I don't know what I don't know.

I was a big fan of Pythagoras many years ago - he's really big among Occultist (widely applied word I know).

Always wanted to know more about his teacher, who was supposed to have been the one that came up with the Hygeia symbol.

Okay - looked it up it was Pherecydes, never can find much on him - he came up with the name Pentemychos (five Chambers)
 
Last edited:
When I I was a kid there was no man I knew named Paul. Not really when I was a kid when I was in my twenties. I met this guy through work, in his lifetime he had built three Conestoga wagons from scratch. He had a forge any forged the wheel hubs and the wheel rims. He had a spokeshave and actually carved all the spokes by hand. Cut all the wood by hand. He was a welder and made giant ornamental Gates. One day over to his house he was using a little calculator but writing things down as if it worked on the numbers, he didn't know how to use the memory button. I taught him that he was thrilled. I also taught in the Pythagorean theorem. One day when I came over he was trying to stretch to tapes corner to corner of these Gates he was building to make sure they were Square before he started welding them all together. I said Paul, why two tapes you have a calculator why not finger figure the diagonal. He wrote a squared plus b squared equals c squared on a post in his shop he learned that day how to use the square root button and what it was valuable for. He built amazing things for 60 years without this knowledge, it felt good to be able to share though
 
wil said:
To be clear(er) science changes when new information is brought to light, when old information is proven wrong.
Click to expand...
Same with theology. That's why commentary is necessary to understand the text.

wil said:
We don't leave old outdated idioms in our science books because of tradition or age...old science is not always good science. We update things.
Click to expand...
Well not the original books, obviously. Science publishes new commentary that becomes the basis of study of old ideas. Ditto theology.

wil said:
With the thousand year old religious texts floating around the US is creating yet another generation of literalists...holding the book in the air and screaming it is written.
Click to expand...
You put your finger on it — literalists — they tend to ignore any data that refutes their beliefs.
 
wil said:
We don't leave old outdated idioms in our science books because of tradition or age...old science is not always good science. We update things.
Click to expand...
But think about it.

If you regularly updated the Declaration of Independence, for example, how much of the original document, and its ethos, would be around today?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Text in red would have gone, surely, when it's clear that men were not seen as equal, and that black people are naturally second and subservient to white?

Then the 'updating' that would have occurred under the rule of the billionaire industrialists, and again under the rule of tech giants ... each generation rewriting the constitution as it sees fit, and with a few generations you'll have nothing left of the original document at all.

Even today, Roe v Wade is about to be overturned, and the Constitution would be rewritten to make sure that such a challenge could never arise again.

Rewriting history is truly Orwellian.

In fact, you say 'I don't know what I don't know', and by your process you'd know even less, in fact nothing other than what 'they' will allow you to know ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
We amend the constitution, (which is much more our Bible than the declaration) publicly correct its errors and omissions and make them officially part of the original document for all to see.

The commentaries are not similar to updated/revised texts of the science books or amendments to the constitution.
 
My point is, if you rewrite history every generation, you know where that leads.

I take on board that the literalist cannot see beyond the ink on the age, and usually no further than s/he chooses to see ... but there are those who can see, and to destroy history will benefit the literalist, no-one else.

On the other hand I also take on board that the myths, legends and histories of Israel were rewritten as the foundation of the Second Temple era, but this is a reason to demonstrate that some books should not be 'updated'...
 
Thomas - I really don't think Roe v Wade will be over turned.
I do think restrictions will continue and attempts to over turned Roe v Wade will happen, but will fail - could be wrong of course, but I really feel it will withstand the efforts to completely get rid of it.
 
Last edited:
Lol,.rewrite history? We both know the bible is not history, it may be a historical document as in it was composed and compiled millennia ago,.but it is not a historical text.
 
wil said:
Lol,.rewrite history? We both know the bible is not history, it may be a historical document as in it was composed and compiled millennia ago,.but it is not a historical text.
Click to expand...
No, exactly, it's not. Nor is it a scientific treatise. You should see the point and stop holding it to an irrelevant measure.
 
The fact that it's a text in history is reason enough to leave it as is.

Edit: 'not' changed to 'to'
 
Last edited:
Thomas said:
You should see the point and stop holding it to an irrelevant measure.
Click to expand...
I could, I would. But I (shall repeat) live in a country where half my population believes the world is less than 10k old BECAUSE their religious leaders have told them this is a science book and a history book and it is written by an infallible GOD.

If they only sat in the corners and regurgitated their babble it would be one thing...but they have been elected to office and pass laws
Thomas said:
You should see the point and stop holding it to an irrelevant measure.
Click to expand...
i know you aren't in this country,.the future of your nation is not determined by literalists with warped views that are created by misinterpretations of this very book, but you very well know that I live in a powerful country whose decisions impact the entire world....so for YOUR sake I will ignore what you ask me and continue to shout it from the roof tops!
 
wil said:
I could, I would. But I (shall repeat) live in a country where half my population believes the world is less than 10k old BECAUSE their religious leaders have told them this is a science book and a history book and it is written by an infallible GOD.

If they only sat in the corners and regurgitated their babble it would be one thing...but they have been elected to office and pass laws

i know you aren't in this country,.the future of your nation is not determined by literalists with warped views that are created by misinterpretations of this very book, but you very well know that I live in a powerful country whose decisions impact the entire world....so for YOUR sake I will ignore what you ask me and continue to shout it from the roof tops!
Click to expand...
Is this really the way forward though? I don't see what you are trying to accomplish by "fixing" the Bible. Promote good theology instead (which, what you are insisting, is not)
 
wil said:
I could, I would. But I (shall repeat) live in a country where half my population believes ... so for YOUR sake I will ignore what you ask me and continue to shout it from the roof tops!
Click to expand...
I feel for you, dude I really do ... but that's really not the book's fault. You're shouting in the wrong direction ...
 
A Cup Of Tea said:
Is this really the way forward though? I don't see what you are trying to accomplish by "fixing" the Bible. Promote good theology instead (which, what you are insisting, is not)
Click to expand...
I believe (like all) my theology (of choice) is good theology (and I post on unity) just as the literalists do.
 
A large part of the population disagree with your Unitu interpretation of the Bible as strongly as you disagree with theirs. What makes your interpretation right and theirs wrong, that would entitle you to rewrite it to fit your own beliefs? It's just a question?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top