How Do You Know The Bible Is True?

Author: Yassine

Posts

Total: 494
#31
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7



.
TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF THIS ESTEEMED FORUM AND THIS THREAD THAT YASSINE HAS BROUGHT FORTH:

YASSINE DIRECT QUOTE TO ME IN HIS POST #13:  "I know you miss the same beating you got last time, that's why you're recycling the same nonsense you said that time. I'm not into your kinky shit. Debate or skate. Put up or shut up."

What happened to the Muslim Yassine?  I more than followed his wants when he said, "Debate or skate. Put up or shut up," in my post #24, and where I said I was ready for round 2, of which there will be many more, but Yassine has not responded nor seen for the last 3 days, whoops! 

Do you suppose Yassine is getting together with other inept Muslims of the faith to "try" and put together a coherent argument to what I have brought forth thus far in my previous two posts regarding his disgusting Islamic faith, of which destroyed the Twin towers in New York, where a friend of mine lost his beloved daughter?

Imagine following Islam where your leader Mohammed was an outright PEDOPHILE in marrying a SIX YEAR OLD girl, and the ramifications thereof, which is sickening to say the least!  Who wants to be a Muslim, raise your hands! LOL!


Jesus and I will await his return AGAIN to a thread that he produced, like we did the last time he RAN AWAY.......... the clock is ticking!


.





#32
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,993
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
Bro D.

Nice to see you back and at it.

Hallelujah.
Topic's author
#33
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Tradesecret
I don't think there is an undeniable proof that the bible is true.  It would depend upon the measure of truth in the first place and by what measure of truth would be acceptable.
- What's the best you got?


As far as I am concerned however the Bible is infallible. It is inerrant.  It is entirely trustworthy.  It reliable. 
- What proof do you have to believe this?


Jesus said "I am the way the truth and the life".  
Jesus is the embodiment of truth. 
- That sounds circular. What proof you have that Jesus (pbuh) said those words & not the author of the gospel.

Topic's author
#34
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@FLRW
Albert Einstein says it all: “The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.”
- Now Einstein is a philosopher & a theologian? This does not speak of the truth of the Bible.


Topic's author
#35
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
- Mr. Masochist, I'm not your dom. Debate or skate. If you wish to debate, first specify the topic of debate, we shall then go from there.

#36
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Yassine
Albert Einstein it's just another bigoted atheist so you're right, his opinion about religion is no different than anyone else's.
Topic's author
#37
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Albert Einstein it's just another bigoted atheist so you're right, his opinion about religion is no different than anyone else's.
- Whether he was atheist or not is up for debate, I don't believe he was. But "bigoted" is too strong. Einstein was much more honest in his quests than most deluded atheists. 

#38
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Yassine
He's pretty clear in his comments about religion he thinks  theists are beneath him so yes he is a bigot. If he wasn't they, wouldn't quote him. But everyone's entitled to their opinion. If you want to believe hes genuine that's fine.
#39
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,427
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
YOUR QUOTE OF EMBARRASSMENT AGAIN: "That you see my words as a contradiction does not surprise me.  Nevertheless, I stand by my words. "

Of course you have to say that you stand by your words that are in BLATANT CONTRADICTION, because the time limit to change them into being coherent had already passed!  What's the time limit on this forum to edit your post, 30 minutes? Whoops, LOL!
Let me repeat myself - please read it very slowly - I would not want you to miss it again.  I am very comfortable with my words.   There is no contradiction.  


#40
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,427
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Yassine
I don't think there is an undeniable proof that the bible is true.  It would depend upon the measure of truth in the first place and by what measure of truth would be acceptable.
- What's the best you got?
I think there are lots of ways of demonstrating that the Bible is from God and worthy of being read by itself without the distortion of others such as the Book of Mormon, the JW's bible, and the Koran.  Scripture interprets itself - it is not to be interpreted through the lens of other so called religious books which conveniently ALWAYS change the bible to mean something other than it really is.  

I say the measure of truth is truth. We cannot determine whether a book is divine unless we have a divine measuring stick to measure it against. Hence the truth of Sola Scriptura. Scripture interprets Scripture.  Anything less than a divine measuring stick will ALWAYS be an incorrect measure. 

As far as I am concerned however the Bible is infallible. It is inerrant.  It is entirely trustworthy.  It reliable. 
- What proof do you have to believe this?
Infallible means its from God. It is a divine book. Very few books in the world claim to be God's own word. For instance the Koran doesn't make this claim.  Its scholars might. But they are incorrect. A divinely given book would require this authentication and without such an authentication - we can discard it as a divine book.  Of course logically - having this claim does not prove per se it is divine - but the inverse is necessarily true. Hence why we know that the Koran is not a divine book. 

Inerrant means it is without error.  The bible is its own measure. As I indicated above - we can only measure the truth of a divine book by a divine measure.  Hence - the bible as its own measure - clearly is measured perfectly.   To be without error as determined by a divine measure is very different to saying that the book has spelling mistakes or historical inaccuracies or so called contradictory passages. To make that mistake is to fall into a classic logical and philosophical error. I wonder if you have the capacity to find which one I am referring to. 

It is totally reliable because it is the WORD of GOD.  

Jesus said "I am the way the truth and the life".  
Jesus is the embodiment of truth. 
- That sounds circular. What proof you have that Jesus (pbuh) said those words & not the author of the gospel.

Unlike you, I don't have an issue with circular arguments per se. Some circular arguments are pointless and silly - but every one of the major philosophical positions including reason, experience, and revelation ALL commence with an axiom - that cannot be proved except by itself.  If an axiom can be proved by something other than itself then it is not an axiom and ought to be discarded.   I am surprised that a scholar such as yourself is apparently ignorant of this doctrine of philosophy. That many others here are ignorant is unsurprising - but you - hmmm - curious really. It seems you might have been more influenced by the West than you are letting on. The Western logic of Aristotle and Plato and Socrates - (The big three) seems to hold more sway over you than the eastern - so called water logic. I find that interesting. 
#41
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,592
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
I think there are lots of ways of demonstrating that the Bible is from God and worthy of being read by itself without the distortion of others such as the Book of Mormon, the JW's bible, and the Koran.  Scripture interprets itself - it is not to be interpreted through the lens of other so called religious books which conveniently ALWAYS change the bible to mean something other than it really is. 

What you accuse  those "others " are doing, YOU especially, do yourself and often.  You are a hypocrite and typical bible dunce that offers  his own invented definitions to almost ever word of the bible to get yourself out of the  tight theological corners that you often paint yourself into. Such as here:


[A] Infallible means its from God. It is a divine book.#40


No it  doesn't, you idiot!.


 Of course logically - having this claim does not prove per se it is divine 

But you have just said it does, you clown. See [A] above.


We cannot determine whether a book is divine unless we have a divine measuring stick to measure it against.

 So what is your own yardstick for measuring a book that you have  claimed;  "The Bible is a book. It can't cause anything" .#3  and have told us in very contradictory terms that; "I don't think there is an undeniable proof that the bible is true." and in the same sentence state ; "As far as I am concerned however the Bible is infallible. It is inerrant.  It is entirely trustworthy.  It reliable".#15



the Bible is from God and worthy of being read by itself without the distortion of others 


So can it be taken literally then?


I think there are lots of ways of demonstrating that the Bible is from God.

Go on then;  demonstrate, Reverend Münchhausen.


#42
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,993
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Philosophical reasoning can come to any conclusion that it wants to come to.

That's the beauty of thinking.

And also the reason why 90% of philosophy is either stating the obvious or absolute BS.


And axioms are ten a penny.


Just like GOD, the YETI (Dinanthropoides nivalis) is an established proposition.

One would therefore assume that as GOD sets a precedent, then your faith in the existence of the YETI is also absolute.
#43
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret


.
Miss Tradesecret,

YOUR QUOTE OF DESPARATION: "Let me repeat myself - please read it very slowly - I would not want you to miss it again.  I am very comfortable with my words.   There is no contradiction. "

Obviously you didn't read my comment to you SLOW ENOUGH for you to be able to use it, where I gave you a website to bone up upon your reading comprehension skills. Therefore, here it is again for you, you can thank me later.  https://www.time4learning.com/homeschool-curriculum/reading-comprehension.html

NEXT PERSON IGNORANT OF READING COMPREHENSION OF THE  ENGLISH LANGUAGE WILL BE ...?


.

#44
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Yassine


.
Yassine,

YOUR PITIFUL QUOTE #35 IN BUYING TIME FOR YOUR INEVITABLE EMBARRASSING OUTCOME: "Mr. Masochist, I'm not your dom. Debate or skate. If you wish to debate, first specify the topic of debate, we shall then go from there."

Barring your child like sexual innuendos, you have the audacity to ask me what the debate will be at this point? HUH? How about the obvious, since you didn’t address my posts #10 and 24, where you totally ran away from the main topics, these will be your starting point, understood? 

How embarrassing where it took you THREE DAYS, and I am sure many underwear changes subsequent to my godly posts directed to you upon the topic of your despicable Qur’an and Muhammed, to try and compose yourself to return to your own thread!  Priceless!

YOU MAY BEGIN:


.
#45
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.
Miss Tradesecret,

YOUR QUOTE OF DISRESPECT FOR JESUS IN POST #40: "I think there are lots of ways of demonstrating that the Bible is from God and worthy of being read by itself without the distortion of others such as the Book of Mormon, the JW's bible, and the Koran."

In prayer with Jesus last night, He told me to inform you that since He is our serial killer Yahweh Hebrew God incarnate, then you ARE NOT to use the term "God" anymore because that could mean "any god" of the biblical age, therefore use His name "JESUS" instead!  Understood?  As if your biblical ignorance within this forum isn't embarrassing enough, don't let it disrespect Jesus at the same time!


 YOUR QUOTE OF WHICH I WILL NOW TEST YOU: "Scripture interprets itself - it is not to be interpreted through the lens of other so called religious books which conveniently ALWAYS change the bible to mean something other than it really is."

Since I am a TRUE Christian that accepts ALL of the words of Jesus within the scriptures, I have to accept the biblical FACT that our Jesus is as serial killer, especially since He is the Hebrew Yahweh God incarnate within the Old Testament, where His killing sprees were without bounds, get it?

Therefore, how does your notion of scripture interprets itself come to bear upon the following passages directly towards our ever loving and forgiving Jesus in showing Him to be an outright killer:

1. JESUS SAID:  "And these enemies of mine who were unwilling for me to rule over them, bring them here and slay them in front of me. After Jesus had said this, He went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.….” ( Luke 19:26-28)

2. JESUS SAID: “Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works.” (Revelation 2: 22-23) 

3.  JESUS SAID:  "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?  For God commanded, saying, 'Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."  (Matthew 15: 1-4)


YOU MAY BEGIN:  



.






#46
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,419
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Yassine

The point is that Einstein does not have numerous brain lesions that cloud his analysis of reality. The same could be said of Elon Musk.
#47
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@zedvictor4


.
zedvictor4,

YOUR QUOTE: "Bro D. Nice to see you back and at it. Hallelujah."

Yes, unfortunately Jesus and I get banned when I just act like Him in so many ways. Imagine that? "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you." (1 Corinthians 11:1-2)

I am in a couple of other Christian Forums that are running rampant with pseudo-christians rewriting the scriptures, and when shown their Bible ignorance, I get warned by the moderators with lame excuses of not being "nice" to them, imagine that!  lol

Jesus said it was going to be hard for a TRUE Christian like me in delivering His direct words:  "Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, (2 Timothy 3:12)


.





#48
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Yassine
@Stephen
@Tradesecret


.
Stephen,

MISS TRADESECRET:  I am sure you have noticed, but the forums #1 RUNAWAY from biblical axioms Tradesecret is MIA regarding my post #45 to her for 3 days now!  She usually at least "tries" to address my posts to her in a timely manner, where I have to correct her none the same, but her running again is her true modus operandi. Whats new? NOTHING!  Is she forgetting that this is a "discussion forum," and NOT a "runaway from discussion forum?"

YASSINE: Oh, oh, guess what?  The Muslim Yassine has also RAN AWAY from calling me out in a discussion about his disgusting faith of Islam. Whoops! Just look at his pitiful and ever wanting posts numbers 11, 13, and 35 within his own thread, where he told me to "Debate or Skate," whereas I have been present and called him out in return to discuss Islam and how horrific of a religion it actually is, but NO YASSINE for 4 days and counting!  Poor Yassine is running away AGAIN just like the last time when I easily "Qur'an Slapped him Silly!" 

Maybe Yassine went to "Tradesecrets; How to Runaway from Biblical Axioms School," and to try and remain intelligent looking in the aftermath!  

. 


#49
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,427
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
1. JESUS SAID:  "And these enemies of mine who were unwilling for me to rule over them, bring them here and slay them in front of me. After Jesus had said this, He went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.….” ( Luke 19:26-28)
Context. Firstly, ask yourself the correct questions - who wrote it - who was he writing to - what was the purpose of the writing. What kind of language is this? After considering these questions - - and comprehending this is a parable addressing the issue posed in v. 11, then perhaps you might start to understand the context and what Jesus is specifically saying. We don't take metaphors too far or it becomes a nonsense.  A parable tends to have one or two primary purposes. The rest is simply filling out the story.  What was the issue he was addressing? And does he answer it? And if you don't think he does, then go back and read and re read to see how it is answered? What is the logic of the story? 



2. JESUS SAID: “Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works.” (Revelation 2: 22-23) 
Excellent choice Brother.  Your lessons continue here.  But I teach by asking questions. (people who think they know everything don't like people asking them questions.)  Who has Jesus cast onto the sickbed? V. 20 lets you know.  But the context is what? John the apostle has written to whom?  Go back to Revelation 1:1 and v. 4. And why did he write to these people? Again the answer is in v. 1.  How are you enjoying your learning so far? It's fun isn't? 

Now the verses you pick up on are which of these groups?  I count 4 to this point.  Rev 2:18 tells us which group in particular.  See - you are getting it.  So John who is relating Jesus' words - as Rev 1:19 points out - and writes Jesus' words.  And after relating the first three groups - he comes to this one. 2:18-19 relate Jesus' confidence and love in this group. their deeds, their love, their faith, their service, their perseverance.  Yet like any teacher he points out any errors. And that issue here is that they - this fourth group - tolerate "that woman" Jezebel - the one who calls herself a prophetess. "that woman" misleads Jesus' servants into immorality, idolatry inter alia.  Jesus says he has given "that woman" time to repent but she refuses to do so. So he casts her on a bed of suffering. And he causes those who commit adultery with her to suffer until they repent. He indicates he will strike her children dead. And the purpose of this is to cause the churches to know that God knows all things and will provide justice. 

Now the questions in our thinking arise? Who is that woman? Is a literal person? Is it a metaphor or a symbol of something else? The passage of course give us clues don't they? Why is Jesus using the name Jezebel? Is there a Jezebel in the Bible anywhere? Has this term been used before? What are the people that John is writing to - what would they think of when this name is used?  Is there a reason Jezebel is linked with sexual immorality, idolatry?   What is a bed of suffering? Is this literal or again a metaphor? And those who commit adultery? Is this talking literal adultery or spiritual unfaithfulness? And the children? Biological? Or simply disciples?  If "that woman" is for example a nation or perhaps a religion, it is not talking about biological children. And what would killing be in that context?  v. 24 goes on to say letting us know that "that woman" is telling Satan's secrets.  Hence for Jesus to be warning this group to stay away from "that woman" is good.  

I could provide you exactly what I think - but you seem to be a good student. Keep on learning. 



3.  JESUS SAID:  "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?  For God commanded, saying, 'Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."  (Matthew 15: 1-4)
Another excellent question to raise, Thanks for giving me this opportunity to continue to mentor you.  Although I am sure we have discussed this before.  

V 1 tells us the pharisees had come to Jesus enquiring about Jesus' disciples - why don't they wash their hands according to our religious rules? And Jesus response - why do you break the rules of God. 

The first thing to note is - there are rules of tradition or rules of the church - and then there are rules of God.  Rules of man v rules of God. The so called religious leaders - had been judging the disciples for breaking man's rules while they had been breaking the rules of God.  Jesus points this out to them - reminding them how hypocritical this judgmentalism is.   He was calling attention to them - stop with the nonsense - and start listening to God.   This is what v. 8-9  is about - as Jesus recalls an OT passage. The Pharisees - were very religious on the outside - according to the rules of man - but were evil on the inside - by ignoring the rules of God.   

The 5th commandment is to honour your parents.   It is a rule of God, not a rule of man.  Breaking the rules of God are much more serious than breaking the rules of man.  The pharisees were saying - if you break our rules you are unclean. Jesus said - nope. Breaking man's rules don't make you unclean. Breaking God's rules  reminds us that we are unclean already because our hearts are unclean.  

I assume you are trying to highlight the punishment for breaking God's rules.  The fact is - the more serious the punishment - is reserved for the breaches of good rules.   We don't punish someone with death for chewing gum. We reserve the death penalty for the gravest offences.  Dishonoring Parents is a grave offence.  Cursing your parents is dishonoring.  

It is a call really to start honoring our parents. To give them the due respect that parents in general show towards their children. Of course there are exceptions.  But these would be rare and hopefully few.  In our society in the 21st century we might have stopped honouring our parents.  Mind you - we have pretty much stopped respecting anyone except ourselves.  Look at you for instance - you respect no one except for yourself.  Perhaps this may explain why you have so few friends and need to use such a charade of persona on this forum.   

Rules are rules - if you break them - you get banned.  And if this is to be expected with a human forum, how much more on a global and cosmic and divine level for those who disobey God.   We can shut our eyes and pretend it is not so - but that well - is not the wisest thing to do is it? 



#50
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,427
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
And axioms are ten a penny.
Are they? How about you start naming a few.  

Topic's author
#51
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@FLRW
The point is that Einstein does not have numerous brain lesions that cloud his analysis of reality. The same could be said of Elon Musk.
- Einstein's speciality is in Physics, & that's that. Beyond Physics his opinion is of laity. Moreover, the value is in the strength of the argument, not the supposed intelligence of the user.

Topic's author
#52
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
- I have yet to see any specification of the debate topic to be broached.
#53
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,993
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Cheese is made from milk.

Cheese is tasty.

Ice is cold.

Fire is hot.

Arms and legs are useful.

Walking is slower than cycling.

Bicycles have two wheels.

Tricycles have three wheels.

Elephants are large animals.

Mice are smaller than Elephants.

Lions eat meat.

Elephants eat vegetation.

Bears eat meat and vegetation.

Birds have feathers.

Birds fly.

Aeroplanes fly.

Axioms are ten a penny.
Topic's author
#54
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
- You high?
#55
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,993
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Yassine
All ten a penny axioms buddy.
#56
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,189
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@Yassine
An axiom. 
A statement or proposition wich is regarded as "established " , excepted if you will. 

Lets check em together yassine.

#1. Cheese is made from milk.   Well this one is good. 
Cheese is made from milk. 
You knew that hey yassine.  ?

Actually. 
If you quickly go through them.  
Everything zed wrote looks correct.   
No google needed. 

Boy did he get lucky. 


I highly doubt he could rattle off another  penny's worth. 
I mean.   
How many axioms could a bloke possibly know.

Hey yassine 
See if he can give you ten more.  
You'll get him soon enough.   


#57
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,189
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Hang on a sec.

Arms and legs are useful he says. 

Yeah it checks out. 
Thats good
Arms and legs are indeed useful . 
Right?

I thouht i had him then. 
I reckon this sick bastard has majored in axioms.  

#58
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,189
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
He would be incorrect  If he'd a wrote something like ummmm,

Horses fly.  

Actually that is a bad example. 

Something like. 
 Giraffes are good swimmers.  This is not a axiom. 

#59
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,419
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Yassine

In a 1936 article entitled “Physics and Reality,” Einstein explained why the physicist cannot simply defer to the philosopher but must be a philosopher himself:
It has often been said, and certainly not without justification, that the man of science is a poor philosopher. Why then should it not be the right thing for the physicist to let the philosopher do the philosophizing? Such might indeed be the right thing to do at a time when the physicist believes he has at his disposal a rigid system of fundamental concepts and fundamental laws which are so well established that waves of doubt can’t reach them; but it cannot be right at a time when the very foundations of physics itself have become problematic as they are now. At a time like the present, when experience forces us to seek a newer and more solid foundation, the physicist cannot simply surrender to the philosopher the critical contemplation of theoretical foundations; for he himself knows best and feels more surely where the shoe pinches. In looking for a new foundation, he must try to make clear in his own mind just how far the concepts which he uses are justified, and are necessities.

#60
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
So like every other atheist Einstein thought he should get the stick his nose wherever he wanted to put it and give his opinion and everybody should have to follow it.