Posts: 7388
Threads: 168
Joined: February 25, 2009
Reputation:
45
RE: The Bible
January 2, 2011 at 1:45 am
Quote:Invented? Probably the wrong word in the context I think you are using it.
Min; didn't YHWH start out as a minor Sumerian (?) desert god? The Jews kind of embellished him a bit,turning him into YHWH ("I am who am") but left him a nasty ,petty vindictive cunt.
All this seems to have happened when the Jews began inventing their own mythology in written form, probably as early as 800 BCE.
Around 1500 years later, an illiterate nomad regurgitated a some garbled chunks of the Torah,and invented Islam.
Disclaimer: I may have erred a little on the side of hyperbole. I consider that approach entirely fair considering the topic.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
132
RE: The Bible
January 2, 2011 at 8:31 am
(This post was last modified: January 2, 2011 at 8:33 am by Edwardo Piet.)
(January 1, 2011 at 5:58 pm)Stempy Wrote: (January 1, 2011 at 8:01 am)DoubtVsFaith Wrote: Not if it's literal or a metaphor that is - literally - in an accepted dictionary. The meaning is only vague if the meaning is being made up on the spot, e.g: A metaphor being created by the author on the spot - and so not in an accepted dictionary.
What a meaning actually is and what you think is meant by it are separate. I think we're talking across each other here, because we're using two different senses of the word "meaning".
"What did he mean when he said that?" vs "What does this word mean?"
When I am using the word 'meaning', I am referring to the semantic content, in particular, the content wished to be expressed by a particular person.
Oh good, because that was exactly my point. Just because someone intends to mean a certain thing doesn't mean the actual meaning (in the other sense of the definition "meaning") is actually any different.
Quote:Knowing all the definitions of the words and phrases used in a sentence is not enough to know the content wished to be expressed by the sentence. Definitions underdetermine the semantic content.
I disagree. Without definitions things would be much more awkward. Dictionaries help, for example, because they make definitions more specific and agreed upon.
It's not enough to "know" what was meant in the sentence. But what is? We can't know anything besides tautology and our own self-awareness.
The meaning of what is expressed means whatever it means. We either mean X or we don't mean X. Whether others know what we mean or not is another matter.
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: The Bible
January 2, 2011 at 3:45 pm
Quote:Min; didn't YHWH start out as a minor Sumerian (?) desert god?
If memory serves....always dangerous at our age, Pad...there is a vague reference in Egyptian literature ( either a papyrus or an inscription) to Yah or Yaw as a volcano god of Midian. That it was incorporated into the Canaanite pantheon (headed by El) is obvious and the fact that he was later inflated into some sort of superior god is equally obvious as you have said.
The argument is about when all of that occurred and it is the heart of the dispute between the centrists ( like Finkelstein and A. Mazar) and the Minimalists ( like Davies, Thompson and Lemche.) The Maximalists ( those who think the bible is actual history) have been dismissed for the kooks they are.
Posts: 7388
Threads: 168
Joined: February 25, 2009
Reputation:
45
RE: The Bible
January 2, 2011 at 7:03 pm
Quote:If memory serves....always dangerous at our age, Pad...
Actually,at our age,long term memory can be pretty good,Eg I can still tell you what I bought for lunch in Harrod's Food Hall in 1985. (the year I finished my degree)
On the the other hand,short term memory may not be what it once was EG I have just switched from an espresso stove percolator to a lousy dripolator. I kept forgetting the percolator was on the stove and burnt out three of them. I also keep finding the vegemite in the fridge
PS: Sneezing,farting and pissing simultaneously may be an hilarious party trick to others,but can be embarrassing .
Posts: 13901
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: The Bible
January 3, 2011 at 5:57 am
(January 2, 2011 at 7:03 pm)padraic Wrote: PS: Sneezing,farting and pissing simultaneously may be an hilarious party trick to others,but can be embarrassing .
Sounds like your lucky its only farting.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: The Bible
January 3, 2011 at 9:57 am
(This post was last modified: January 3, 2011 at 10:07 am by Anomalocaris.)
(December 31, 2010 at 12:31 pm)Stempy Wrote: (December 31, 2010 at 12:27 pm)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: I agree with Chuck. The literal meaning is always the same. That's why it's literal.
Metaphorical meanings are metaphorical.... but they are, then, actually, genuinely - literally - metaphorical otherwise they're not metaphorical. Take the statement "The Bible is a shabby piece of shit", then, standing alone, apart from any context of authorial intent. What is the objective meaning of this statement?
The objective meaning of "shabby" is "showing signs of wear, use, and neglect".
The objective meaning of "a piece of shit" is "any object, person, or other existing thing that works incorrectly, is too expensive, or just plain sucks".
The objective meaning of "The Bible is a shabby piece of shit" is "The shifting collection of well worn primitive written superstition of dubious authorship and repugnant moral implication, favored in some of its parts by christians and in other of its parts by the jews, has always worked incorrectly, just plain sucks, and is too expensive even if being given away for free."
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
132
RE: The Bible
January 3, 2011 at 10:03 am
(This post was last modified: January 3, 2011 at 10:03 am by Edwardo Piet.)
Bachelors are objectively unmarried because that's how they're defined. That's their objective meaning because that's how they are defined.
You can make any metaphor you like out of it but it won't change THAT meaning.
Posts: 13901
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: The Bible
January 3, 2011 at 4:29 pm
(January 3, 2011 at 10:03 am)DoubtVsFaith Wrote: Bachelors are objectively unmarried because that's how they're defined. That's their objective meaning because that's how they are defined.
You can make any metaphor you like out of it but it won't change THAT meaning.
'confirmed batchelor' used to mean they were gay.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 3
Threads: 0
Joined: January 3, 2011
Reputation:
0
RE: The Bible
January 3, 2011 at 9:24 pm
(December 20, 2010 at 3:41 am)Micah Wrote: What are some of the main fallacies, contradictions, or problems that you see in the bible?
I, in no way, believe in the bible. I am an atheist. I was just wanting to see how many problems are in it, as I am not a biblical scholar.
Ok there are many fallacies, contraditions and problems in the bible. If you need a good start to this information I suggest you read the books from decodedseries.com This is very complete and will answer your questions. I agree with its contents and its because I have read the bible I am an atheist.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
132
RE: The Bible
January 4, 2011 at 8:49 am
(This post was last modified: January 4, 2011 at 8:49 am by Edwardo Piet.)
(January 3, 2011 at 4:29 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: (January 3, 2011 at 10:03 am)DoubtVsFaith Wrote: Bachelors are objectively unmarried because that's how they're defined. That's their objective meaning because that's how they are defined.
You can make any metaphor you like out of it but it won't change THAT meaning.
'confirmed batchelor' used to mean they were gay.
But it still doesn't change THAT meaning, as I said.
|