Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 06-16-2007, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Aesop's Fables, by Aesop
translated by G.F. Townsend

Preface | Life of Aesop | Aesop's Fables Contents
The Bat, the Birds, and the Beasts
A great conflict was about to come off between the Birds and the Beasts. When the two armies were collected together the Bat hesitated which to join. The Birds that passed his perch said: "Come with us"; but he said: "I am a Beast." Later on, some Beasts who were passing underneath him looked up and said: "Come with us"; but he said: "I am a Bird." Luckily at the last moment peace was made, and no battle took place, so the Bat came to the Birds and wished to join in the rejoicings, but they all turned against him and he had to fly away. He then went to the Beasts, but soon had to beat a retreat, or else they would have torn him to pieces. "Ah," said the Bat, "I see now,

"He that is neither one thing nor the other has no friends."

http://ancienthistory.about.com/libr...rds_beasts.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesop

pkropotkin · 06-16-2007, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

So if Moses had said that cows have six legs, would some bright spark not have respectfully ventured to suggest that he had miscalculated just a fraction? Or, if the whole thing is a con, would the authors not have taken more care? If the Israelites knew as much as you say, how is it that such a preposterous error was perpetuated? We must either suppose that the Israelites did not know how many legs insects possess, or that Leviticus does not actually state that insects have four legs, as anyone who has investigated the subject very much is aware may be the case.

So now your agreeing with me that if there was a god involved in the criteria, it wouldn't have let such an obvious error in his followers pass. I don't think anyone is arguing that Leviticus was some deliberate con, but have you ever read any of those Nigerian e-mail scams, they certainly aren't very careful in trying to appear convincing. Now you posit a false dichotomy.

Of course there are other options. I would say that it is certainly possible some individual human or humans thought that insects had four legs, because they didn't really pay attention or look at how insects move, maybe a sheltered holy man type person, with a big ego. They then wrote this into the law, and no one changed it until it was considered gods word, and therefore correct somehow, and then they had to make due with nice explanations.

I actually have read the various explanations on why this isn't really saying they have four legs, and I haven't found them persuasive, much like I haven't found the rabbit cud chewing arguments persuasive either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

Let me know when I do.

sure thing

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

So what is the problem? That God thought that insects have four legs, or that the Israelites thought so? Is that much of a reason for rejecting an offer of eternal life?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

I did that some time ago, but, as I expected, someone noticed an adjacent verse. And maybe more will be quoted if it gets dealt with.

well quote away

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

You sure know how to insult, anyway!

Well, I wouldn't consider it an insult, I assumed if there was no NT and no Christianity, that you wouldn't be an atheist, that you would still be some kind of theist. I merely posited some that historically might have filled the vacuum left by Christianity's non-existence, it wasn't intended as an exhaustive list. Though maybe I was wrong, and you would be an atheist, if there was no Christianity? would you?

Clouseau · 06-16-2007, 06:48 PM

[QUOTE=pkropotkin;4541545]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

So if Moses had said that cows have six legs, would some bright spark not have respectfully ventured to suggest that he had miscalculated just a fraction? Or, if the whole thing is a con, would the authors not have taken more care? If the Israelites knew as much as you say, how is it that such a preposterous error was perpetuated? We must either suppose that the Israelites did not know how many legs insects possess, or that Leviticus does not actually state that insects have four legs, as anyone who has investigated the subject very much is aware may be the case.

Quote:

I would say that it is certainly possible some individual human or humans thought that insects had four legs, because they didn't really pay attention or look at how insects move

But you just said that it was as obvious as cows having four legs!

Quote:

I actually have read the various explanations on why this isn't really saying they have four legs and I haven't found them persuasive

Why not? Can you persuade us that you have actually read them?

Quote:

sure thing

That's more like it.

Quote:

well quote away

Catholic parrots are one thing, but it must be desperate for atheists if they have to get their ideas from believers too!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

You sure know how to insult, anyway!

Quote:

Well, I wouldn't consider it an insult

Try it on your friends, then. Get some running shoes first, though.

Do atheists cavil at the Koran, the Vinaya Pitaka, the Book of Mormon, the Catholic Catechism, the Bhagavad Gita, the Talmud, the Granth Sahib? Hardly ever, if at all, because they don't believe in those any more than they believe in the Pink Panther. It is the demands of Christ that make the Book of Leviticus of the smallest interest- probably even to Jews!

Joan of Bark · 06-16-2007, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

The commandments were not a biology lesson, and as long as the Israelites understood what they were to do, that was enough.

But the Israelites often didn't understand what they were to do, implying that God was not clear enough.

Numbers 15:32 While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. 33 Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, 34 and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him.

The lack of clarity in this case resulted in the poor sod getting stoned to death.

Clouseau · 06-16-2007, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joan of Bark

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

The commandments were not a biology lesson, and as long as the Israelites understood what they were to do, that was enough.

But the Israelites often didn't understand what they were to do, implying that God was not clear enough.

Numbers 15:32 While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. 33 Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, 34 and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him.

The lack of clarity in this case resulted in the poor sod getting stoned to death.

'"For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the Lord. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death."' Ex 35:1-3 NIV

You wrote 'often'. Do you have more examples like this is supposed to be?

Joan of Bark · 06-17-2007, 04:34 AM

Are you implying that God IS being clear in this statement? Then why do the Israelites not know what to do with him? The reason, obviously, is that God didn't bother to define what constitutes "work". Is gathering firewood "work"? This issue crops up again in the NT, when Jesus heals the sick and allows his disciples to gather food on the sabbath. Is that not also "working"?

Clouseau · 06-17-2007, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joan of Bark

Are you implying that God IS being clear in this statement?

You are surely not attempting to deny that he is not. Whose translation is it that you chose?

Johnny Skeptic · 06-17-2007, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

Do atheists cavil at the Koran, the Vinaya Pitaka, the Book of Mormon, the Catholic Catechism, the Bhagavad Gita, the Talmud, the Granth Sahib? Hardly ever, if at all, because they don't believe in those any more than they believe in the Pink Panther. It is the demands of Christ that make the Book of Leviticus of the smallest interest- probably even to Jews!

Do you have any problems with atheism, agnosticism, and deism? How about Christianity?

Toto · 06-17-2007, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

...Do atheists cavil at the Koran, the Vinaya Pitaka, the Book of Mormon, the Catholic Catechism, the Bhagavad Gita, the Talmud, the Granth Sahib? Hardly ever, if at all, because they don't believe in those any more than they believe in the Pink Panther. It is the demands of Christ that make the Book of Leviticus of the smallest interest- probably even to Jews!

Actually, atheists also cavil at the Qur'an, mock the Book of Mormon, laugh at the Catholic Catechism, and the rest of the supernatural sacred documents.

Christianity and the Book of Leviticus get more attention because there are fundamentalist Christians who want to legislate these ancient laws. But we don't believe in any of them, and we don't worry about what if they are true.

Chris Weimer · 06-17-2007, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joan of Bark

Are you implying that God IS being clear in this statement?

You are surely not attempting to deny that he is not. Whose translation is it that you chose?

Why bother with a translation when the Hebrew is readily available?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-17-2007, 04:34 AM	#36
Joan of Bark Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Pua, in northern Thailand Posts: 2,823	Are you implying that God IS being clear in this statement? Then why do the Israelites not know what to do with him? The reason, obviously, is that God didn't bother to define what constitutes "work". Is gathering firewood "work"? This issue crops up again in the NT, when Jesus heals the sick and allows his disciples to gather food on the sabbath. Is that not also "working"?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.