM5/21/20
to
JWS asked:
>How old does a woman have to be to have a child?
Depending on the girl as young as 11. I believe that is the youngest age on record but I wouldn't swear to it.
There is a risk to the health of the mother when pregnancy happens in girls that are too young that makes it potentially life threatening.
>How old does a woman have to be to have a child?
There is a risk to the health of the mother when pregnancy happens in girls that are too young that makes it potentially life threatening.
Cloud Hobbit
May 21, 2020, 7:14:37 PM5/21/20
to
Just found this so I need to correct myself.
Lina Medina. Lina Marcela Medina de Jurado (Spanish pronunciation: [ˈlina meˈðina]; born 23 September 1933) is a Peruvian woman who became the youngest confirmed mother in history, giving birth at age five years, seven months, and 21 days.
What kind of sick fucker has sex with a child of 4 or 5?
Lina Medina. Lina Marcela Medina de Jurado (Spanish pronunciation: [ˈlina meˈðina]; born 23 September 1933) is a Peruvian woman who became the youngest confirmed mother in history, giving birth at age five years, seven months, and 21 days.
What kind of sick fucker has sex with a child of 4 or 5?
JWS
May 21, 2020, 7:43:26 PM5/21/20
to
JWS
May 21, 2020, 7:45:41 PM5/21/20
to
to have an 18 year old daughter now giving
birth to her grandchild.
Vincent Maycock
May 21, 2020, 8:09:05 PM5/21/20
to
On Thu, 21 May 2020 15:42:27 -0700 (PDT), kitw...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:28:44 PM UTC-4, SkyEyes wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
>> > ==
>> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>> >
>> > Do we?
>> >
>> > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
>> >
>> >
>> > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
>> > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
>> > minority view.
>>
>> And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
>>
>
>That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers!
> How did they grow up?
If they were born when their parents were 18, they would definitely be
>On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:28:44 PM UTC-4, SkyEyes wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
>> > ==
>> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>> >
>> > Do we?
>> >
>> > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
>> >
>> >
>> > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
>> > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
>> > minority view.
>>
>> And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
>>
>
>That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers!
> How did they grow up?
teenagers by the time their parents died.
Yap Honghor
May 21, 2020, 8:17:51 PM5/21/20
to
Yap Honghor
May 21, 2020, 8:20:51 PM5/21/20
to
Only mad people or broken heads are incapable to see the fake or fraud!
Ivan The Terrible
May 21, 2020, 8:48:28 PM5/21/20
to
Grandma Kessler was always very protective of me.
She could speak good English but could not write it very well.I wanted to help her, so 3 days a week I'd go to her apartment after school and give her lessons in writing English. She learned fast. She was a great cook and always rewarded me with a sumptuous dinner.
kitw...@gmail.com
May 21, 2020, 8:48:48 PM5/21/20
to
I'll explain my objection to you, since you obviously don't understand. Suppose we consider five people, two who died at birth, and three who lived to the age of 80. The mean age of the five is (0+0+80+80+80)/5 = 48 years. The median age of the five people is 80 years. (For an explanation see ant introductory statistics textbook.) As the old saying goes, "Lies, damned lies, and statistics!"
-- Kit (kitw...@gmail.com)
LinuxGal
May 21, 2020, 9:16:55 PM5/21/20
to
On Thu, 21 May 2020, kitw...@gmail.com wrote:
> I'll explain my objection to you, since you obviously
> don't understand. Suppose we consider five people, two
> who died at birth, and three who lived to the age of 80.
> The mean age of the five is (0+0+80+80+80)/5 = 48 years.
> The median age of the five people is 80 years. (For an
> explanation see ant introductory statistics textbook.)
> As the old saying goes, "Lies, damned lies, and
> statistics!"
Bill Gates builds a $100 million dollar home on my
> I'll explain my objection to you, since you obviously
> don't understand. Suppose we consider five people, two
> who died at birth, and three who lived to the age of 80.
> The mean age of the five is (0+0+80+80+80)/5 = 48 years.
> The median age of the five people is 80 years. (For an
> explanation see ant introductory statistics textbook.)
> As the old saying goes, "Lies, damned lies, and
> statistics!"
cul-de-sac with four other homes worth $300,000.
Mean price = $20,240,00
Median price = $300,000
--
Linux Geeks: Smart. Single. Sexy.
Well, two out of three ain't bad!
https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
John Locke
May 21, 2020, 10:10:46 PM5/21/20
to
On Wed, 20 May 2020 20:09:30 -0700 (PDT), Ivan The Terrible
<VTand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The bible is evidence.
..no it isn't. It's religious fantasy. Fictional tales fabricated by
<VTand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The bible is evidence.
anonymous authors. It has the same status for evidence as Grimm's
Fairy Tales.
> It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
who they were.
>Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died?
the "witnesses" were. It's not verifiable.
>How foolish!
>Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our
> history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science
>books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard
>what he wrote?
>Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
>Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote?
>How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
>Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
>How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because
>they are all deceased?
>
religious motives.
>The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness
>testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other
> testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony
> for consideration by the judge or jury.
>
>We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate
>his credibility and this is useful for the bible.
>Was Moses an honest man?
>Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
________________________________________________________
We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing
all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames
them for his own mistakes. - Gene Roddenberry
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them
to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own
desires. - Susan B. Anthony
________________________________________________________
kitw...@gmail.com
May 22, 2020, 2:04:23 AM5/22/20
to
-- Kit (kitw...@netzero.com)
JWS
May 22, 2020, 6:27:21 AM5/22/20
to
On Friday, May 22, 2020 at 1:04:23 AM UTC-5, kitw...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:16:55 PM UTC-4, LinuxGal wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 May 2020, kitw...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > I'll explain my objection to you, since you obviously
> > > don't understand. Suppose we consider five people, two
> > > who died at birth, and three who lived to the age of 80.
> > > The mean age of the five is (0+0+80+80+80)/5 = 48 years.
> > > The median age of the five people is 80 years. (For an
> > > explanation see ant introductory statistics textbook.)
> > > As the old saying goes, "Lies, damned lies, and
> > > statistics!"
> >
> > Bill Gates builds a $100 million dollar home on my
> > cul-de-sac with four other homes worth $300,000.
> >
> > Mean price = $20,240,00
> > Median price = $300,000
> >
> > --
> > Linux Geeks: Smart. Single. Sexy.
> > Well, two out of three ain't bad!
> >
> > https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
>
> Exactly.
Wooooooosh!
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:16:55 PM UTC-4, LinuxGal wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 May 2020, kitw...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > I'll explain my objection to you, since you obviously
> > > don't understand. Suppose we consider five people, two
> > > who died at birth, and three who lived to the age of 80.
> > > The mean age of the five is (0+0+80+80+80)/5 = 48 years.
> > > The median age of the five people is 80 years. (For an
> > > explanation see ant introductory statistics textbook.)
> > > As the old saying goes, "Lies, damned lies, and
> > > statistics!"
> >
> > Bill Gates builds a $100 million dollar home on my
> > cul-de-sac with four other homes worth $300,000.
> >
> > Mean price = $20,240,00
> > Median price = $300,000
> >
> > --
> > Linux Geeks: Smart. Single. Sexy.
> > Well, two out of three ain't bad!
> >
> > https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
>
> Exactly.
Don Martin
May 22, 2020, 9:06:07 AM5/22/20
to
>On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:28:44 PM UTC-4, SkyEyes wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
>> > ==
>> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>> >
>> > Do we?
>> >
>> > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
>> >
>> >
>> > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
>> > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
>> > minority view.
>>
>> And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
>>
>
>That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers! How did they grow up? Please check your facts before posting.
You would do well to check yours--life expectancy around 1900 in the
>> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
>> > ==
>> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>> >
>> > Do we?
>> >
>> > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
>> >
>> >
>> > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
>> > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
>> > minority view.
>>
>> And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
>>
>
>That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers! How did they grow up? Please check your facts before posting.
civilized world was 45. In the uncivilized parts, it was less. "In a
2010 article published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, gerontologist and evolutionary biologist Caleb Finch
describes the average life spans in ancient Greek and Roman times as
short at approximately of 20 to 35 years, though he laments these
numbers are based on “notoriously unrepresentative” graveyard epitaphs
and samples."
(https://www.verywellhealth.com/longevity-throughout-history-2224054)
Now, why should graveyard epitaphs and samples be unrepresentative of
populations as a whole? To start with, the only people who can leave
epitaphs behind are those who can afford to pay for chunks of heavy
stone, often transported some distance, then polished and carved by
craftsmen and placed, often on a tomb constructed by other craftsmen.
In other words, epitaphs are created for that segment of the
population that is well to do. Trust me, neither peasants nor the
urban poor lived as long as those who could afford good food, good
housing, and good medical care (good is something of a moveable feast
regarding the state of the art of medical knowledge, but still you
were better off with than without). Peasants tended to get buried in
or near the soil they ploughed, without much in the way of preserving
their identities for posterity; the urban poor ended up in potter's
fields with the same degree of anonymity. Were the life times of the
lower classes knowable, Mr. Finch's estimate would be significantly
lower.
By sneeringly correcting a regular member of this news group with your
ignorant quibble, you have qualified as Yet Another Troll here. If
you are like the rest of that tribe, you shall wear this distinction
as a badge of honor, an equally ignorant stance.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
kitw...@gmail.com
May 22, 2020, 11:16:48 AM5/22/20
to
On Friday, May 22, 2020 at 9:06:07 AM UTC-4, Don Martin wrote:
> On Thu, 21 May 2020 15:42:27 -0700 (PDT), kitw...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:28:44 PM UTC-4, SkyEyes wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
> >> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> >> > ==
> >> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
> >> >
> >> > Do we?
> >> >
> >> > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
> >> > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
> >> > minority view.
> >>
> >> And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
> >>
> >
> >That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers! How did they grow up? Please check your facts before posting.
>
> You would do well to check yours--life expectancy around 1900 in the
> civilized world was 45.
Ages of Presidents living around the turn of the 20th Century:
> On Thu, 21 May 2020 15:42:27 -0700 (PDT), kitw...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 5:28:44 PM UTC-4, SkyEyes wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 9:52:48 PM UTC-7, Oko tillo wrote:
> >> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> >> > ==
> >> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
> >> >
> >> > Do we?
> >> >
> >> > For example, a quick glance at the Wikipedia pages on the Gospels
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Most scholars believe the gospel [of Matthew] was composed between AD 80 and 90,
> >> > with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a
> >> > minority view.
> >>
> >> And when it was written the average life expectancy was 35-37 years. No way the author of Matthew, or any of the other gospels, could have been a "witness."
> >>
> >
> >That is the most outrageous statement I have seen in quite some time! Are you claiming that the mean life expectancy was only 35-37? Or are you claiming that the median life expectancy was only 35-37 years? And what ever became of the children of those who lived only some 35-37? They weren't even teenagers! How did they grow up? Please check your facts before posting.
>
> You would do well to check yours--life expectancy around 1900 in the
> civilized world was 45.
Grover Cleveland: 71 years
William McKinley: 58 years (he was assassinated)
Teddy Roosevelt: 63 years
William Taft: 72 years
Let us consider the ages of some of the Roman emperors:
Julius Caesar (b. 100 BC - d. 44 BC) age: 56 years
Julius was assassinated as evidence by his last words to Brutus, "Et tu, Brute."
Augustus (b. 63 BC - d. 14 AD) age: 76 years
Tiberius (b. 42 BC - d. 37 AD) age: 76 years
Claudius (b. 10 BC - d. 54 AD) age: 63 years
Claudius was poisoned by his niece, Agripinilla.
QED, People lived longer than 35-40 as claimed by the atheists.
SCORE: Kit 1, ATHEISTS 0.
Kit (W, 1-0)
SkyEyes (L, 0-1)
Don Martin (L, 0-1)
>
> By sneeringly correcting a regular member of this news group with your
> ignorant quibble, you have qualified as Yet Another Troll here. If
> you are like the rest of that tribe, you shall wear this distinction
> as a badge of honor, an equally ignorant stance.
>
"Let God be found true, though every man found a liar..." -- Romans 3:4 NWT
> By sneeringly correcting a regular member of this news group with your
> ignorant quibble, you have qualified as Yet Another Troll here. If
> you are like the rest of that tribe, you shall wear this distinction
> as a badge of honor, an equally ignorant stance.
>
A bit of advice, Don Martin, be humble enough to admit your mistakes.
-- Kit (kitw...@gmail.com)
> --
> aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
> BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
> Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
> Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Don Martin
May 22, 2020, 11:45:47 AM5/22/20
to
>SCORE: Kit 1 (obtained by skewed sample containing only Presidents and Emperors), ATHEISTS 0.
>
>Kit (W, 1-0)
>SkyEyes (L, 0-1)
>Don Martin (L, 0-1)
>>
>> By sneeringly correcting a regular member of this news group with your
>> ignorant quibble, you have qualified as Yet Another Troll here. If
>> you are like the rest of that tribe, you shall wear this distinction
>> as a badge of honor, an equally ignorant stance.
>>
>Kit (W, 1-0)
>SkyEyes (L, 0-1)
>Don Martin (L, 0-1)
>>
>> By sneeringly correcting a regular member of this news group with your
>> ignorant quibble, you have qualified as Yet Another Troll here. If
>> you are like the rest of that tribe, you shall wear this distinction
>> as a badge of honor, an equally ignorant stance.
>>
>A bit of advice, Don Martin, be humble enough to admit your mistakes.
As soon as you become honest enough to avoid snipping presented
evidence. Your reply above leaves out a large chunk, with
attribution, following "life expectancy around 1900 in the civilized
world was 45":
=======
In the uncivilized parts, it was less. "In a 2010 article published
in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, gerontologist
and evolutionary biologist Caleb Finch describes the average life
spans in ancient Greek and Roman times as short at approximately of 20
to 35 years, though he laments these numbers are based on “notoriously
unrepresentative” graveyard epitaphs and samples."
(https://www.verywellhealth.com/longevity-throughout-history-2224054)
Now, why should graveyard epitaphs and samples be unrepresentative of
populations as a whole? To start with, the only people who can leave
epitaphs behind are those who can afford to pay for chunks of heavy
stone, often transported some distance, then polished and carved by
craftsmen and placed, often on a tomb constructed by other craftsmen.
In other words, epitaphs are created for that segment of the
population that is well to do. Trust me, neither peasants nor the
urban poor lived as long as those who could afford good food, good
housing, and good medical care (good is something of a moveable feast
regarding the state of the art of medical knowledge, but still you
were better off with than without). Peasants tended to get buried in
or near the soil they ploughed, without much in the way of preserving
their identities for posterity; the urban poor ended up in potter's
fields with the same degree of anonymity. Were the life times of the
lower classes knowable, Mr. Finch's estimate would be significantly
lower.
=======
in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, gerontologist
and evolutionary biologist Caleb Finch describes the average life
spans in ancient Greek and Roman times as short at approximately of 20
to 35 years, though he laments these numbers are based on “notoriously
unrepresentative” graveyard epitaphs and samples."
(https://www.verywellhealth.com/longevity-throughout-history-2224054)
Now, why should graveyard epitaphs and samples be unrepresentative of
populations as a whole? To start with, the only people who can leave
epitaphs behind are those who can afford to pay for chunks of heavy
stone, often transported some distance, then polished and carved by
craftsmen and placed, often on a tomb constructed by other craftsmen.
In other words, epitaphs are created for that segment of the
population that is well to do. Trust me, neither peasants nor the
urban poor lived as long as those who could afford good food, good
housing, and good medical care (good is something of a moveable feast
regarding the state of the art of medical knowledge, but still you
were better off with than without). Peasants tended to get buried in
or near the soil they ploughed, without much in the way of preserving
their identities for posterity; the urban poor ended up in potter's
fields with the same degree of anonymity. Were the life times of the
lower classes knowable, Mr. Finch's estimate would be significantly
lower.
>-- Kit (kitw...@gmail.com)
>I have proof and evidence. See above.
dishonest as the other shithead theist trolls we get in here. Do not
be so arrogant as to imagine you invented snipping the meat of the
post to which you reply. You are merely following in the same gutter
other theists have trodden smooth.
Like Doook, the Androol brothers, Triple Arsehole, et al., your
behavior degrades the reputation of christianity (not that it was ever
all that good to begin with).
Ivan The Terrible
May 22, 2020, 12:19:35 PM5/22/20
to
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 1:32:35 AM UTC-7, Kevrob wrote:
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 4:07:15 AM UTC-4, Cloud Hobbit wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > > Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > > Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
> > >
> > > Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> > > How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
> > >
> > > The Rules of evidence in all 50 states....
>
> Are irrelevant outside a court of law.
NYET. The standards are the same. Cut the crap, Lord Bullshit. You don't care about evidence or rules. All you want is to badmouth and discredit religion and you will say anything to achieve that. I have no faith in your credibility or your sincerity or your integrity.
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 4:07:15 AM UTC-4, Cloud Hobbit wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > > Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > > Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
> > >
> > > Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> > > How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
> > >
> > > The Rules of evidence in all 50 states....
>
> Are irrelevant outside a court of law.
>
Siri Cruise
May 22, 2020, 12:35:54 PM5/22/20
to
In article <fjrfcfh3bb1fbju8f...@4ax.com>,
After that it depended on having enough money and sense to avoid
mayhem: any cut in the skin was a potential death sentence. Death
by natural causes waits until mid 60s; between that and infant
disease it was mostly death by misfortune. Amputations were done
to stop infections in injured extremities.
Vaccines and antibiotics have saved so many lives.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The first law of discordiamism: The more energy This post / \
to make order is nore energy made into entropy. insults Islam. Mohammed
Don Martin <drdon...@comcast.net> wrote:
> As soon as you become honest enough to avoid snipping presented
> evidence. Your reply above leaves out a large chunk, with
> attribution, following "life expectancy around 1900 in the civilized
> world was 45":
That's an average. Before vaccines most people died before 5.
> As soon as you become honest enough to avoid snipping presented
> evidence. Your reply above leaves out a large chunk, with
> attribution, following "life expectancy around 1900 in the civilized
> world was 45":
After that it depended on having enough money and sense to avoid
mayhem: any cut in the skin was a potential death sentence. Death
by natural causes waits until mid 60s; between that and infant
disease it was mostly death by misfortune. Amputations were done
to stop infections in injured extremities.
Vaccines and antibiotics have saved so many lives.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The first law of discordiamism: The more energy This post / \
to make order is nore energy made into entropy. insults Islam. Mohammed
ryno...@gmail.com
Jun 10, 2020, 11:46:41 AM6/10/20
to
On Wednesday, May 20, 2020 at 8:09:32 PM UTC-7, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
>
> Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
>
> The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
>
> Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
>
> The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
>
> We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
>
I have a question. Jesus is a faggot cause he wanted me to fuck him in the ass and I did. I guess that was a statement but here's the question Igor, Does that make me a faggot?
duckg...@cox.net
Jun 10, 2020, 2:59:19 PM6/10/20
to
the dukester, American-American
Yap Honghor
Jun 10, 2020, 10:11:50 PM6/10/20
to
kry...@gmail.com
Jun 10, 2020, 10:46:11 PM6/10/20
to
On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 6:09:32 AM UTC+3, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
>
> Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
>
> The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
>
> We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
The Bible is a hearsay evidence at best,
> The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
>
> Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
>
> The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
>
> We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
and I will go further and say it is
a rumor passed on over a long chain
of men. As a witness testimony it has a lot
Of contradictions, making it unreliable evidence, with many unsupported claims.
The Bible is evidence of the beliefs of the people who wrote it and edited it. No more then that...
Your declaration of faith in the christian
claims and your lack of knowledge and rejection of the Jewish tradition
re an evidence that you are a Christian. Maybe with a Jewish origin.
You can believe in whatever you wish
No one can stop you on this.
The question which boggles me is
why do you pose as a Jew.
I guess only you know the answer for that for real.
May you find peace and happiness,
KRYOEL
%
Jun 10, 2020, 10:51:54 PM6/10/20
to
what you think is nothing now was a miracle to then
Melzzzzz
Jun 11, 2020, 12:25:58 AM6/11/20
to
On 2020-05-21, Ivan The Terrible <VTand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
Sanity check says, that there is no evidence in The Bible. There are
> The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
plenty of religious books out there, and we all know that they are full
of myths and legends. Bible is just most popular to criticize...
--
current job title: senior software engineer
skills: c++,c,rust,go,nim,haskell...
press any key to continue or any other to quit...
U ničemu ja ne uživam kao u svom statusu INVALIDA -- Zli Zec
Svi smo svedoci - oko 3 godine intenzivne propagande je dovoljno da jedan narod poludi -- Zli Zec
Na divljem zapadu i nije bilo tako puno nasilja, upravo zato jer su svi
bili naoruzani. -- Mladen Gogala
Andrew W
Jun 11, 2020, 12:37:16 AM6/11/20
to
"Ivan The Terrible" wrote in message
news:78f4bc29-2828-4304...@googlegroups.com...
>The bible is evidence.
>
Evidence of what exactly?
>
>It is witness testimony
>
No, because the Bible has been edited for various reasons by various
parties, some with agendas.
>
>and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>
No you don't. Many authors used pen names and added their own versions of
events and ideas.
>
>Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died?
>
Yes, if thousands of years has passed and the originals are gone. The
writings must be seriously questioned.
>
>How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most
>libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most
>of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we
>therefore discard what he wrote?
>Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
>Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about
>Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
>
>Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
>How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they
>are all deceased?
>
>The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness
>testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other
>testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original
>testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
>
>We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate
>his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man?
>Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
>
No, you would have to have a time machine and go back and talk to them to
determine that.
--
http://members.optusnet.com.au/ajwerner/
The golden rule with food - if it smells strange from the fridge then throw
it in the bin. With Christianity, if it sounds strange and it's from the
Bible then you must embrace it as the word of God.
A question to all Christians: Was the Bible inspired or dictated? Because if
it was just inspired then it can't be called God's word.
http://www.rumormillnews.com -- The best alternative news site.
news:78f4bc29-2828-4304...@googlegroups.com...
>The bible is evidence.
>
Evidence of what exactly?
>
>It is witness testimony
>
No, because the Bible has been edited for various reasons by various
parties, some with agendas.
>
>and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>
events and ideas.
>
>Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died?
>
writings must be seriously questioned.
>
>How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most
>libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most
>of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we
>therefore discard what he wrote?
>Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
>Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about
>Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
>
>Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
>How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they
>are all deceased?
>
>The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness
>testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other
>testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original
>testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
>
>We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate
>his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man?
>Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
>
determine that.
--
http://members.optusnet.com.au/ajwerner/
The golden rule with food - if it smells strange from the fridge then throw
it in the bin. With Christianity, if it sounds strange and it's from the
Bible then you must embrace it as the word of God.
A question to all Christians: Was the Bible inspired or dictated? Because if
it was just inspired then it can't be called God's word.
http://www.rumormillnews.com -- The best alternative news site.
Ivan The Terrible
Jun 11, 2020, 12:59:11 AM6/11/20
to
On Wednesday, June 10, 2020 at 9:25:58 PM UTC-7, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On 2020-05-21, Ivan The Terrible <VTand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>
> Sanity check says, that there is no evidence in The Bible. There are
> plenty of religious books out there, and we all know
that they are full
> of myths and legends. Bible is just most popular to criticize...
>
> --
It's glaringly obvious that you don't know shit.
> On 2020-05-21, Ivan The Terrible <VTand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it.
>
> Sanity check says, that there is no evidence in The Bible. There are
> plenty of religious books out there, and we all know
that they are full
> of myths and legends. Bible is just most popular to criticize...
>
> --
duckg...@cox.net
Jun 11, 2020, 1:20:52 PM6/11/20
to
On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 19:11:47 -0700 (PDT), Yap Honghor <hhya...@gmail.com>
wrote:
But he came back in resurrection. Satan won't let you do that.
the dukester, American-American
wrote:
the dukester, American-American
duckg...@cox.net
Jun 27, 2020, 1:19:56 PM6/27/20
to
the dukester, American-American
Ivan The Terrible
Jun 27, 2020, 2:26:12 PM6/27/20
to
On Wednesday, June 10, 2020 at 7:46:11 PM UTC-7, kry...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 6:09:32 AM UTC+3, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
> >
> > Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> > How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
> >
> > The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
> >
> > We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
>
> The Bible is a hearsay evidence at best,
> and I will go further and say it is
> a rumor passed on over a long chain
> of men. As a witness testimony it has a lot
> Of contradictions, making it unreliable evidence, with many unsupported claims.
>
> The Bible is evidence of the beliefs of the people who wrote it and edited it. No more then that...
>
YOU ARE IGNORANT
> On Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 6:09:32 AM UTC+3, Ivan The Terrible wrote:
> > The bible is evidence. It is witness testimony and in most cases, we know who wrote it. Shall we ignore evidence because the witness has died? How foolish! Using that standard, we would discard completely most libraries. All our history books would be rendered useless, as would most of our science books and math books. Isaac Newton is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Galileo is dead. Shall we therefore discard what he wrote?
> > Clarence Darrow is past on. Shall we discard what he wrote? How about Supreme Ct Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes?
> >
> > Shall we discard the Gettysburg Address because Abe Lincoln is dead?
> > How about the Founding Fathers? Is our Constitution useless because they are all deceased?
> >
> > The Rules of evidence in all 50 states allow the introduction of witness testimony. Of course, it is always wise to verify evidence with other testimony or cross examination, but that still leaves the original testimony for consideration by the judge or jury.
> >
> > We can verify evidence by examining the lives of the speaker to evaluate his credibility and this is useful for the bible. Was Moses an honest man? Were the apostles honest men? How about Matthew, John and Paul?
>
> The Bible is a hearsay evidence at best,
> and I will go further and say it is
> a rumor passed on over a long chain
> of men. As a witness testimony it has a lot
> Of contradictions, making it unreliable evidence, with many unsupported claims.
>
> The Bible is evidence of the beliefs of the people who wrote it and edited it. No more then that...
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_method
Yap Honghor
Jun 27, 2020, 9:28:49 PM6/27/20
to
You see bony skeleton up in the sky??????????
Yap Honghor
Jun 27, 2020, 9:30:22 PM6/27/20
to
duckg...@cox.net
Jun 28, 2020, 1:22:28 PM6/28/20
to
On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 18:28:47 -0700 (PDT), Yap Honghor <hhya...@gmail.com>
Well, I know you were stupid but I didn't think you were that bad.
the dukester, American-American
the dukester, American-American
Yap Honghor
Jun 28, 2020, 10:18:01 PM6/28/20
to
Cloud Hobbit
Jun 28, 2020, 10:29:43 PM6/28/20
to
duke wrote:
>Not only a fag, but one headed for the fires of hell.
the dukester
Thank you for your confession.
>Not only a fag, but one headed for the fires of hell.
the dukester
duckg...@cox.net
Jun 29, 2020, 12:27:37 PM6/29/20
to
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:17:58 -0700 (PDT), Yap Honghor <hhya...@gmail.com>
No, you are ultra stupid.
the dukester, American-American
the dukester, American-American
duckg...@cox.net
Jun 29, 2020, 12:29:36 PM6/29/20
to
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:29:41 -0700 (PDT), Cloud Hobbit
<youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>
>>Not only a fag, but one headed for the fires of hell.
You are what you are. As you said, Jesus is a faggot cause he wanted me to
<youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>
>>Not only a fag, but one headed for the fires of hell.
fuck him in the ass and I did
the dukester, American-American
Yap Honghor
Jun 29, 2020, 9:58:49 PM6/29/20
to
You are doomed because no research has been conducted to cure you!!!!
Ivan The Terrible
Jun 29, 2020, 10:18:11 PM6/29/20
to
Cloud Hobbit
Jun 29, 2020, 10:27:18 PM6/29/20
to
Duke wrote:
>duke wrote:
>
>>Not only a fag, but one headed for the fires of hell.
>You are what you are. As >you said, Jesus is a faggot >cause he wanted me to
>fuck him in the ass and I >did
>the dukester
I never said that.
>duke wrote:
>
>>Not only a fag, but one headed for the fires of hell.
>You are what you are. As >you said, Jesus is a faggot >cause he wanted me to
>fuck him in the ass and I >did
>the dukester
I think that was Tandy.
Odd that you didn't quote me.
Lying?
Yap Honghor
Jun 30, 2020, 5:06:18 AM6/30/20
to
duckg...@cox.net
Jun 30, 2020, 6:48:45 PM6/30/20
to
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 02:06:15 -0700 (PDT), Yap Honghor <hhya...@gmail.com>
Good grief but yap is an ignorant.
the dukester, American-American
the dukester, American-American
duckg...@cox.net
Jun 30, 2020, 6:49:10 PM6/30/20
to
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 18:58:47 -0700 (PDT), Yap Honghor <hhya...@gmail.com>
It must be awful to know you're stuck where you are.
>You are doomed because no research has been conducted to cure you!!!!
the dukester, American-American
>You are doomed because no research has been conducted to cure you!!!!
Yap Honghor
Jun 30, 2020, 8:41:48 PM6/30/20
to
Yap Honghor
Jun 30, 2020, 8:43:33 PM6/30/20
to
Gronk
Jul 9, 2020, 12:57:13 AM7/9/20
to
Yes.
0 new messages