|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 05/29/2007 : 20:39:12 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Dave said "Provide evidence that the "sphere" usage is anywhere close to as common as the "circle" usage."
As both definitions are used the quantity of usage does not tell us what the word means here. The point is that it is undetermined.
|
Given that we can't tell from the immediate context which definition should be used, we have to fall back on broader context within the Bible (which indicate "circle"), and that the circle-usage of the word is statistically more common.
|
Statistically more common does not prove anything outside of more or less likely. Statements of fact based on possibilities could lead to any conclusion. Just because something is possible; or even probable, proves nothing and no conclusion can be drawn.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 05:22:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Statistically more common does not prove anything outside of more or less likely. Statements of fact based on possibilities could lead to any conclusion. Just because something is possible; or even probable, proves nothing and no conclusion can be drawn. |
So because it's possible that Einstein was wrong means that nothing can be concluded about General Relativity? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 08:07:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Statistically more common does not prove anything outside of more or less likely. Statements of fact based on possibilities could lead to any conclusion. Just because something is possible; or even probable, proves nothing and no conclusion can be drawn.
|
Since you have failed to produce more support in favour of the sphere-interpretation, I find the likelihood of it being correct very low. Sphere versus pancake seems to be rather mutually exclusive, and there are more Bible verses that conform to a pancake-interpretation, the statistical difference in the use of the word is only a part of the evidence.
"Statistically more common does not prove anything"
-- and "proof" only matters in whisky and mathematics. All other conclusions are tentative. So nothing can really be proved as in "proof" in the literal sense.
So, my conclusion is that your theory lacks sufficient support, and the pancake theory (with its support) is more credible.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 08:25:59 [Permalink]
|
When one take a presumption and builds upon that presumption with more presumptions the conclusions can be drastically different from the reality.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 10:14:01 [Permalink]
|
| Strange then that this rule doesnt apply to you. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 13:56:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
When one take a presumption and builds upon that presumption with more presumptions the conclusions can be drastically different from the reality.
|
I don't see how your post connects to our discussion. Please elaborate. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 14:07:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
In hebrew circle is defined as such:
chuwg:“TO DESCRIBE A CIRCLE, TO DRAW A CIRCLE, as with a compass.
chuwg:“a circle, sphere, used of the arch or vault of the sky”
It was not anyone reading the text who believed in a flat earth. [emphasis added] |
Just to clarify here, the use of the Hebrew het-waw-gimel-- at least in the context of the Isaiah verse-- clearly refers to the "arch or vault of the sky." In general, I think we can speak of ancient Near Eastern cosmography as calling for a flat disk where we live. I'm away from some references, but when I'm back in my office I'll go into more detail about what the ancients thought about their earth. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 18:25:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
When one take a presumption and builds upon that presumption with more presumptions the conclusions can be drastically different from the reality.
|
I don't see how your post connects to our discussion. Please elaborate.
|
If we presume what the word meant to the writers, than we are building a potentially false starting point as to whether the writers believed in a flat earth.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 19:45:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
If we presume what the word meant to the writers, than we are building a potentially false starting point as to whether the writers believed in a flat earth.
|
Yes, but in the context of the entire Bible, one interpretation is more likely than the other. No presumption necessary. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2007 : 23:22:32 [Permalink]
|
This word is not used many times; so we are looking at the low frequency of the usage and making a presumption on a low data sample. Thus making the presumption more tenuous.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2007 : 06:41:15 [Permalink]
|
| It's not (just) about the frequency of use of the word within the bible. It's the frequency of use of the word globally and historically. And within the context of the many bible-verses that needs to have a pancake-world in order to make sense. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2007 : 20:53:41 [Permalink]
|
Doc, when one goes out and paints the town red, one does not use a brush or paint. Four corners of the earth could well mean the four compass points. There are many examples of phrases in language the do not mean what they literally say.
Isaiah was written circa 698 BC
Pythagoras proposed a spherical earth circa 500 BC
It is not inconceivable that prior to Pythagoras others also believed in a spherical earth.
Again, I am not saying I know what the writers believed about the earth only that it is in doubt. If one begins with a presumption, many times the conclusions on which that presumption is based are wrong.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2007 : 05:42:41 [Permalink]
|
Cough, like the assumption that it was compass points?
http://www.solarnavigator.net/compass.htm
The oldest compass known is from China 400+ years after the old-T was written...
Edit:More info on ancient navigation by star, cloud, bird, memory and smell.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/longitude/secrets.html
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
| Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 06/01/2007 05:52:09 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2007 : 07:04:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Doc, when one goes out and paints the town red, one does not use a brush or paint. Four corners of the earth could well mean the four compass points. There are many examples of phrases in language the do not mean what they literally say. |
Now, who's making assumptions?
Isaiah was written circa 698 BC
Pythagoras proposed a spherical earth circa 500 BC |
He proposed that the Earth was spherical solely on faith that the circle was the perfect geometrical form.
Aristotle was the first one who brought up any kind of evidence that the earth is a sphere.
| It is not inconceivable that prior to Pythagoras others also believed in a spherical earth. |
Yajnavalkya (c. 9th–8th century BC)
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2007 : 07:19:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
This word is not used many times; so we are looking at the low frequency of the usage and making a presumption on a low data sample. Thus making the presumption more tenuous. |
But you can use comparative Semitics to aid in the understanding of the Hebrew, as well as early translations of the Bible into Latin and Greek. So it's often not as hard as you think! |
|
|
 |
|
Flat earth
