# Why the bible is the word of God.

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
Why the bible is the word of God.

Mathematicians have discovered that The bible is written in a mathematical pattern called Gematria and is encrypted  unlike any other book in history. A universal language based on mathematics.

God's universal Language is the bible.

God created everything by number, weight and measure.
Isaac Newton

Mathematics is a universal language and a language by which God speaks. It is a fact that mathematicians like
Isaac Newton and theologians like E.W. Bullinger discovered the bible  to be written in a intelligent mathematical Design far superior to man's capability. Today, the requirement of computers is needed to reveal the hidden truth. A study was done at the university of Jerusalem that gives proof to the discovery by Mathematicians.

Galileo Galilei  said, 'The universe cannot be read until we have learned the language and become familiar with the characters in which it is written. It is written in mathematical language, and the letters are triangles, circles and other geometrical figures, without which means it is humanly impossible to comprehend a single word. Without these, one is wandering about in a dark labyrinth'.

Mathematicians like  Euler and Borel used their mathematical expertise to discover God and were somewhat successful. But they were no were near as successful as Isaac newton and Bullinger.
1. Leonhard Euler: formula( ei*pi + 1 = 0 ) also know as "God’s formula".
2. Borel, Emil :Probability and Life formula

Mathematical signatures or patterns are inherent to the very structure of nature and the universe. While we use our language of mathematics to describe these patterns and all of the precise fine-tuning found in the universe, the mathematical ratios themselves seem to be design evidences: a universal language, unchanging throughout time or place; too precise and nonrandom to be products of chance.

These are just a few examples of Mathematics and God: Φ=Phi  = (1.6180339887...) is a number found in universal pattern an a irrational number like pi.pi is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter (3.141592653...) pi= π   is an irrational number, which means that its value cannot be expressed exactly as a fraction having integers in both the numerator and denominator (unlike 22/7). Consequently, its decimal representation never ends and never repeats. π is also a transcendental number, which implies, among other things, that no finite sequence of algebraic operations on integers (powers, roots, sums, etc.) can render its value; proving this fact was a significant mathematical achievement of the 19th century. Phi and pi are both ratios defined by particular Euclidean geometries, with phi being the division of a line "so that the ratio of the lesser part to the greater part is the same as the ratio of the greater part to the whole." Phi's abundance in the universe has earned it names such as the Golden Section, the Divine Proportion, the Golden Ratio, and the Golden Mean. This ratio phi can be found in many natural constructs such as in human and animal proportions (i.e., the arrangement of physical features). Phi relationships can be found in DNA, among the planets of the Solar System (as in Kepler's Laws), and so on.

I recommend for all of you to read Number in Scripture by E.W. Bullinger.
He followed Newton study of the mathematical intelligence behind the bible.

Another good book on the subject is :

The Signature of God
By Grant R. Jeffrey

The laws of mathematics (a universal language)  proves the existence of a intelligent being we humans call God.

God Bless.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

NMCP (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:1 Kings 7:23

Jimenezj wrote:
1 Kings 7:23 writes: "He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it." We know that circumference = pi times diameter. So from 1 Kings 7:23 we produce 30 = pi(10). Solving for pi we get 3. Since pi actually equals 3.141592653... If you look at the numbers, you will see that it is off by .141592653...which is less than one percent. Therefore the error in the bible is less than one percent. Making it divine and precise.

indeed.

OMG milk just shot out of my nose.
Hey why didn't your god write a verse that said:

"And the lord does sayeth pi = 3.14..."

And so what if it did? Anyone with a brain and a piece of string could calculate pie is slightly more than 3.

3.1415926535... would have been impressive.

Why didn't he write in the bible:

"An d the lord says light travels at 299 792 458 metres per second, everything is made of tiny little atoms, and here is a list of the cures for all the epidemics coming in the future."

Now that would have been a start for some divine precision.

Brilliant.

3 = 3.1415926535...  sure it does.

pfffff

I'm sorry my eyes are watering.

And this is divine knowledge?

I convert!

Louis_Cypher
Posts: 535
Joined: 2008-03-22
Offline
You are the only one confused...

Jimenezj wrote:
Im sorry, I believe I have made a mistake. My calculations at first were made in my head. my result approximation was less than one percent. After redoing it on a calculator, I found out it is actually one percent (1%) after rounding off to the nearest tenth or pi =3.1 instead of pi=3.141592653  So in reality we were all wrong. How I did it: If the bible  = 3.1   then you divide 3.1 by 100= .031 or one percent  .031 x 99 = 3.069 3.069 (99%)  + .031 (1%) = 3.1 or 100% bible Therefore the bible equals 99% correct. off by 1% if the bible =3 and pi = 3.1 If you recalculate by rounding off to the nearest hundreth and thousandth, you will get an approximation of 1 to 3 percent. Again sorry for the confusion.

You don't understand mathematics, period.

In order to find the percentage of error, you divide .14159 (rounded to 5 places) by 3 the result is .04719 or 4.7 % ERROR.

LC >;-}>

Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
Louis

It would seem that way, but incorrect again.
I will explain .
You see, pi is a never ending number, a unique number.
If you do not have an ending number, you must use the bigining number (round to the tenth) which is one or 3.1
It would be illogical to use a middle number, like 9 or any other middle number, do to the fact of pi not having an ending.

Making the bible 99% correct.
But indeed very good research on your part.

I will see you guys next year.
Merry Christmas.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

latincanuck
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2007-06-01
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:It would seem

Jimenezj wrote:
It would seem that way, but incorrect again. I will explain . You see, pi is a never ending number, a unique number. If you do not have an ending number, you must use the bigining number (round to the tenth) which is one or 3.1 It would be illogical to use a middle number, like 9 or any other middle number, do to the fact of pi not having an ending. Making the bible 99% correct. But indeed very good research on your part. I will see you guys next year. Merry Christmas.

oh boy you seem to not understand mathematics, it's not used in that manner, it is 3.14159 is the more common, 3 is not very accurate even for it's day, the egyptians used 3.125 and the mesopotamian use 3.165, which they intern preceed the bible, so yes your bible is using a known number already, and using it wrong as 3 as it was not 3 and was never used as 3. This alone shows how full of shit you are on this topic, god didn't know Pi, it was already being used as II chronicles was written sometime around 595 BCE, and Pi was already being used sometime to build the pyramids, 2000 years before II chronicles was written, and the earliest texts is a full 1000 years before II chronicles and the number used is 3.125 and 3.160, which those are 1 percent difference from the true number. Sheesh if you can find me evidence that in antiquity they used 3 as Pi that might, and I say MIGHT in the loosest form, lend some credibility to your argument. However reality seems to disagree with you, as it tends to disagree with all believers of god, since Pi was never used as 3 and it seems god is crappy at mathematics then, since the evidence points to Pi already being used before it the torah was written.

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
Louis

There is actualy two ways of doing it, which would be correct on this 3.1 irrational number.method 1: We allready discussed the first way, which is rounding off the the right side (tenth) of the decimal which is one. Method 2: But we can also go the opposite end of the decimal, which equals three (3. )

If you round of 3.1 to the nearest Ones, it would equal 3 (3.1=3).

Method 2: This would make the bible equal 100% correct or 3.
Method 1: But if you want to find errors, you would find 1% or 3.1

I'm officially on vacation.
See you next year.

God created everything by number, weight and measure.
Isaac Newton

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Louis_Cypher
Posts: 535
Joined: 2008-03-22
Offline
I don't usually give up, but...

Jimenezj wrote:
There is actualy two ways of doing it, which would be correct on this 3.1 irrational number.method 1: We allready discussed the first way, which is rounding off the the right side (tenth) of the decimal which is one. Method 2: But we can also go the opposite end of the decimal, which equals three (3. ) If you round of 3.1 to the nearest Ones, it would equal 3 (3.1=3). Method 2: This would make the bible equal 100% correct or 3. Method 1: But if you want to find errors, you would find 1% or 3.1 I'm officially on vacation. See you next year. God created everything by number, weight and measure. Isaac Newton

Son, you are just too damned stupid to even try to discuss anything with.
I frequently cite trying to discuss algebra with my dog as a analogy to discussing science with a theist, in your case, I'd have better luck with the dog.
Your ignorance of mathematics is staggering.... truly.

LC >;-}>

Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.

pauljohntheskeptic
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
Offline
You are now grasping at straws

it's not helping you, you still are exhibiting an inadequate education in mathematics.

Jimenezj wrote:
It would seem that way, but incorrect again. I will explain . You see, pi is a never ending number, a unique number. If you do not have an ending number, you must use the bigining number (round to the tenth) which is one or 3.1 It would be illogical to use a middle number, like 9 or any other middle number, do to the fact of pi not having an ending. Making the bible 99% correct. But indeed very good research on your part. I will see you guys next year. Merry Christmas.

1-It doesn't matter pi is a never ending number when you round it off. You can't round it off to make your approximation cause a significant error.

2-Rounding to the tenth still causes an error. The Bible rounded it off to the whole number and ignored all of the decimals.

3-How to find percent error: To correctly put together the percent error equation, take the difference from accepted value which is also your result minus the accepted value, divide by accepted value and multiply this result by 100. This formula is always expressed as %.

Here we have this for π (pi) difference =  Where 3 is your Bible claim and 3.141592653 is the accepted value divided by the Accepted Value of 3.141592653 times 100 for percent

or as follows: Bible claim π - Accepted value of π = difference divided by the accepted value of π times 100

expressed like this in numbers - ( 3 - 3.141592653 ) / 3.141592653 = 0.450703412693523  * 100 = -4.50703412693523%

So your Bible number will always cause an error of approx - 4.5% in calculations.

What this will cause is errors in geometry, errors in GPS, errors in any calculation used with trigonometry that use π.

An error of - 4.5% would render many electronic devices inoperative preventing you from spreading your ignorance.

Obviously engineers such as myself do not follow your ignorant methods or you could not be here.

Go back to school and pay attention next time.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
pauljohntheskeptic

There are many mathematical ways to go at this. Let's just say you are correct at 4.5 error.

It is illogical to compare an electronic device with a 2000 year old book that is 95.5 correct with 4.5 error as you have concluded.

Remember that the bible has been copied hundreds of times. For the bible to survive over 2000 years with only 4.5 error (human error) is without any dought incredible and divine. All ancient scriptures have changed with time, And all of them are beyond 50% in error (Muslim, hindu, Buddhist to include U.S constitution. Except one book called the bible.

There is no escaping reason, no denying purpose. Because we both know, that without purpose. We would not exist. Purpose that created us, purpose that connects us,

The way of all things.=
Causality
Action = reaction
Cause = effect

I believe God has proven his point.
I had an excellent time with you on this discussion. I will see you again next year.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

latincanuck
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2007-06-01
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:There are

Jimenezj wrote:
There are many mathematical ways to go at this. Let's just say you are correct at 4.5 error. It is illogical to compare an electronic device with a 2000 year old book that is 95.5 correct with 4.5 error as you have concluded. Remember that the bible has been copied hundreds of times. For the bible to survive over 2000 years with only 4.5 error (human error) is without any dought incredible and divine. All ancient scriptures have changed with time, And all of them are beyond 50% in error (Muslim, hindu, Buddhist to include U.S constitution. Except one book called the bible. There is no escaping reason, no denying purpose. Because we both know, that without purpose. We would not exist. Purpose that created us, purpose that connects us,  The way of all things.= Causality Action = reaction Cause = effect I believe God has proven his point. I had an excellent time with you on this discussion. I will see you again next year.

95 percent correct? About what? history? Nope, creations of the universe? Nope, how mankind came to be? Nope that right there represents about 50 percent of the bible....and most of it is wrong. Want to include biology? Because it contains errors in that as well. Forget the fact, and this is fact that destroys your Pi argument, that it was already being used almost 2000 years before it was written in the bible, and the mathematical equations were that have been found 1000 years before it was written down in II chronicles, and they were already using 3 decimal places, not 1 and no they didn't round up to the tenth for 3.1 as you suggest, which any mathematician or engineer knows would cause problems when designing many things in the ancient world, your arguments fails to meet up with reality.

latincanuck
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2007-06-01
Offline
Jimenezj wrote: There is no

Jimenezj wrote:
There is no escaping reason, no denying purpose. Because we both know, that without purpose. We would not exist. Purpose that created us, purpose that connects us,  The way of all things.= Causality Action = reaction Cause = effect I believe God has proven his point. I had an excellent time with you on this discussion. I will see you again next year.

There are causes, but as quantum mechanics have shown, they don't need a purpose or another cause to happen, your argument again, is denied by reality. Even worse, there is no need to believe that there is a purpose other than continuing the human genome, it does not require an intelligent being, even worse for your argument it doesn't require it to be your god.

pauljohntheskeptic
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:There are

Jimenezj wrote:

There are many mathematical ways to go at this.

No, there is only one way to calculate the percent error in mathematics from the correct value.

Jimenezj wrote:

Let's just say you are correct at 4.5 error. It is illogical to compare an electronic device with a 2000 year old book that is 95.5 correct with 4.5 error as you have concluded.

It has nothing to do with what field we are discussing. The percent error in mathematics and statistics applies the same way to all of them.

Jimenezj wrote:

Remember that the bible has been copied hundreds of times. For the bible to survive over 2000 years with only 4.5 error (human error) is without any dought incredible and divine.

We weren't discussing the entire Bible here, only the claim for pi  ( π ). There are countless other problems with the Bible as to accuracy that far exceed this particular error.

Jimenezj wrote:

All ancient scriptures have changed with time, And all of them are beyond 50% in error (Muslim, hindu, Buddhist to include U.S constitution.

Yes, all ancient writing has problems in both change and understanding. Some have not changed as we have nearly the original versions, such as Sumerian clay tablets regarding the Annunaki. Though, terms may be used that we do not understand properly.

Jimenezj wrote:

Except one book called the bible.

Not hardly. The Bible is one of the worst offenders for errors. See "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman. See also "Forged" by Bart Ehrman. Read both and then come back here and tell me you still stick with your claim.

Jimenezj wrote:

There is no escaping reason, no denying purpose. Because we both know, that without purpose. We would not exist.

You have no proof for this assertion, that we would not exist without purpose. You of course are trying to slip in your god here as the definition of purpose.

Jimenezj wrote:

Purpose that created us, purpose that connects us,

Nothing created us. We evolved.

Jimenezj wrote:

The way of all things.= Causality Action = reaction Cause = effect I believe God has proven his point.

The god proved nothing and neither have you.

Jimenezj wrote:

I had an excellent time with you on this discussion. I will see you again next year.

Come back and play some more next year.

Try to read a few books in the meantime beyond the Bible. Bart Ehrman is a good place to start. I can recommend others if you want to seriously look at the problems with the Hebrew / Christian god and the Jesus.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.

Brian37
Posts: 15570
Joined: 2006-02-14
Offline
When you go to a si fi

When you go to a si fi movie, they have brilliant computer programmers, brilliant special affects artists, brilliant model builders, and script writers and actors, and all that gets you lost in the movie, but it doesn't make robots who travel back though time to kill Sarah Connor real.

You have fallen for JUNK................Let me repeat.............J    U    N   K     JUNK!

It merely displays human imagination, not reality. There are people who claim Big Foot. There are people who claim JFK conspiracies. There are people who think the moon landing was faked. And "numerology" is yet another elaborate piece of claptrap humans fall for.

There is no such thing as virgin births. There is no such thing as zombie gods. The earth is not flat. The moon is not made of cheese.

The bible has no "code" in it. It only has people like you looking for ways to prop up absurd fantastic comic book claims. Being creative about making up crap that sounds impressive is just as real as the Terminator is in reality.

You want to believe this junk, because it sounds good to you, nothing more.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
to pauljohn and latincanuck

To Latincanuck and pauljohntheskeptic

I decided to have a break from my vacation. And decided to answer some more open questions regarding the Bible.

Both of you mentioned History in the Bible to be incorrect compared with other scriptures. If you look at history most ancient scripture, you will find that the ancient clay tablets found in Syria and Mesopotamia both confirm the Hebrew story of creation. The 17,000 clay tablets found at Elba Syria predates the corrupted Sumerian clay tablets by about 600 years making the Sumerian tablets unreliable and full of error ( what pauljohn believed were accurate is actually inaccurate ) . The Ebla clay tablets from Syria confirm the reliability of the bible making the bible correct compared to other ancient scriptures. Latincanuck said that the bible was not correct on the creation of the universe. Lets look at Genesis one. In the beginning , God created the heaven (or universe) and the earth (at the same time) .This was written around 3,500 BC. Thousands of years later, scientists discovered the Big bang , that all the universe began all at the same time at one point in time. It took them thousands of years to find an answer, when the whole time it was already recorded in the bible.

All of you had a great deal to say about my first argument (pi ), but what about my second argument (phi )? You have seem to forgotten my second argument for the justification of the bible, which is phi. I will remind you all. Phi is found in the bible, the universe and in Nature. Would anyone like to prove me wrong?
Here is some more info on the evidence for the word of God called the Bible.

The teachings of Jesus Christ express the thought that part of God is within each of us and that we are created in His image. The appearance of the Golden number phi = 1.618 throughout life and the universe is believed by some to be the signature of God, a universal constant of design used to assure the beauty and unity of His creation.

DNA example:

The DNA spiral:

The DNA molecule, the program for all life, is based on phi= 1.6180339
It measures 34 angstroms long by 21 angstroms wide for each full cycle of its double helix spiral.

34 and 21, of course, are numbers in the Fibonacci series and their ratio is 34 divided by 21 or 34/21=1.6190476 closely approximates phi, 1.6180339.

Bible example:

In Exodus 25:10, God commands Moses to build the Ark of the Covenant, in which to hold His Covenant with the Israelites, the Ten Commandments, saying,

"Have them make a chest of acacia wood-
two and a half cubits long,
a cubit and a half wide,
and a cubit and a half high."

The ratio of 2.5 divided by 1.5 is 1.666..., which is as close to phi (1.618 ...) as you can come with such simple numbers and is certainly not visibly different to the eye. The Ark of the Covenant is thus constructed using the Golden Number phi or Divine Proportion. This ratio is also the same as 5 to 3, numbers from the Fibonacci series

Throughout mankind's history, beliefs accepted as unarguable fact in one age have been discovered to be false in the next. Have you ever wondered which of today's "facts" will be seen by future generations as the "old myths" of the 21st century?

We're taught that life is the result of chance and natural adaptation, but is this the truth, or is it just a "fact" that suits our limited understanding of life?

If evolution occurred, is it really the source of life's creation or is it God's process of creation?

Is there any scientific evidence or basis in reason which proves that DNA is a result of chance rather than a creation of the Divine?

Could evolution be little more than a myth for today that will someday be replaced by a deeper understanding?

If you want to know the truth,

"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.

Matthew 7:7

Look under :
the bible
Theology
DNA

Or look at everything .
God Bless.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline

you said;
95 percent correct? About what? history? Nope, creations of the universe? Nope, how mankind came to be?

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Brian37
Posts: 15570
Joined: 2006-02-14
Offline
Quote:ancient clay tablets

Quote:
ancient clay tablets found in Syria and Mesopotamia both confirm the Hebrew story of creation.

No shit. but what it proves is not that a monotheist god exists, but the Hebrews stole their characters and motifs from the CLAY TABLETS of Syria and Mesopoptamia which were a product of the Canaanite polytheism.

Baal, Yahweh, El and Elohim before the Hebrews used those names were part of polytheism.

Hebrews exist today much like Coke and Pepsi compete. Coke comes out with a Cheri soda and Pepsi looks at that and says "we need to get in on that".

Marketing, not a real god, is why Hebrews were successful. There was no real Yahweh storm god of polytheism which Hebrews stole the name from any more than the claimed monotheist god Yahweh exists  via proxy of Jewish tradition. Just like the Christian God is no more real when Mythras and Atlas, long before had the same birthday as the alleged magic baby of the bible.

Humans make up gods and the only place they get them is from prior claims.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:To

Jimenezj wrote:

Numbers can be applied in whatever way is needed to get the desired results. It doesn't imply a supernatural connection.

I remember a person saying that Jesus would come in 1998 by taking the number of the beast (they thought it to be 666) and the number of the trinity (3).

You know that didn't happen right?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

A_Nony_Mouse
Posts: 2880
Joined: 2008-04-23
Offline
.

Jimenezj wrote:
Mathematicians have discovered that The bible is written in a mathematical pattern called Gematria and is encrypted  unlike any other book in history. A universal language based on mathematics. ...

Considering you have no grasp of math at all or even logic as shown by that "prove me wrong" nonsense what you do you think you are accomplishing posting claims you cannot grasp?

At least have the courtesy of proper academic citation of this discovery and to the exposition of this "Gematria" and the encryption methodology you talk about.

Anyone grasping math would understand without question the expositions come first.

No, I am not a mathematician. I am a physicist so my math is mostly what is used in that field like quantum mechanics. So please feel free to post anything you have no matter how technical you think it might be. I am certain I can grasp it.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

HumanVuvuzela
Posts: 93
Joined: 2011-04-24
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:To

Jimenezj wrote:

Hey look. There could be an element of truth to this.

Post #63, divided by phi (1.618) is 38.936, which using Jimenezj's mathematical approximations is equal to post #39.

Post #39 gives us:

Louis_Cypher wrote:

leaving a trail of troll shit behind him.

See? It all makes sense!

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
Www.godennumber.net

See if you can grasp the formulas provided on the website I have posted. More info is given on thread # 63. Let me know what you think on the evidence provided for phi and the bible. Perhaps you may understand.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:See if you

Jimenezj wrote:
See if you can grasp the formulas provided on the website I have posted. More info is given on thread # 63. Let me know what you think on the evidence provided for phi and the bible. Perhaps you may understand.

We did. They're not connected. all we have is your assertions to the contrary.

The numbers work out to the conclusion you desired so God? If that number didn't work out, you'd simply plug in other numbers until you found one you liked and then claim that was proof of God.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
Brian

If that is the case, explain the number phi evident in Nature, the bible,and the universe. Visit www.goldennumber.net and look under DNA, the bible and the universe. Human beings lie, but numbers do not lie.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:If that is

Jimenezj wrote:
If that is the case, explain the number phi evident in Nature, the bible,and the universe. Visit www.goldennumber.net and look under DNA, the bible and the universe. Human beings lie, but numbers do not lie.

Coincidence?

You're working from "There is a God so these numbers work".

Reality works from evidence to conclusion - not the way you're doing it.

If phi didn't work you'd simply find one that did. It was a number before it was made divine.

Incidentally, the guys who named the Golden mean likely attributed it to Zeus.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline

Humanbeings lie but numbers and formulas do not lie. It is ilogical to compare phi found in Nature and the bible with prophecy. Prophecy is the future. What I'm talking about is the present .visit www.goldennumber.net and read about it. See if you can manipulate the evidence.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:Humanbeings

Jimenezj wrote:
Humanbeings lie but numbers and formulas do not lie. It is ilogical to compare phi found in Nature and the bible with prophecy. Prophecy is the future. What I'm talking about is the present .visit www.goldennumber.net and read about it. See if you can manipulate the evidence.

Human beings manipulate numbers to fit formulae.

The number came first before it was attributed to Zeus by the Greeks and Yahweh by you. Or are you saying that the ration itself is God?

a number working in a formula does not imply a divinity.

Quit working from your desired conclusion first. You're doing it backwards.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline

You have provided no evidence to what you have said. I gave you a number (phi) ,a ratio formula , a website full of evidence that supports God and I have given historical proof found in the clay tablets that comfirm the the bible story of creation. How am I or anyone else, suppose to believe you?

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline

You said

Human beings manipulate numbers to fit formulas.

If numbers and formulas can be manipulated to fit a cause (like you stated). Then it is safe to say that the formula of general relativity found by Albert Einstein can be manipulated to fit another cause. To say this is absurd. There is no common sense in what you are saying.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:You said

Jimenezj wrote:
You said  Human beings manipulate numbers to fit formulas. If numbers and formulas can be manipulated to fit a cause (like you stated). Then it is safe to say that the formula of general relativity found by Albert Einstein can be manipulated to fit another cause. To say this is absurd. There is no common sense in what you are saying.

Different numbers could easily be plugged into Einstein's formula. Those numbers would arrive at a different answer - It would be wrong but it could be done.

You did it yourself because neither the current value of pi or the Biblical value of pi didn't fit.

Why do you keep skirting my point? The ratio existed before men called it "divine".

Why do you claim that what you are trying to prove is the first premise of your argument?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

butterbattle
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
Offline
Let's see what we got here.

Let's see what we got here.

Jimenezj wrote:
Phi is found in the bible, the universe and in Nature.

The existence of mathematical constants doesn't prove a god. That's non sequitur.

Quote:
Would anyone like to prove me wrong?

No one has to prove you wrong. You have to prove you're right.

Quote:
It measures 34 angstroms long by 21 angstroms

Angstroms are units of length. That can be arbitrary. That's stupid.

I can easily come up with an arbitrary unit of length such that the dimensions of DNA more closely approximates phi using that unit than angstroms. I'll call it the 'butter.' You should worship me instead of the Christian God.

Quote:
The ratio of 2.5 divided by 1.5 is 1.666..., which is as close to phi (1.618 ...)

I got a \$50 iTunes gift card for Christmas, and I have \$30 left on it. Oh my god! That closely approximates phi!! I have to walk about .3 miles to the nearest Subway, where they have \$5 foot longs. Holy crap!!!!! That approximates phi if you divide the cost of the footlong by the 3 in .3 miles. Look at this. I just put two exclamation points at the end of a sentence there. Then, I put five exclamation points. Whoa!

Quote:
The Ark of the Covenant is thus constructed using the Golden Number phi or Divine Proportion.

Or, it was just constructed with random ass numbers that happened to have a 5 to 3 ratio in it, because 5 and 3 are single digit numbers that exist everywhere, and I could probably come up with the combination about 2,000 times using the objects in my room.

Quote:
Have you ever wondered which of today's "facts" will be seen by future generations as the "old myths" of the 21st century?

Yes, of course. More introspection required, sir.

Quote:
If evolution occurred, is it really the source of life's creation

It's not the source at all. That doesn't even make sense.

Evolution is the change of a species from generation to generation. The theory of evolution describes and explains how organisms change.

Quote:
Is there any scientific evidence or basis in reason which proves that DNA is a result of chance rather than a creation of the Divine?

- Strawman. Evolution is not chance. It is a stochastic process.

- False dichotomy. There is no logical necessity for the diversity of life to have to be explained by either evolution or Creationism.

- Argument from ignorance. You're implying that if we can't present evidence for evolution, then Creationism is automatically justified.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare

butterbattle
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
Offline

Coincidence?

Lol, how unlikely does it even have to be to be called a coincidence. This guy is invoking god whenever he finds the numbers 5 and 3.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline

Because you still have not proven anything, you actualy contradicted your self by saying;

Different numbers could easily be plugged into Einstein's formula. Those numbers would arrive at a different answer - It would be wrong but it could be done.

You said it "would be wrong". Therefore numbers do not lie.

About pi. It did match, you do not see it because the number was rounded off to equal 3. Rounding numbers was the norm in the ancient Hebrew. If you look at the bible, you will notice that the Hebrew has no digits. The Babylonians did use digits, but not the hebrew. Perhaps this is what confuses most people.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline

Jimenezj wrote:
Read #75 Because you still have not proven anything, you actualy contradicted your self by saying; Different numbers could easily be plugged into Einstein's formula. Those numbers would arrive at a different answer - It would be wrong but it could be done. You said it "would be wrong". Therefore numbers do not lie. About pi. It did match, you do not see it because the number was rounded off to equal 3. Rounding numbers was the norm in the ancient Hebrew. If you look at the bible, you will notice that the Hebrew has no digits. The Babylonians did use digits, but not the hebrew. Perhaps this is what confuses most people.

It would be incorrect compared to Einstein's theory. It wouldn't be if I was trying for a different conclusion that I pulled out of my tush as you did.

You have the conclusion you want and you put in the numbers to fit Reality has nothing to do with it.

Figures don't lie but liars figure as Twain would say.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
Butterbattle

Quote:
The Ark of the Covenant is thus constructed using the Golden Number phi or Divine Proportion.

You said:
Or, it was just constructed with random ass numbers that happened to have a 5 to 3 ratio in it, because 5 and 3 are single digit numbers that exist everywhere, and I could probably come up with the combination about 2,000 times using the objects in my room.

A repeated mathematical pattern found in nature as in the examples of fibonacci series and Phi is not an accident. nature and the universe seems to obey 'mathematical rules' rather than acting whimsically.

The level of order is too sophisticated for random cause

If you can come up with all these combinations, than perhaps you would like to explain how the formulas on www.goldennumber.net add up to
Universal order vs random chance.

Go inside the website and take a peek.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:Quote: The

Jimenezj wrote:
Quote: The Ark of the Covenant is thus constructed using the Golden Number phi or Divine Proportion. You said: Or, it was just constructed with random ass numbers that happened to have a 5 to 3 ratio in it, because 5 and 3 are single digit numbers that exist everywhere, and I could probably come up with the combination about 2,000 times using the objects in my room. A repeated mathematical pattern found in nature as in the examples of fibonacci series and Phi is not an accident. nature and the universe seems to obey 'mathematical rules' rather than acting whimsically.  The level of order is too sophisticated for random cause If you can come up with all these combinations, than perhaps you would like to explain how the formulas on www.goldennumber.net add up to Universal order vs random chance.  Go inside the website and take a peek.

A repeated mathematical pattern is no accident if people repeat it. No god needed.

Why do you have to assume a God exists before you can claim that the "golden number" proves God exists?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

Philosophicus
Posts: 362
Joined: 2009-12-16
Offline
...

HumanVuvuzela wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:

Hey look. There could be an element of truth to this.

Post #63, divided by phi (1.618) is 38.936, which using Jimenezj's mathematical approximations is equal to post #39.

Post #39 gives us:

Louis_Cypher wrote:

leaving a trail of troll shit behind him.

See? It all makes sense!

Nice!

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline

I have giving you plenty of proof and evidence. You have not given me any proof of your argument.it Seems that you are running away from your proof. There is nothing to be afraid of. Just come forward and accept the truth. There is no escaping reason, no denying purpose.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:I have giving

Jimenezj wrote:
I have giving you plenty of proof and evidence. You have not given me any proof of your argument.it Seems that you are running away from your proof. There is nothing to be afraid of. Just come forward and accept the truth. There is no escaping reason, no denying purpose.

Your claim boils down to this:

"God exists because 5/3=God and so God exists."

It's a collection of assertions not a proof. Numbers aren't God or proof of one.

I've given you questions and ridicule - that's more than you deserve.

"No escaping reason"? You seem to be doing awfully well.

"No denying purpose"? Especially when one assumes purpose that isn't there.

You're just another person claiming that order can come only from God and having to lie about evolution (claiming it is random chance) to do it.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

pauljohntheskeptic
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
Offline
Jimenezj wrote: To

Jimenezj wrote:

To Latincanuck and pauljohntheskeptic I decided to have a break from my vacation. And decided to answer some more open questions regarding the Bible. Both of you mentioned History in the Bible to be incorrect compared with other scriptures.

Not exactly what I said. I said, " The Bible is one of the worst offenders for errors. "

Jimenezj wrote:

If you look at history most ancient scripture, you will find that the ancient clay tablets found in Syria and Mesopotamia both confirm the Hebrew story of creation. The 17,000 clay tablets found at Elba Syria predates the corrupted Sumerian clay tablets by about 600 years making the Sumerian tablets unreliable and full of error ( what pauljohn believed were accurate is actually inaccurate ) .

You do know the Ebla tablets are written in Sumerian script don't you?

Which Sumerian tablets do you have in mind that were written 600 years later, please supply the ETCSL ref ID or the BM #. If you have neither of these, supply the link to the web site where you found this claim.

I assume you refer to this short creation hymn:

Lord of heaven and earth:
the earth was not, you created it,
the light of day was not, you created it,

Perhaps you love to jump to conclusions. The Lord can be any god, not Yahweh the Canaanite god, it can easily refer to Enki or any of the Annunaki.

As to your claim of Ebla tablets predating Sumerian, not so, they were in a modified Sumerian script bassed on Akkadian at Ebla.

Sumerian tablets date as early as 3300 BCE. Following them were the Akkadians, the Assyrians, and finally the Babylonians who all adapted and used the Sumerian script.

Jimenezj wrote:

The Ebla clay tablets from Syria confirm the reliability of the bible making the bible correct compared to other ancient scriptures.

Jimenezj wrote:

Latincanuck said that the bible was not correct on the creation of the universe. Lets look at Genesis one. In the beginning , God created the heaven (or universe) and the earth (at the same time) .This was written around 3,500 BC.

What was written in 3500 BCE? In what language do you claim this was done? Show me the link that claims this.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.

Ktulu
Posts: 1831
Joined: 2010-12-21
Offline
HumanVuvuzela wrote:Jimenezj

HumanVuvuzela wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:

Hey look. There could be an element of truth to this.

Post #63, divided by phi (1.618) is 38.936, which using Jimenezj's mathematical approximations is equal to post #39.

Post #39 gives us:

Louis_Cypher wrote:

leaving a trail of troll shit behind him.

See? It all makes sense!

+1

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
Pauljohn

Pauljohntheskeptic

Which Sumerian tablets do you have in mind that were written 600 years later, please supply the ETCSL ref ID or the BM #. If you have neither of these, supply the link to the web site where you found this claim.

Im talking about the Sumerian creation myth tablets. There is only one.

The earliest record of the Sumerian creation myth and flood myth is found on a single fragmentary tablet excavated in Nippur, sometimes called the Eridu Genesis. It is written in the Sumerian language and datable by its script to 2150 BC, during the first Babylonian dynasty

Sumerian creation myth - Wikipedia

The Ebla tablets are a collection of as many as 1800 complete clay tablets, 4700 fragments and many thousand minor chips found in the palace archivesof the ancient city of Ebla, Syria. The tablets were discovered by Italian archaeologist Paolo Matthiae and his team in 1974–75 during their excavations at the ancient city of Tell Mardikh.The tablets, which were found in situ on collapsed shelves, retained many of their contemporary clay tags to help reference them. They all date to the period between ca. 2500 BC and the destruction of the city ca. 2250 BC.Today, the tablets are being held in the Syrian museums of Aleppo, Damascus, and Idlib.

Ebla tablets
Wikipedia

If you do the research, you will find out that I am correct. The Elba tablets pre dates the Sumerian creation story by about 600 years. Making the Sumerian tablets inaccurate compared to the Hebrew and Elba creation story.

Have you looked at the evidence of universal order and the bible.
Go to www.goldennumber.net and read under theology.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

Posts: 6791
Joined: 2006-07-18
Offline
The Sumerian creation

The Sumerian creation story is inaccurate because you found tablets of a creation myth written by Sumerians in Sumerian script?

The Sumerian creation story predates the Sumerian creation story?

Really? is that like your transitory valuation of pi?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin

pauljohntheskeptic
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
Offline
More Proof Required not Wild Opinions

Jimenezj wrote:

Pauljohntheskeptic wrote:
Which Sumerian tablets do you have in mind that were written 600 years later, please supply the ETCSL ref ID or the BM #. If you have neither of these, supply the link to the web site where you found this claim.

Im talking about the Sumerian creation myth tablets. There is only one. The earliest record of the Sumerian creation myth and flood myth is found on a single fragmentary tablet excavated in Nippur, sometimes called the Eridu Genesis. It is written in the Sumerian language and datable by its script to 2150 BC, during the first Babylonian dynasty Sumerian creation myth - Wikipedia

Tell me something I don't already know.

Please note, even Wiki makes note it was during the 1st Babylonian Dynasty. They were not Sumerians. They used Sumerian script just like the tablets in Ebla did.

Eridu Genesis is supposedly based on older versions of both the Sumerians and the Akkadians. However this tablet is as indicated from the 1st Babylonian dynasty so per se is not Sumerian any more than the Ebla tablets.

Jimenezj wrote:

The Ebla tablets are a collection of as many as 1800 complete clay tablets, 4700 fragments and many thousand minor chips found in the palace archivesof the ancient city of Ebla, Syria. The tablets were discovered by Italian archaeologist Paolo Matthiae and his team in 1974–75 during their excavations at the ancient city of Tell Mardikh.The tablets, which were found in situ on collapsed shelves, retained many of their contemporary clay tags to help reference them. They all date to the period between ca. 2500 BC and the destruction of the city ca. 2250 BC.Today, the tablets are being held in the Syrian museums of Aleppo, Damascus, and Idlib.

And your point is what? That the Ebla tablets have their variation of ancient traditions just like the 1st Babylonian dynasty did as well as later versions of Assyria and Babylon of older Sumerian stories.

Jimenezj wrote:

Ebla tablets Wikipedia   If you do the research, you will find out that I am correct. The Elba tablets pre dates the Sumerian creation story by about 600 years. Making the Sumerian tablets inaccurate compared to the Hebrew and Elba creation story.  Have you looked at the evidence of universal order and the bible.  Go to www.goldennumber.net and read under theology.

It predates the 1st Babylonian dynasty story of Eridu Genesis, but is not very descriptive at all.

As to the content of these tablets, wild claims were made on discovery, but they have not held up

Also read this 1980 article from the Biblical Archaeologist especially pp82-83 - http://www.ericlevy.com/Revel/Intro2/The%20Ebla%20Tablets%20-%20An%20Interim%20Perspective.PDF

In order for you to prove your position on the content of the tablets, supply an actual link to a verifiable archaeologist and scholar specializing in translation of Sumerian based script and source with the translated tablets that indicate your claim.

Wiki is not one of those as it is but a summary of general opinion, little more.

Then there's the tablet from Nippur # 8380 which dates to about 2500 BCE which is a story of Enhil and Ninhursag. Since these gods are shown in the text, the stories involving earlier events were likely as well. There are thousands of tablets dating to even earlier, written at the time of the Sumerians, but they have not been translated due to cost, time and lack of understanding.

So be dismissive is rather short sighted of you.

Please supply the text of the Ebla tablet in question if it is different from the one I posted in post 87. As I indicated nothing tells you what god is being discussed and jumping to the conclusion it is the one called Yahweh by Canaanites is presumptive on your part.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.

butterbattle
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:A repeated

Jimenezj wrote:
A repeated mathematical pattern found in nature as in the examples of fibonacci series and Phi is not an accident.

You have not addressed my responses, dude. Repeating the same unsupported assertions ad nauseum does not make them true.

By the way, define "accident." I won't hold my breath.

Quote:
The level of order is too sophisticated for random cause If you can come up with all these combinations,

It is....really not that hard to come up with the numbers 5 and 3. If it'll help you comprehend what I'm saying, you should try it too.

.3 miles to the nearest Subway. \$5 footlong!

Quote:
than perhaps you would like to explain how the formulas on www.goldennumber.net add up to Universal order vs random chance.

A formula can't "add up" to either of those things. That is not even coherent.

Oh, and you're creating a strawman of our position with a false dichotomy between your religion and random chance again. Try to stop doing that.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare

Brian37
Posts: 15570
Joined: 2006-02-14
Offline
Quote:OMG milk just shot out

Quote:

OMG milk just shot out of nose.
Hey why didn't your god write a verse that said:

And god says pi = 3.1415...

And so what if it did? It would just show someone back in the day had a brain and some time, which many did.

Too bad their pie theory doesn't mean "nose" in the way "milk" would be spitting out of my "nose" if "pie" were Angelina Jolie and I was producing "math".

That would be messy. The difference between my fantasies and theirs is I am aware that I will never get a piece of Angelina's "pie".

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
Pauljohn

Can you clarify what Sumerian tablets you are talking about. I am talking about creation. Please state the location and date found  and the translator or give me a link. The earliest creation tablets that I am aware are the ones from Ebla, first translated by professor Dr. Giovanni Pettinato around 1976 which are different compared to the Sumerian,Akkadian , Assyrian and Babylonian tablets found. The Babylonian , akkadian , assyrian and Sumerian tablets follow the same story of creation but not the Ebla. The Ebla is more in line with the Hebrew scripture as translated by Dr. Pettinato .

The earliest creation sumerian tablets that I know are from 2150 BC, found on Nippur and are called the eridu and the Barton cylinder.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

pauljohntheskeptic
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
Offline
Put up your claim not just an assertion

Jimenezj wrote:
Can you clarify what Sumerian tablets you are talking about. I am talking about creation. Please state the location and date found  and the translator or give me a link. The earliest creation tablets that I am aware are the ones from Ebla, first translated by professor Dr. Giovanni Pettinato around 1976 which are different compared to the Sumerian,Akkadian , Assyrian and Babylonian tablets found. The Babylonian , akkadian , assyrian and Sumerian tablets follow the same story of creation but not the Ebla. The Ebla is more in line with the Hebrew scripture as translated by Dr. Pettinato . The earliest creation sumerian tablets that I know are from 2150 BC, found on Nippur and are called the eridu and the Barton cylinder.

What part about detailing the content you claim refers to your god do you just not understand?

Please list the translated content from the Ebla tablet along with the name of the translator or a link to it.

And I don't mean Wiki here. an actual scholar or a link to his work.

Do you get it now?

Show me what you think refers to your god.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.

Brian37
Posts: 15570
Joined: 2006-02-14
Offline
Jimenezj wrote:Can you

Jimenezj wrote:
Can you clarify what Sumerian tablets you are talking about. I am talking about creation. Please state the location and date found  and the translator or give me a link. The earliest creation tablets that I am aware are the ones from Ebla, first translated by professor Dr. Giovanni Pettinato around 1976 which are different compared to the Sumerian,Akkadian , Assyrian and Babylonian tablets found. The Babylonian , akkadian , assyrian and Sumerian tablets follow the same story of creation but not the Ebla. The Ebla is more in line with the Hebrew scripture as translated by Dr. Pettinato . The earliest creation sumerian tablets that I know are from 2150 BC, found on Nippur and are called the eridu and the Barton cylinder.

This is a stupid argument.

The names were existent in Sumeria PERIOD!

This is no different than Coke claiming it doesn't contain water because it's can is red when red does not constitute the first beverage, much less the first soda.

Hebrews got their names and motifs from a multitude of surrounding cultures, mainly the Canaanites.

There is nothing original about the God/s of Abraham other than they were successful at marketing their fictional bullshit.

Monotheism is a result of prior polytheism, PERIOD.

Gods do not fucking exist, they are made up.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

pauljohntheskeptic
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
Offline
He makes wild claims & has no proof - standard procedure

Brian, This one throws out claims and won't produce his assertion.

SOP for a theist isn't it.

Many claims were made about the Ebla tablets supporting the Bible storytelling. None have basis so far. The links I gave him showed even the Jews don't buy into it.

Brian37 wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:
Can you clarify what Sumerian tablets you are talking about. I am talking about creation. Please state the location and date found  and the translator or give me a link. The earliest creation tablets that I am aware are the ones from Ebla, first translated by professor Dr. Giovanni Pettinato around 1976 which are different compared to the Sumerian,Akkadian , Assyrian and Babylonian tablets found. The Babylonian , akkadian , assyrian and Sumerian tablets follow the same story of creation but not the Ebla. The Ebla is more in line with the Hebrew scripture as translated by Dr. Pettinato . The earliest creation sumerian tablets that I know are from 2150 BC, found on Nippur and are called the eridu and the Barton cylinder.

This is a stupid argument.

The names were existent in Sumeria PERIOD!

This is no different than Coke claiming it doesn't contain water because it's can is red when red does not constitute the first beverage, much less the first soda.

Hebrews got their names and motifs from a multitude of surrounding cultures, mainly the Canaanites.

There is nothing original about the God/s of Abraham other than they were successful at marketing their fictional bullshit.

Monotheism is a result of prior polytheism, PERIOD.

Gods do not fucking exist, they are made up.

He obviously found the wild claim on one of many Christian web sites which expound BS into fact.

[/rant on]

SFW the Ebla tablets have a version of the storytelling in a variation of Sumerian script. Duh!!!

It is not explicit in what god it means. I gave him in post #87 the translation of the damn thing. It can be any fantasy god one wants it to be.

One can bang one's head against the wall. No help at all.

[/rant off}

I do try to have an actual discussion to help them see the problems with their assertions. But sometimes....................

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.

Jimenezj
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
Offline
pauljohn

You cannot provide evidence for the Sumerian creation tablets that predates the Ebla tablets because they do not exist.

Dr. Pettinato was the first to translate the tablets, and it was he who came to the conclusion that the tablets fell in line with the Hebrew version. He was well qualified to make that conclusion compared with the other translators that followed. You can read about it on the internet under Bar 6:06 by Dr. Pettinato. Dr. Pettinato wrote a number of books and articles regarding his conclusion. Perhaps you may want to read some of his works and compare them to your versions.

Your links that you provided are comments by people who were not even experts in the language of the tablets or Epigraphy.

I gave you evidence in universal order using Phi.
I gave you a website full of evidence for the universe , the bible, and nature using Phi.
I gave historical creation evidence found at Ebla that predates (2500BC) any other creation tablets.
I gave you historical proof by the first translator of the tablets (Bar 6:06).

It is up to you what you make of it.
Happy New year to all of you.

Remember, numbers do not lie, only people.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God.

CharliesGhost
Posts: 2
Joined: 2011-12-30
Offline
don't forget, you gave us

don't forget, you gave us a big steaming pile of horse shit.

Atheistextremist
Posts: 5130
Joined: 2009-09-17
Offline
Hi Jim

Jimenezj wrote:
Im sorry, I believe I have made a mistake. My calculations at first were made in my head. my result approximation was less than one percent. After redoing it on a calculator, I found out it is actually one percent (1%) after rounding off to the nearest tenth or pi =3.1 instead of pi=3.141592653  So in reality we were all wrong. How I did it: If the bible  = 3.1   then you divide 3.1 by 100= .031 or one percent  .031 x 99 = 3.069 3.069 (99%)  + .031 (1%) = 3.1 or 100% bible Therefore the bible equals 99% correct. off by 1% if the bible =3 and pi = 3.1 If you recalculate by rounding off to the nearest hundreth and thousandth, you will get an approximation of 1 to 3 percent. Again sorry for the confusion.

why would you conclude that the human mental conceptions of mathematics had any relationship to a hypothetical external first cause? That math at times assumes the shape of the world we measure with it should be no great surprise.

It's true that certain mathematical structures mirror physicists' modelling of the universe but this only happens in a tiny number of instances. Most of math has no bearing whatever on questions of cosmology or the natural world.

At the most basic level, consider 2 random electrons. No electron is exactly equal in mass. Nothing is precisely equal. There is no equation in which 1 +1 really equals 2, except on paper. And depending on the exactitude of your handwriting, even that is fraught.

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck