Is any purported work of sacred scripture the word of God?

[uwot]

Prove me wrong.

This won't get you very far. One of my twin daughters was teasing the other about her belief in Father Christmas; I told them that he is a spirit that enters all the daddies in the world. Prove me wrong.

[Greylorn Ell]

... what happens if one passes the test?

The Ragnarok.

Had to look up "Ragnarok." This is consistent with my favorite theories, except for firing up planet earth in the aftermath and seeding it with two human beings. That's been tried already (in Jewish religious lore anyway) and we all know how well that worked out (even in the lore).

[Greylorn Ell]

Prove me wrong.

This won't get you very far. One of my twin daughters was teasing the other about her belief in Father Christmas; I told them that he is a spirit that enters all the daddies in the world. Prove me wrong.

uwot,
The existence of Christmas proves you right.

As you enjoy your ongoing mutual learning process with them, try on the theory that they colluded beforehand to select you as their father. It'll bring a different perspective to your time with them.

[Greylorn Ell]

Actually, no. If you pick up a calculus or physics textbook, or peruse a math or physics paper, you'll find that it is not just lines of mathematics. There is always some explanatory text involved. Even the people who read these things can use some assistance following the author's line of thought, and these are always expressed in some language, often with lots of jargon developed within the book or paper, or, for advanced material, jargon that was taught in the educational process.

Perhaps you noticed that Newton's "Principia Mathematica" was a more difficult read than a modern calculus book because 17th century British English does not translate directly into American English? Leibnitz' version of calculus was essentially the same as Newton's, but was written in German and used different symbolisms, and so was not immediately recognized as being the same thing. I tried reading Newton's book after graduating with a physics degree, and had considerable difficulty making sense of it. Had I been transported back to Newton's time, I'd have had a difficult time understanding him.

You are correct in a sense that there are, or have been, different mathematical dialects, but this is a matter of symbolism. The use of symbols such as + - / and a raised "x" or dot for multiply are fairly standard. Often, the multiplication symbol is implied, as in E=mcc. Other symbols are used for different mathematical operations, such as the Greek lower-case delta in differential calculus, and the integral symbol. Notice that I cannot even display these symbols in the language allowed here, not even c-squared.

But in mathematics, when all is written and translated, the core mathematical principles are what they are. Were you or I to try to compare Newton's expression of calculus to Leibnitz, we would have trouble perceiving that they are the same. Mathematicians who knew both languages had no difficulty recognizing that the math is the same.

∫∂

You can use this and cut and paste the html:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ma ... al_symbols

Usually if its an equation as well you can simply post an image link:





On some boards you can use tags like [sup]2[/sup] to raise the letter so you can show squared but not on this one. Of course it'd be great if every forum had installed LaTeX but sadly they aint.

Windows lets you alter the font or cut and paste html versions of hundreds of fonts too.

Simply type charmap into the search box and it'll let you mess about with various fonts including some more science friendly ones:
e=mc²
x²
100°=½°½ f(x)=y³
∑=∫x dx lim→±∞
and so on

Thanks for this information! 95% of it is new for me. I've used [sup] etc. on some of the more technical forums, noted also that it does not work here. And while I've used LaTeX for technical material and HTML for a book and website, I'd no idea that any forums accepted these formats. Figured that they were too arcane for most users, so never tried them.

Very helpful!

[uwot]

As you enjoy your ongoing mutual learning process with them, try on the theory that they colluded beforehand to select you as their father. It'll bring a different perspective to your time with them.

It will do nothing to enhance our relationship. It would pain me to believe that two such beautiful souls could choose so ineptly.

[attofishpi]

There is no such test that can somehow morph words written by remarkably ignorant men into insights or words from God. However it is easy to invalidate "sacred" scriptures. If they contain logical contradictions, they are invalid. If they describe events that cannot happen and declare them to be miracles (e.g. turning water into wine), they are simply man-invented nonsense.
...and conning the gullible....

Only a thoroughbred atheist would suggest a man purported to be the Christ turning water to wine is a logical contradiction. If..and it is, God is all dimensions then you would understand that miracles do not happen, there is nothing contradictory to logic with such power of simply turning water to wine.

Or am i just gullible?

[Blaggard]

There is no such test that can somehow morph words written by remarkably ignorant men into insights or words from God. However it is easy to invalidate "sacred" scriptures. If they contain logical contradictions, they are invalid. If they describe events that cannot happen and declare them to be miracles (e.g. turning water into wine), they are simply man-invented nonsense.
...and conning the gullible....

Only a thoroughbred atheist would suggest a man purported to be the Christ turning water to wine is a logical contradiction. If..and it is, God is all dimensions then you would understand that miracles do not happen, there is nothing contradictory to logic with such power of simply turning water to wine.

Or am i just gullible?

Depends do you believe a man was born in Israel about 2000 give or take years ago and could do magic?

What do you base this belief on? Ie evidence, history etc.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l5p6S7aXGY

Just for context:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VS5-uYLiKmw

[Soren]

Soren wrote:
...Prove me wrong.

This won't get you very far. One of my twin daughters was teasing the other about her belief in Father Christmas; I told them that he is a spirit that enters all the daddies in the world. Prove me wrong.

Easily.

False analogy. Weak logic. Reductio ad Absurdum, an obvious fallacy.

Santa Claus is verifiably mythological. Go to the North Pole and see.

"Religions" may or may not be verifiably mythological, which is a contested point at the moment; but if the assertion is to be carried, then carrying it will likewise require verification. For the moment, that is not the issue.

But one thing is apparently NOT based on ANY mythology, according to R2...and that is his knowledge that these things are mythological.

It is his knowledge that is in question at the moment. He is speaking as though he is confidently certain that not one of them has a "word from God." This would seem to suggest he's claiming proof. All we wish to know is what proof he is claiming.

[R2D2]

Soren...I'm bored....btw I'm a she not a he

[Soren]

Sorry: I'm very poor at detecting the sexual orientation of droids.

[HexHammer]

Soren...I'm bored....btw I'm a she not a he

Lies! Everybody knows R2D2 is a guy robot!

[R2D2]

funny.....

[uwot]

False analogy.

Why?

Weak logic.

Really? Which bits?

Reductio ad Absurdum, an obvious fallacy.

The conclusion can still be true.
It's not that easy.

Santa Claus is verifiably mythological. Go to the North Pole and see.

What will I find at the North Pole that proves that Father Christmas is not a spirit that infuses daddies in late December?

"Religions" may or may not be verifiably mythological, which is a contested point at the moment; but if the assertion is to be carried, then carrying it will likewise require verification. For the moment, that is not the issue.

R2D2 posed a question, it's in the title of the thread. A quick review of the thread failed to find any such assertion.

But one thing is apparently NOT based on ANY mythology, according to R2...and that is his knowledge that these things are mythological.

You apparently have found it. Could you direct me?

It is his knowledge that is in question at the moment. He is speaking as though he is confidently certain that not one of them has a "word from God." This would seem to suggest he's claiming proof. All we wish to know is what proof he is claiming.

Well, let's first establish whether any such claim was made.

[Greylorn Ell]

As you enjoy your ongoing mutual learning process with them, try on the theory that they colluded beforehand to select you as their father. It'll bring a different perspective to your time with them.

It will do nothing to enhance our relationship. It would pain me to believe that two such beautiful souls could choose so ineptly.

All the more reason to adopt my proposal. If you do so, it will be impossible for you to doubt the quality of their choice.

Then you can get about the more interesting job of figuring out the motivations for their choice.
G

[Greylorn Ell]

There is no such test that can somehow morph words written by remarkably ignorant men into insights or words from God. However it is easy to invalidate "sacred" scriptures. If they contain logical contradictions, they are invalid. If they describe events that cannot happen and declare them to be miracles (e.g. turning water into wine), they are simply man-invented nonsense.
...and conning the gullible....

Only a thoroughbred atheist would suggest a man purported to be the Christ turning water to wine is a logical contradiction. If..and it is, God is all dimensions then you would understand that miracles do not happen, there is nothing contradictory to logic with such power of simply turning water to wine.

Or am i just gullible?

Gullibility is a function of knowledge and understanding, which are functions of age and experience. As an altar boy I served mass with complete devotion, and cried my stupid little heart out assisting at pre-Easter Stations of the Cross. Now I treat the story of Christ as persuasive religious fiction, and can still cry over good fiction.

No thoroughbred at all, I am a mutt. I am neither atheist nor agnostic, and subscribe to no religious opinions other than my own, which are derived from the only valid source of thoughts about the Creator or Creators-- the physical universe itself.