How do you decide if something is factual?

[AV1611VET]

The word "Raqiya" means ...

Seriously, I'm the last type of person you want to discuss this with.

I'm a GACT KJVO.

 

[Papias]

Seriously, I'm the last type of person you want to discuss this with.

I'm a GACT KJVO.

OK, I could guess.

But it's probably quicker for you to explain why you think that you are the last type of person I want to discuss this with.

In Christ-

Papias

 

[PsychoSarah]

OK, I could guess.

But it's probably quicker for you to explain why you think that you are the last type of person I want to discuss this with.

In Christ-

Papias

I know what he is going for, since I have debated AV a lot. He believes that the original language of the world was English, and thus the KJV is the most accurate version. That is, it doesn't matter that in Hebrew, this word means that or that, because he thinks the Hebrew version isn't in the original language to begin with, and thus is not the most accurate translation.

 

[AV1611VET]

But it's probably quicker for you to explain why you think that you are the last type of person I want to discuss this with.

Because I won't accept any of that speaking-in-tongues apologetics educated people like to adhere to when telling us how God did what He did in Genesis 1.

Solid dome, my foot.

 

[Kylie]

Yes, and I didn´t object to this. So feel freel to run with it.

Yet in post 712, you replied specifically to just that statement I made and claimed: "That´s not an accurate paraphrasing of what I said. You may want to reread my previous post."

So yes, you did object to it.

 

[Kylie]

Did we ever define "fact"?

For example, the answer to the question is "No" when using this definition:
something that actually exists; reality; truth:

But the answer is "Yes" with this definition:
something said to be true or supposed to have happened:

How do you figure that it's NOT a fact that a person lives on earth if fact is taken to mean, "something that actually exists; reality; truth:"

That seems to be veering towards solipsism...

 

[quatona]

Yet in post 712, you replied specifically to just that statement I made and claimed: "That´s not an accurate paraphrasing of what I said. You may want to reread my previous post."

So yes, you did object to it.

I said that your summary didn´t summarize what I said in the paragraph you had quoted.

But you know what, Kylie: Why don´t we simply agree that I am generally and principally wrong no matter what I say, and be done with it?

 

[Ophiolite]

How do you figure that it's NOT a fact that a person lives on earth if fact is taken to mean, "something that actually exists; reality; truth:"

That seems to be veering towards solipsism...

And? Are you excluding solipsism as an option? You didn't stipulate limits in your opening post, but you seem to have added several since then, mostly associated with your own incredulity.

 

[Papias]

Because ...

PS wrote:

because he thinks the Hebrew version isn't in the original language to begin with, and thus is not the most accurate translation.

AV, is that correct? Do you think Genesis was originally written in English, long before Christ was born? I don't think that's a KJVO position - even by Ruckmanists.

In Christ-

Papias

 

[AV1611VET]

AV, is that correct?

Yes.

Do you think Genesis was originally written in English, long before Christ was born?

Yes.

Jacobean English, to be exact.

I don't think that's a KJVO position - even by Ruckmanists.

Genesis 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

What language do you think it was?

 

[Aman777]

Yes.
Yes.
Jacobean English, to be exact.
Genesis 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
What language do you think it was?

I call it Human speak and it is why Noah's descendants were scattered over the face of the whole Earth. It is very dangerous for everyone to speak the same language:

Gen 11:6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

It's the same today since the internet has brought us again to another dangerous place where even total destruction of our Earth, is possible for us to do.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I call it Human speak and it is why Noah's descendants were scattered over the face of the whole Earth. It is very dangerous for everyone to speak the same language:

We are getting to the point that language barriers are about to be dissolved without everyone necessarily having to speak a common language. However, I don't think this in and of itself makes us a species more dangerous to ourselves.

It's the same today since the internet has brought us again to another dangerous place where even total destruction of our Earth, is possible for us to do.

It's not common language that brought us to that point, though. That's the nukes. Also, it's highly debatable that we have enough firepower to actually make this planet void of life, even if every nuclear weapon on the planet was launched and every nuclear power plant had a meltdown strategically. I'm pretty sure the tardigrades could make it through that.

 

[Kylie]

I said that your summary didn´t summarize what I said in the paragraph you had quoted.

But you know what, Kylie: Why don´t we simply agree that I am generally and principally wrong no matter what I say, and be done with it?

I'm just trying to understand an apparent contradiction.

 

[Kylie]

And? Are you excluding solipsism as an option? You didn't stipulate limits in your opening post, but you seem to have added several since then, mostly associated with your own incredulity.

By all means, go with solipsism if you want.

If someone can tell me how they know solipsism to be a fact, I'd love to hear how they justify me being a figment of their imaginations...

 

[quatona]

I'm just trying to understand an apparent contradiction.

It doesn´t feel that way, to me.

 

[Ophiolite]

By all means, go with solipsism if you want.

If someone can tell me how they know solipsism to be a fact, I'd love to hear how they justify me being a figment of their imaginations...

I'll give it another try.

On a casual, day to day basis, I treat as factual things in three categories:

• What experience has shown me to be reliably the case. So, I accept that things fall down if I drop them and that day and night alternate, etc.
• Anything of minor importance based on its appearance (using so called common sense). Yesterday the lights in the drawing room and front hall went out, but the TV stayed on. I took as a fact that one of the light circuits in the house had a tripped circuit breaker.
• Something of incidental importance that is declared to be a fact by an expert. If the weather forecast says there is a 90% chance of snow in my vicinity, I take as fact that it will very probably snow today.

On matters of more substance I adopt a more critical approach, following - to a greater or lesser extent - scientific methodology. I adapt that to the point that, for practical purposes, I take as fact the general reality of plate tectonics and the specific reality of certain quantitative behaviours of silicate melts. i.e. I no longer regard those findings as provisional scientific explanations, but absolute "truth".

Finally, at what some might call the metaphysical level, all bets are off. I have no idea what is fact and what isn't, but I find it convenient to ignore the confusion and uncertainty that arises from this position, except when someone asks me "how do you decide if something is factual".

And, in practice, these three approaches are not discrete, but form part of a continuum that I have subdivided for convenience.

Edit: In regard to solipsism, there was a time when I "adopted" the beliefs of a number of Robert Heinlein's characters, declaring a belief in pantheistic multi-person solipsism, because like Heinlein I think from time to time you have to show the universe a finger.

 

[Papias]

Genesis 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
What language do you think it was?

There are different ways to interpret that verse. I think that the two most likely possibilities are:
1. That this is referring to the start of language, which, if it started in one root, was actually spoken by all humans on the planet. If so, then it was a very simple language which developed gradually over a long time (after all, even chimps use a very basic language with sounds, and it's been around 6 million years since we were like them), and that language hasn't been spoken by anyone for probably 100,000 years. That would be when all humans were in Africa, so it was possible for all the speak the language.
2. Language developed in a few parallel places, in which case that "one language" line is part of a parable story, not meant to be taken literally.

But the evidence could allow for other possibilities too.

Yes.
(Genesis was originally written in Jacobean English, long before Christ was born.)

AV, that again shows that you don't actually follow your "boolean standards". The science (evidence) is clear that Jacobean English wasn't spoken by back then. There are literally hundreds of thousands of texts from Mesopotamia, which are older than 3,000 years, and exactly zero of them are in Jacobean English. We have extensive evidence of when Jacobean English evolved, from what parents (latin, etc) and how it evolved in the few centuries since then.

So going to your boolean standards, science says "no".
The Bibles don't claim Jacobean English either.

And yet you believe that.
It looks like your standards, in actual practice, are something like:
1. Is it an idea I personally like, even if I made it up myself or if someone recently made it up?
2. Is it socially acceptable among conservative Christians?
3. Note that it is irrelevant if it is shown to be wrong by the evidence, and also irrelevant if it contradicts what the Bibles themselves say, and even if it contradicts what the KJV says.

With example after example, I can't find these to be incorrect in describing your beliefs. Help me out here - are there examples I'm missing?

In Christ-

Papias

***************

Also, it's highly debatable that we have enough firepower to actually make this planet void of life, even if every nuclear weapon on the planet was launched and every nuclear power plant had a meltdown strategically. I'm pretty sure the tardigrades could make it through that.

Google earth the crater from the Ivy Mike nuke - one of the biggest nukes ever detonated. On the scale of the Earth, it's tiny. Even if we did exactly what you said, we wouldn't even cause the extinction of all vertebrates, much less all life. We probably couldn't kill off any whole vertebrate class (mammal, dinosaur, reptile) that way. Humans? Sure - but we are only one species of millions.

In Christ-

Papias

 

[AV1611VET]

Help me out here -

Sure.

I believe Jacobean English was the language mentioned in ...

Genesis 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

So from 4004 BC (Creation) until circa 2250 (Tower of Babel) they spoke Jacobean English.

Then came the tower incident, and English was replaced with several different languages.

At that point, language starts to evolve back to Jacobean English, and your 'extensive evidence of when Jacobean English evolved' begins.

Why is it evolving back to Jacobean English? because God's eighth and final Translation of the Bible is destined to be in Jacobean English.

Since Jesus said ...

Luke 11:2c Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.

This means that it is possible that, IF the books mentioned in Heaven ...

Revelation 20:12a And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life:

... are the 66 books of God's final Translation (IOW, the King James Bible), then those books in Heaven are written in Jacobean English.

Just as God gave us the Tabernacle in the Wilderness, a three-dimensional type of Christ, according to the pattern of the one in Heaven ...

Hebrews 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

... He gave us the KJB according to the One in Heaven.

This is just a pet theory of mine, and until someone comes up with a better one, I'll stick to that.

 

[Aman777]

We are getting to the point that language barriers are about to be dissolved without everyone necessarily having to speak a common language. However, I don't think this in and of itself makes us a species more dangerous to ourselves.

God doesn't agree. Here is what Jesus said:

Gen 11:5 And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men (Heb-Adam) builded. Gen 11:6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

Gen 11:7 Go to, let us (Trinity) go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
Gen 11:8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. (Civilization)

WHY did the Lord scatter them all over the Earth since they would have built civilization quicker IF they had stayed together with the same language? Humankind today would have been more technologically advanced IF the first Humans had NOT been scattered among the savages. Amen?

It's not common language that brought us to that point, though. That's the nukes. Also, it's highly debatable that we have enough firepower to actually make this planet void of life, even if every nuclear weapon on the planet was launched and every nuclear power plant had a meltdown strategically. I'm pretty sure the tardigrades could make it through that.

It would have already been over long ago and Heaven would have been less populated IF Humankind had the technology advantages we have today, long ago. IOW, We have reached the point of no return. Like the first Humans, who died in the flood, we have chosen to reject God's Truth in favor of man's. The following prophecy is about to be fulfilled.

Jesus, speaking of the last days: Mat 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Jesus will return to keep this Earth from being totally destroyed where NO Flesh would survive. Humans, left alone, would totally destroy our Earth and ALL Flesh on it. The War will begin soon but it will take a long time from now, maybe 3.5 years to reach the point when Jesus returns. That's WHY I asked you about Trump. Hold your breath since we are already at that point in time. It could take longer IF he's re-elected Amen?

 

[Papias]

then those books in Heaven are written in Jacobean English.

and every single verse you cite could just as well point towards:

• Coptic as the original language, with the 81 book Ethiopian Bibles as the only real Bible, or
• Latin as the original language, with the 73 book Vulgate at the only real Bible, or
• Modern English as the original language, with the Jehovah's Witnesses New World Translation as the only real Bible, or
• 19th century New Yorker dialect as the original language, with the Book of Mormon/quad as the only real Bible, or
• spiderman comics, or anything.

Your verses apply to anything. They certainly aren't specific to the KJV.

and until someone comes up with a better one, I'll stick to that.

There are already lot's of "better ones" that are more consistent than your idea. Two have already been mentioned, but even the YEC view of the "original language" being an unrecorded proto-hittite is one.

So we might be back to our "actual boolean standards" from post #737.

In Christ-

Papias