The Bible is a Human Artifice!!!

[Leumas]

The language problem you offer does not arise since the suggested author might have written in any language.

So YHWH ... an omnipotent deity and your suggested author... chose to write a work of fiction in the language of the people whom in that fictive work he loathed and wanted to genocide and he wrote himself into that work of fiction as having tried and failed to do so because they had iron chariots???



And to boot... he wrote down his fictive fabrications in the flawed and incomplete script of yet another people he depicted himself in the fairy tales as hating as the enemies of his WIFE and said script would not yet be invented for another 600 years from the time the tall tales he devised are said to be taking place.

It's not relevant that I don't believe Gods exist;

The fact that you do not see how irrational that statement is... is... well...


Dont' take my word for it ... here is one of the "us" saying it....

Obviously that's irrational.....

You're not my schoolteacher so kindly stop trying to set me homework. Your failure clearly to articulate your argument is not my problem.

Had you read the OP and the numerous other posts ... you would have seen the articulation... it is right there in the OP and other posts you do not want to read.

....For the umpteenth time, what people reading this thread believe is not the subject of the thread.

But you and others of the "us" made a repeated relentless red herring out of it by stating it over and over again.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

No. You keep challenging us on what we believe. That does not matter, because it does not change your argument.

Tony Hawks wrote a book called Round Ireland with a Fridge. It's a funny story about the adventures and misadventures of a man called Tony Hawks who accepted a drunken bet. If you could prove that some of the tales it contains were at least partially false and embellished for comic effect, would that prove that Tony Hawks could not be the author?

 

[sackett]

■Leumus, you're telling people to read and re-read your posts, but it doesn’t seem to be working.

There's a reason for that. Suppose you told them, "Here, put this bucket over your head. Now take these two sticks -- I'll put them in your hands, careful, they're heavy -- and begin hammering on that bucket, and hard. Harder. Keep it up. I'll tell you when to stop." How effective would that be? How convincing? How impressive?

How long will you take to answer?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

So YHWH ... an omnipotent deity and your suggested author... chose to write a work of fiction in the language of the people whom in that fictive work he loathed and wanted to genocide and he wrote himself into that work of fiction as having tried and failed to do so because they had iron chariots???

Not *my* suggested author. I didn't come up with the claim that a God I don't believe in authored the bible.

The fact that you do not see how irrational that statement is... is... well...

Perhaps instead of making such an elaborate show of astonishment you could explain what precisely you find "irrational" about it. I do not believe in any Gods. I do not believe any God authored the bible. But I do not believe you have shown proof that a God did not author the bible. If you can explain why you think that is illogical, kindly do so, instead of wasting time with more eye-rolling histrionics.

 

[Leumas]

■Leumus, you're telling people to read and re-read your posts, but it doesn’t seem to working.

There's a reason for that. Suppose you told them, "Here, put this bucket over your head. Now take these two sticks -- I'll put them in your hands, careful, they're heavy -- and begin hammering on that bucket, and hard. Harder. Keep it up. I'll tell you when to stop." How effective would that be? How convincing? How impressive?

How long will you take to answer?

Yes... it seems that the skill of reading properly and correctly comprehending what one reads is lost along with the ability to reason rationally... you can lead a horse to the watering hole but you cannot force it to actually drink... but you can keep pointing at the water which will quench its thirst if it only knew better.

 

[Leumas]

Not *my* suggested author. I didn't come up with the claim that a God I don't believe in authored the bible.

Perhaps instead of making such an elaborate show of astonishment you could explain what precisely you find "irrational" about it. I do not believe in any Gods. I do not believe any God authored the bible. But I do not believe you have shown proof that a God did not author the bible. If you can explain why you think that is illogical, kindly do so, instead of wasting time with more eye-rolling histrionics.

Read the very same post you responded to ... the answers to all your points are right there irrefragably demonstrating the irrationality of your current post... read the post you responded to.


Ah... and you might also want to read your own post...

That would appear to be a case for the bible being a work of fiction, as I think almost everyone here would agree, but can you explain which part shows that the fiction could not have been authored by an omnipotent deity?

 

[Steve]

Read the very same post you responded to ... the answers to all your points are right there irrefragably demonstrating the irrationality of your current post... read the post you responded to.

Actually the post Jack by the hedge responded to does no such thing. It is really rather sad that you think it does.

There is no question that there are many irrational posts in this thread. They all come from the same source.

 

[Leumas]

Actually the post Jack by the hedge responded to does no such thing. <snip claptrap>

So do you think that YHWH ... an omnipotent deity and his suggested author... chose to write a work of fiction in the language of the people whom in that fictive work he loathed and wanted to genocide and he wrote himself into that work of fiction as having tried and failed to do so because they had iron chariots???

And to boot... he wrote down his fictive fabrications in the flawed and incomplete script of yet another people he depicted himself in the fairy tales as hating as the enemies of his WIFE and said script would not yet be invented for another 600 years from the time the tall tales he devised are said to be taking place.

That would appear to be a case for the bible being a work of fiction, as I think almost everyone here would agree, but can you explain which part shows that the fiction could not have been authored by an omnipotent deity?

Or do you believe like the above that YHWH was a pseudonym for Loki??

Do you really not see how irrational it is to say that the bible is a work of fiction but it is written by an omnipotent deity???



Here is one rational answer to the above question... do you disagree???

Obviously that's irrational. Believing in a deities omnipotent or not is also irrational. Why the angst here? It's a bit of a Blinding Flash of the Obvious (BFO).

.

 

[Craig4]

So do you think that YHWH ... an omnipotent deity and his suggested author... chose to write a work of fiction in the language of the people whom in that fictive work he loathed and wanted to genocide and he wrote himself into that work of fiction as having tried and failed to do so because they had iron chariots???

And to boot... he wrote down his fictive fabrications in the flawed and incomplete script of yet another people he depicted himself in the fairy tales as hating as the enemies of his WIFE and said script would not yet be invented for another 600 years from the time the tall tales he devised are said to be taking place.





Or do you believe like the above that YHWH was a pseudonym for Loki??

Do you really not see how irrational it is to say that the bible is a work of fiction but it is written by an omnipotent deity???



Here is one rational answer to the above question... do you disagree???



.

AHHHH AAHHHHHHHHHHHH....Those are the screams of your logic being tortured.

It's perfectly clear to me that Jack does not think the bible or anything else was written by a supernatural being. I'm not really sure why this is a tough one for you. There's a difference between you proving it wasn't (an odd claim) and believing it was.

 

[Steve]

So do you think...

(ranting and screaming snipped)

.

Gods, by any name, do not exist,

 

[Leumas]

Gods, by any name, do not exist,

GREAT!!!.... so you agree that it is irrational to say that a work of fiction that you agree is a work of fiction needs to be proven as not having been written by an omnipotent deity.... right??? Or any other work of anything for that matter... right??

And you agree that not believing in a god has a profound bearing on the question of whether or not a work of fiction was written by any gods... right???

And so it is irrational to claim that belief or not in a god has no bearing on whether a god wrote a work of fiction or not... right???

 

[Leumas]

<snip claptrap>

It's perfectly clear to me that Jack does not think the bible or anything else was written by a supernatural being. I'm not really sure why this is a tough one for you. There's a difference between you proving it wasn't (an odd claim) and believing it was.

It is clear to me that you have yet again not read HIS post.... what it says rives your above claims to dust...

Here read it ...

That would appear to be a case for the bible being a work of fiction, as I think almost everyone here would agree, but can you explain which part shows that the fiction could not have been authored by an omnipotent deity?

You said that believing in gods is irrational....

GREAT!!!.... so do you agree that it is irrational to say that a work of fiction that you agree is a work of fiction needs to be proven as not having been written by an omnipotent deity.... or not??? Or any other work of anything for that matter... no??

And you agree that not believing in a god has a profound bearing on the question of whether or not a work of fiction was written by any gods... right???

And so it is irrational to claim that belief or not in a god has no bearing on whether a god wrote a work of fiction or not... right???

There's a difference between you proving it wasn't (an odd claim) and believing it was.

I think you need to reflect on that statement a little longer... because it is

Obviously that's irrational. Believing in a deities omnipotent or not is also irrational. ...

 

[Steve]

GREAT!!!.... so you agree

(ranting snipped)

Please do not attempt to put words in my mouth. If I agree, or if I disagree, with anything you post I will tell you so. If I think it matters.

 

[Leumas]

That would appear to be a case for the bible being a work of fiction, as I think almost everyone here would agree, but can you explain which part shows that the fiction could not have been authored by an omnipotent deity?

Gods, by any name, do not exist,

Please do not attempt to put words in my mouth. If I agree, or if I disagree, with anything you post I will tell you so. If I think it matters.

...There's a difference between you proving it wasn't (an odd claim) and believing it was.

Let me see if maybe you can reason this better if gods were not involved....

Defense Lawyer: Your honor... there is no butler... there never was a butler

Prosecution: Your honor... we all agree that there is no butler... but your honor... my learned colleague has not proven that the butler has not done it... your honor there is a difference in knowing that there is no butler and saying that the butler did not do it... the defense still needs to prove that the butler did not do it... but indeed... we all agree that there was no butler.... but that is not the same as proving that the butler did not do the crime.

Jury and Judge:

 

[Steve]

Let me see if maybe you can reason this better if gods were not involved....

Defense Lawyer: Your honor... there is no butler... there never was a butler

Prosecution: Your honor... we all agree that there is no butler... but your honor... my learned colleague has not proven that the butler has not done it... your honor there is a difference in knowing that there is no butler and saying that the butler did not do it... the defense still needs to prove that the butler did not do it... but indeed... we all agree that there was no butler.... but that is not the same as proving that the butler did not do the crime.

Jury and Judge:

Gods do not exist.

 

[Leumas]

GREAT!!!.... so you agree
(ranting snipped)

Please do not attempt to put words in my mouth. If I agree, or if I disagree, with anything you post I will tell you so. If I think it matters.

Yup... the above is a demonstration of what the pervasive problem here is...

But no... the full post you snipped to make it look like it was putting words in your mouth is the below.... notice the ??????????? do you know what a question mark is??? It is not putting words in your mouth.... it is asking you a question.

GREAT!!!.... so you agree that it is irrational to say that a work of fiction that you agree is a work of fiction needs to be proven as not having been written by an omnipotent deity.... right??? Or any other work of anything for that matter... right?? And you agree that not believing in a god has a profound bearing on the question of whether or not a work of fiction was written by any gods... right???
And so it is irrational to claim that belief or not in a god has no bearing on whether a god wrote a work of fiction or not... right???

 

[Leumas]

Gods do not exist.

Wonderful.... I agree.... so now ... can you answer these questions in the light of the above statement of yours....

So you agree that it is irrational to say that a work of fiction that you agree is a work of fiction needs to be proven as not having been written by an omnipotent deity.... right??? Or any other work of anything for that matter... right??

And you agree that not believing in a god has a profound bearing on the question of whether or not a work of fiction was written by any gods... right???

And so it is irrational to claim that belief or not in a god has no bearing on whether a god wrote a work of fiction or not... right???


AND
And it is irrational to demand that one prove the butler did not do it... if there is no butler... right???
And it is irrational to say that regardless or not if there is a butler one still has to prove that he did not do it... right???

 

[jrhowell]

So you agree that it is irrational to say that a work of fiction that you agree is a work of fiction needs to be proven as not having been written by an omnipotent deity.... right???

You say that it is irrational to try to prove that the Bible could not have been written by a god. Then what is the point of this thread?

Another proof of the bible being an artifice of human making is the fact that…

 

[sackett]

Weak tea

Yes... it seems that the skill of reading properly and correctly comprehending what one reads is lost along with the ability to reason rationally... you can lead a horse to the watering hole but you cannot force it to actually drink... but you can keep pointing at the water which will quench its thirst if it only knew better.

Come now, Leumas. You know very well that my analogy was only meant to describe the subjective experience of reading your posts -- attempting to read them -- skimming them -- glancing at the screen as if at a a junk-filled alley -- and finally rejecting all that clangorous boredom.

Boredom. Tedium. Vacuity. Cranky nothingness. Waste. Narcissistic emptiness. If you could step outside your obsession, that is, experience a flash of sanity, you'd understand that 1) the stuff you believe isn't knowledge, and 2) the things you do aren't work.

Here's a little more: I think that you do have moments when your mind clears and you find relief. Try to live in those moments. Try to remember what they feel like. If some healthy thought comes to you, perhaps you can jot it down or speak it aloud so as to record it.

Or just go back to your earlier posts and try to read them yourself.

 

[Leumas]

<snip ad hominem and other fallacies>.

Do you think it is rational to demand that the defense lawyer prove that the butler did not do it???

Or do you think there is a butler??

And is it irrational or not to say that regardless of if there is a butler one still has to prove that he did not do it???

Let me see if maybe you can reason this better if gods were not involved....

Defense Lawyer: Your honor... there is no butler... there never was a butler

Prosecution: Your honor... we all agree that there is no butler... but your honor... my learned colleague has not proven that the butler has not done it... your honor there is a difference in knowing that there is no butler and saying that the butler did not do it... the defense still needs to prove that the butler did not do it... but indeed... we all agree that there was no butler.... but that is not the same as proving that the butler did not do the crime.

Jury and Judge:

Do you agree that it is irrational to say that a work of fiction that you agree is a work of fiction needs to be proven as not having been written by an omnipotent deity that you agree does not exist and that it is irrational to think there is one??

And do you agree that not believing in a god has a profound bearing on the question of whether or not a work of fiction was written by any gods... right???

And so... do you think it is irrational to claim that belief or not in a god has no bearing on whether a god wrote a work of fiction or not... right???

Do you think that YHWH ... is an omnipotent deity??? ... who chose to write a work of fiction in the language of the people whom in that fictive work he loathed and wanted to genocide and he wrote himself into that work of fiction as having tried and failed to do so because they had iron chariots???

And to boot... he wrote down his fictive fabrications in the flawed and incomplete script of yet another people he depicted himself in the fairy tales as hating as the enemies of his WIFE and said script would not yet be invented for another 600 years from the time the tall tales he devised are said to be taking place.

Or do you believe like the below that YHWH was a pseudonym for Loki??

That would appear to be a case for the bible being a work of fiction, as I think almost everyone here would agree, but can you explain which part shows that the fiction could not have been authored by an omnipotent deity?