Time-line, science and Judaic religious claims

[Willum]

Presented as if it were true, the Bible was memorized* by uneducated goat-hearders and handed down by generations miraculously and exactly until it was recorded 800 years ago for the Torah/OT, and 2000 years ago for the NT.

Science has been dynamically learning since observations have been recorded, and learns and changes even now, arriving at better descriptions and truth.

Question for debate:
How can a reasonable person accept thousands of years of reaffirmed evidence over the alleged hear-say of 8000 year old goat-herders?

* = We must acknowledge that the miraculous memorization is also incorrect, if the rest of it is.

[DPMartin]

[Replying to post 1 by Willum]

how do you know they were uneducated? and what part of what you believe science says have you witnessed for your self, if any, to be fact? in relationship to your time line statements.

you weren't there, but yet you know what happened because those who weren't there said so, in the name of science.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 2 by DPMartin]

How do I know? I studied history.
About "in the name of science."
Science has this wonderful quality - it records itself, tests itself, and thus doesn't rely on my judgment.

Now, to apply your same reasoning, after the first Torah story's generation, no one was there either. So how do you know the Torah/NT, "you weren't there, but yet you know what happened because those who weren't there said so, in the name of religion."

Now that we've had a good chuckle - back to topic?

[1213]

Science has been dynamically learning since observations have been recorded, and learns and changes even now, arriving at better descriptions and truth.

How can “truth� that is constantly changing be considered good? I think it is really stupid how we should always run to new direction that "science" shows and think it is the truth, when it can change after few years again and then we should again run to new direction and believe now we found it. It is ridiculous.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 4 by 1213]

That you do not think that the truth is constantly improving and good is a serious problem.

Imagine if we had left pi 3.14, and not discover the amazing an elsewhere applicable formulae that allowed us to calculate it to arbitrary accuracy?

Imagine if we still believed, as the Wright Brothers, that the tail section of the plane going first was aerodynamic?

Imagine if you took your four-year-olds version of the truth and tried to apply it to world politics.

Imagine if you tried to tell someone it was raining, and it was, but then told them the same thing, when it wasn't, because it was true an hour ago?

Besides, the truth of the Bible changes with popular opinion - in the '80's homosexuality was absolutely not a Christian thing. Yet now here we are, with gay priests and so on.

What were you saying about constant truth?

[JehovahsWitness]

I believe all ancient cultures have something of value to offer, even in the field of science. We get all our ancient history from what ancient civilizations have left behind, it would in my opinion be foolish to dismiss the writings and oral traditions of any culture wholesale whether they raised goats, pigs or swung from trees in the jungle.

NOTE: I'm just as uncomfortable describing the Jews of the past as "uneducated goat herders" as I am as describing black people of descending from "ignorant jungle dwellers". Blanket statements such as these can be viewed by some people on the planet as offensive.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 6 by JehovahsWitness]

If you like, their culture was a theocracy; they kept the lay people uneducated in whatever the religious law was so that they could rule more effectively. But when something better comes along, we don't stick to unsanitary operating rooms. Unless you are a religion, then you never change.

Which isn't right either - because although Judeo-Christianity has firm roots in Babylonian and the Hellenic mythology, no Judeo-Christian holds onto the belief of animistic gods. Although you do continue to worship Ra in his incarnation as Jove.

That tradition is hardly ignorant, as obviously judges and lawyers like to govern over us by pretending the law is too complicated for the rest of us.

But there were not too many educated people 8000 years ago, so you shouldn't make it a "Jew" thing. (Good effort though!)

The science of ancient cultures was just that culture.
However, unless you are willing to subject yourself to 80th century BC medicine, should not make such broad statements!

[Willum]

[Replying to post 7 by Willum]

Wow, I must've been drowsy or something with that last post:

But there were not too many educated people 8000 years ago, so you shouldn't make it a "Jew" thing. (Good effort though!)

If you like, their culture was a theocracy; they kept the lay people uneducated in whatever the religious law was so that they could rule more effectively. Though that tradition is hardly ignorant; as obviously judges and lawyers like to govern over us by pretending the law is too complicated for the rest of us.

But in science, when something better comes along, we don't stick to unsanitary operating rooms. Unless you are a religion, then you never change.

Which isn't right either - because although Judeo-Christianity has firm roots in Egyptian, Babylonian and the Hellenic mythology, no Judeo-Christian holds onto the belief of animistic gods. Although you do continue to worship Ra in his incarnation as Jove.

Sorry, that should read better.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 6 by JehovahsWitness]
.
But there were not too many educated people 8000 years ago, so you shouldn't make it a "Jew" thing.

Okay fair enough... so who exactly are you refering to when you speak of these uneducateded goat herders? I think it only reasonable to identify who we are discussing. You mentioned the Torah, so I naturally presumed you were using ghis expression as a euphemism for "early Jews".

Are you refering to every nation on the earth? If so, is there a reason you didn't refer to " humanity", or "ancient man"? And if these "uneducated goat-herders" were not early Jews, why did you mention the Torah?

I presume your classification has something to do with the raising of goats.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 9 by JehovahsWitness]

Simply what the topic is about:

Why would anyone in their right mind take what is allegedly a 6000 year old verbal tradition, recorded by an inconstant and war-torn pedigree, which is NOT validated by history, in fact contradicted by history in bulk, why would they take it above the dynamic and recursively verified scientific disciplines?

It is difficult to say who as the religious tradition is inconsistent with the historical one.