• Sections
Is the bible a fairy tale?

# Is the bible a fairy tale?

Posted in the Atheism Forum

KJV

United States

#1687 May 21, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>What's the matter? suddenly can't interpret the bullsh*t that your cult promotes like speaking in tongues?
What is your cult?
"Who can post like an idiot cult?"
KJV

United States

#1688 May 21, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
You don't know?
The edge of the universe is where it meets nothing. "

I was asking in the balloon analogy. Where is the boundary in that analogy?

As to your statement, there is no 'where it meets nothing'. You're not very good with the concept of curved space, are you?
Wrong there is and that's where the edge is.

The balloon analogy is stupid and has no place in our universe expanding through nothingness. The balloon is 3 D in a 3 D universe not even close to the same thing.

Look out poly is stuck in a wet paper bag and can't get out.

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#1689 May 21, 2013
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
Wrong there is and that's where the edge is.[/QUOTE]
What edge?
The balloon analogy is stupid and has no place in our universe expanding through nothingness. The balloon is 3 D in a 3 D universe not even close to the same thing.
The analogy is a two dimensional universe in a three dimensional spacetime, like reality gives a three dimensional universe in a four dimensional spacetime. Now, you like to point out that two dimensionality doesn't *really* exist in three dimensions: there is always a slight thickness. But there is also *really* no three dimensional space in four dimensions: there is always a slight duration. But the analogy is still useful.

Furthermore, just as the balloon is the boundary between the inside and the outside, the three dimensional universe at any time is the boundary between the past and the future.

Yes, the analogy is very precise and useful, especially when you actually know the math behind it.
Look out poly is stuck in a wet paper bag and can't get out.
Again, your lack of understanding is showing.

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#1690 May 21, 2013
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
Wrong there is and that's where the edge is.
The balloon analogy is stupid and has no place in our universe expanding through nothingness. The balloon is 3 D in a 3 D universe not even close to the same thing.
Look out poly is stuck in a wet paper bag and can't get out.[/QUOTE]\

In reality the balloon would be a snapshot at a point in time, if a successive series of snapshots were taken the balloon would be seen expanding But this doesn't mean there actually is and edge or boundary.
KJV

United States

#1691 May 21, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
Wrong there is and that's where the edge is."

What edge?

[QUOTE]The balloon analogy is stupid and has no place in our universe expanding through nothingness. The balloon is 3 D in a 3 D universe not even close to the same thing."

The analogy is a two dimensional universe in a three dimensional spacetime, like reality gives a three dimensional universe in a four dimensional spacetime. Now, you like to point out that two dimensionality doesn't *really* exist in three dimensions: there is always a slight thickness. But there is also *really* no three dimensional space in four dimensions: there is always a slight duration. But the analogy is still useful.

Furthermore, just as the balloon is the boundary between the inside and the outside, the three dimensional universe at any time is the boundary between the past and the future.

Yes, the analogy is very precise and useful, especially when you actually know the math behind it.

[QUOTE]Look out poly is stuck in a wet paper bag and can't get out. "

Again, your lack of understanding is showing.
Lets see the proof of the universe expanding into nothingness?

Are you sure that a space is not already there? Prove that there is not a space that is absence of Time, Energy and matter.

A balloon has a boundary. It's called rubber and the same things is in the balloon as what's outside of the balloon. It's simply a pressure difference.

The universe is creating itself.
A balloon is nothing of the sort.
Thinking

Poole, UK

#1692 May 21, 2013
You're embarrassingly thick.

[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
Lets see the proof of the universe expanding into nothingness?
Are you sure that a space is not already there? Prove that there is not a space that is absence of Time, Energy and matter.
A balloon has a boundary. It's called rubber and the same things is in the balloon as what's outside of the balloon. It's simply a pressure difference.
The universe is creating itself.
A balloon is nothing of the sort.[/QUOTE]
KJV

United States

#1693 May 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
Wrong there is and that's where the edge is.
The balloon analogy is stupid and has no place in our universe expanding through nothingness. The balloon is 3 D in a 3 D universe not even close to the same thing.
Look out poly is stuck in a wet paper bag and can't get out. "

\

In reality the balloon would be a snapshot at a point in time, if a successive series of snapshots were taken the balloon would be seen expanding But this doesn't mean there actually is and edge or boundary.
Ok your inside the balloon and a fraction of the size of a atom why can't you see the world outside of your ballon? You claim it doesn't exist even though you can't prove it doesn't exist.

One day your balloon will pop.

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1694 May 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> I hate to get between you twos before he kicks you around intellectually, while you want yo kick him physically.
But....
You're late. I already kicked his ass intellectually. Again.

He defines time as dependent on universe, and universe as dependent on time, which is logically fallacious. Then he relies on a strictly intuitive claim that cause must temporally precede effect. Then he states the sum of these failed points as, not just a possibility, but fact.

It was one of the clearest ass-kickngs handed out around these parts.

At least the best since his infinite-segments-of-length-on -a-stick drubbing.

Judged:

2

2

1

Report Abuse Judge it!
Imhotep
#1695 May 21, 2013
Snevaeh legna wrote:
<quoted text>
Goede nacht mijn vriend, slaap lekker! Post met je morgen ...:)
Ben je wakker en goed?
Ik ben op het punt om te gaan zitten en hebben een lekker ontbijt!
Ja, ik geef toe het is een beetje laat in de avond voor het ontbijt... Ik ben een nachtbraker!
KJV

United States

#1696 May 21, 2013
Thinking wrote:
You're embarrassingly thick.

[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
Lets see the proof of the universe expanding into nothingness?
Are you sure that a space is not already there? Prove that there is not a space that is absence of Time, Energy and matter.
A balloon has a boundary. It's called rubber and the same things is in the balloon as what's outside of the balloon. It's simply a pressure difference.
The universe is creating itself.
A balloon is nothing of the sort. "
That's what she keeps telling me.

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1697 May 21, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Ben je wakker en goed?
Ik ben op het punt om te gaan zitten en hebben een lekker ontbijt!
Ja, ik geef toe het is een beetje laat in de avond voor het ontbijt... Ik ben een nachtbraker!
As near as I can translate, that says:

THE MANAGER HAS PERSONALLY PASSED ALL THE WATER SERVED HERE.

Judged:

1

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!
KJV

United States

#1698 May 21, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>You're late. I already kicked his ass intellectually. Again.

He defines time as dependent on universe, and universe as dependent on time, which is logically fallacious. Then he relies on a strictly intuitive claim that cause must temporally precede effect. Then he states the sum of these failed points as, not just a possibility, but fact.

It was one of the clearest ass-kickngs handed out around these parts.

At least the best since his infinite-segments-of-length-on -a-stick drubbing.
Agreed.

Judged:

2

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!
Imhotep
#1699 May 21, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
As near as I can translate, that says:
THE MANAGER HAS PERSONALLY PASSED ALL THE WATER SERVED HERE.
Ni de lejos Buckmeister

She said:
Good night my friend, sleep well! Post with you tomorrow ...:)

I replied:

Are you awake and well?
I'm about to sit down and have a nice breakfast!
Yes, I admit it's a little late for breakfast ... I'm a night owl!

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1700 May 21, 2013
Snevaeh legna wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes you are! Lol
How on EARTH could you even TELL?

Your hate overwhelms your every word-- it literally drips out of your mouth like poison...

... must suck to be you.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#1701 May 21, 2013
Snevaeh legna wrote:
<quoted text>
See, I was fishing, and out witted you again... Lol
It's just too easy!
You think you ... won?

Seriously.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#1702 May 21, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You're late. I already kicked his ass intellectually. Again.
He defines time as dependent on universe, and universe as dependent on time, which is logically fallacious. Then he relies on a strictly intuitive claim that cause must temporally precede effect. Then he states the sum of these failed points as, not just a possibility, but fact.
It was one of the clearest ass-kickngs handed out around these parts.
At least the best since his infinite-segments-of-length-on -a-stick drubbing.
Buck pigeon chess is not a victory, no matter how much the pigeon declares it so.

Judged:

3

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

“ IT'S A CHOICE !!!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1703 May 21, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
Ben je wakker en goed?
Ik ben op het punt om te gaan zitten en hebben een lekker ontbijt!
Ja, ik geef toe het is een beetje laat in de avond voor het ontbijt... Ik ben een nachtbraker!
Ontbijt voor het diner is geweldig! IK BEN bosbes of banaan pannenkoeken .... met een glas jus d'orange. De grappige tabaco maakte je sleep all day! Lol Blij dat je terug bent! LOL SL

Judged:

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1704 May 21, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
So when you started to lie about creationism, what caused you to lie in the first place?

What was the first cause of your cult of creationism?
Andre

Durban, South Africa

#1705 May 22, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
The alleged works of Jesus as indicated in the Bible don't support it being dangerous.
But the history of religion is appalling it's violent and destructors. It is the clergy the leaders of these churches that are dangerous not the legend itself.
Give some thought to this and give me your opinion...
You are right. Religion can be destructive. So can economic interests, family ties (revenge killings), territorial disputes and a range of other issues.
If we consider WW1, it is suggested that the following played a major role:The immediate cause of World War I that made all the aforementioned items come into play (alliances, imperialism, militarism, nationalism) was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary. http://americanhistory.about.com/od/worldwari...
Neither was the Second World War caused by religion. If we consider present wars, it seems that few have religious differences as the cause.
But maybe we are not considering the real cause  man himself. Religious differences cannot by itself cause wars/conflict, neither can territory nor economic interests. These do not seem to me to be at the heart of the matter.
Like those of the Jewish writer Josephus, the works of the ancient historians Pliny, Suetonius and Tacitus do not provide proof that Jesus Christ ever existed as a "historical" character......
Caesar by comparison is easily verified.
From the information at my disposal, it seems that very few (maybe none) serious scholars dispute the historicity of Jesus. To claim the contrary, is regarded by for instance A N Sherwin-White (not a Christian) as absurd.
Christian sources are excluded for the purpose of our discussion as they would seem predisposed. Yet, the facts reported in the Bible has never been proved wrong.
As a matter of fact Luke is regarded as an excellent historian by for instance Sir William Ramsay, It was gradually borne in upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth. He was from the liberal German historical schools, known for its scholarship, but taught that the New Testament was not a historical document.
When I evaluate the credibility of resources, I usually look at their position within their area of expertise as well as what they have to gain by what they do/say.
A chap that is highly regarded as a historian, and not a Christian himself, is hardly likely to report on a person that he has not by diligent study established as a real person. It may destroy his career as a historian. Refer in this respect to Tacitus. He mentions Christians, who were hated for their enormities.
Suetonius (who was apparently born 69AD) reported on Christians. As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome." (Life of Claudius 25.4). He was a Roman historian, who is unlikely to refer to Christ especially in view of the negative connotation.
Julius Africanus quotes Tallus comments Tallus' comments about the darkness that enveloped the land during the late afternoon hours when Jesus died on the cross.. The issue is not whether there was a natural explanation, but that it in fact happened at the time of Jesus death and they were trying to account for it
Mara Bar-Serapion: Syrian stoic philosopher (ideal being moral and intellectual perfectionism) in a letter to his son, compared Jesus (not his teachings) to philosophers Socrates and Pythagoras.
The Babylonian Talmud. These guys (Sanhedrin) were not really very supportive of Christianity. As indication of their animosity,they disputed the virgin birth, claiming Mary was a whore. Yet they mention Jesus. If Jesus was a myth, they would hardly do that?
You are welcome to provide evidence from serious scholars that disagrees with the historicity of Jesus.
You may also view this

Judged:

2

1

1

Report Abuse Judge it!

_-Alice-_

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#1706 May 22, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't read a damn word of that. But I sense it is not a compliment.
Spidey Senses?

You're awesome.

When you butcher a hog, what do you do with the esophagus?

#### Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

### Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 256,557
Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr It aint necessari... 18,553
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Chimney1 43,208
Why I quit atheism 13 hr Eagle 12 708
Good arguments against Christianity 15 hr superwilly 209
A Universe from Nothing? 16 hr Mikko 533
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 21 hr Thinking 5,696

#### Atheism News

More Atheism News from Topix »

More from around the web