detailed befliefs part 1: When you dont get it... simple is usually right

[Vough]

[quote name='Dark' timestamp='1313282646' post='5440609']
[i]You'd be the .00001% who believe that, but as you have nothing to back it up, you're still entitled to your...flawed...opinion.[/i]

[i]Yes, but we know who wrote it, and we also know that because that person wrote it we know what time period it would have been in or after, [/i]

...how is my opinion flawed? My opinion is just as probable as the OPs, so if mine is flawed, so is his. And you seem to back up his. I am probably the only person who believes that the Garden of Eden is in my pubic hair, but that doesn't make my opinion any less viable than the OPs, nor any more flawed.

Also, the Bible may have been written (supposedly) after the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers were named, but note that the conceptual stories in the Bible [b]may have been [/b]folktales before the book was ever written. You never thought that whoever wrote the Bible might have pulled some passages from things he's heard? Stories? So the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers could have been named as such [b]because[/b] of the Bible.
[/quote]

Because atleast 1 (semi-)reliable source points that the Garden of Eden was somewhere near Mesopotamia, or a place that would be Mesopotamia.

I still fail to see how even if he wrote it after the rule of King Hammurabai, they would be named as such.

[Dwarven King]

[quote name='WTFauKorean' timestamp='1312805059' post='5424564']before I start this
lecture, rant, ego's pride, flame war, preach, debate, education; call it what you want.
there are a few things I would like to warn you or at least alert you about before you even go into the meaty parts

1. If you have very strong views and you hate being open minded its better if you did not read this and make yourself feel offended.... or if you feel some sort of exhilarating rush from being offended and arguing your point, you're free to do that also.

2. yes this does argue about religion... shut up, i"m not smart enough to use numbers and equations, and bringing in discoveries about religion is the only way to make myself exceptionally intelligible.

3. this might be used for my senior project so if I hear a lot of arguments that kind of sound like "well you are pompous cock-suck, f** nut." Then most likely my senior project will be about me liking dick.

4. hell its an internet forum, these thing are actually meant for things like this

5. if you think, actually listening to something from me, that I think is worth presenting to TED, is quite the remarkable, you shouldn't be afraid to tell me so (I only bite in bed) and maybe I'll have more interesting things for you guys that have nothing to do with mundane and overrated issues such as religion =P.


when you look at any unsolved mystery or perplexing puzzle a lot of times you will find that the simplest solution is the best solution. The ones who are so proud that they can create and decipher the complex are not that wise at all. They actually have quite a hazy tunnel vision and have taken a harsher road to the same conclusion that some one could have done with very minimal effort, and most times the conclusion deciphered with a more complex equation will have more inaccuracies and loop holes.

"okay that's cool you railed on professionals and experts in almost every possible subject of research so what?" Is what all of you might be thinking if you read up to this point, especially since I've told you this is the question that should be swirling around in your head.

well using this dogma of a method I've come to discover many truths about almost all major religions in the entire world. Now the key word is "many", not "all" what I say might have seemed to cover everything by the time you are thru with this but it certainly has not and I will explain what is missing later.

but lets start with the question that would probably raise the most question at the very beginning so I can answer them in a chronological order.

and that question is "where is in the world is the garden of Eden?"

this is the reactions that I'd probably expect the most
*who the f*** said that any event in the bible was actually real?*
*so what all the other religions are wrong, you are narrow minded punk*
*wtf is the garden of eden?*
*I already know that answer to that tell me something I don't know*
*I came to hook up with chicks here, can you tell me what page they posted on so I can compliment them about their thoughtful insight even if I think what ever they said was a load of s***?*

those are all very good thought processes, except maybe the one about hooking up with chicks
then you might want to go to a adult chat site.... and no I will not suggest any to you even if I know/knew some really great ones.....

but let me continue and it will hopefully answer a all of your questions if not most.

first of a for those of you who don't know what the garden is it is theoretically the first settlement of man kind. IF and ONLY IF you take what that book says quite literally. Which is what most pastors believe. Further more this location was in theory believed to be a lost paradise where every animals existed and was named by a single man. This is all a load of crap. The book is actually right and it is speaking the truth, but not in literal terms. People have been complicating this issue by finding scientific explanations for such events. well they are getting absolutely know where.

I asked a pastor a few weeks ago where he thought the garden of Eden was and he said he did not know. He claimed it was a lost paradise. I came to ask 5 more different pastors of the same religion and they said similar answers except one who said Hawaii might be it, but it is also being plagued with sin as of now. I asked 2 pastors of different religions and they told me it never existed in the first place. Well I can tell you that all of them are wrong, seriously Hawaii is the dying garden? You gotta be joking.

most likely is around a 49-50 split between idk and it never existed. the other .9% probably said something stupid, like that thing about hawaii back there.

the last .1% is me

and I can tell you the ones with the best answer are the ones that said "they don't know" because they are absolutely right, they don't know..... But I with confidence say "I do." In fact if you go on to goggle maps I can point it out to you.... in fact I will tell you It's now exact current location right now with Google maps. All you have to do is Google map search the term Mesopotamia and locate 2 rivers Euphrates River and her neighbor the Tigris River. At one point these rivers form into one which causes many floods and always has done since the famous/infamous story of Noah's ark which I will also go into detail later.

All world historians know one very clear fact. some of the very, very first great civilizations started in Mesopotamian because of geography. Rivers are a essential part of civilization and those 2 rivers are the best of the best when it comes to landmarks of human evolution. So no Eden was not a tropical paradise, but it sure did have the essential water supply needed for a civilization to make themselves some leisure time... In that leisure time I'm almost certain that one of the first and most influential organized religions were made then. Thus we have one chaos of clump of idealism that eventually split into 3. All 99% the same, yet all 100% viewed these religions as distinct. That I will also get into detail later.

now although this location is ideal for human growth that does not necessarily mean it was the starting point of the entire human race. Instead it was the starting point of the very first organized civilizations which have evolved from nomads, rivers in Asia being followed soon after. Thus the ottoman empire and the Chinese empire. This also explains the first man alive thing, this man Is most likely one of the few men who were educated enough at the time to utilize literacy. Also the very first man to create a government. Oh yeah this religion is the first organized government known by most as historians and politicians as "church." but no one ever took that very simple answer to thought. Before this religion there was a religion known as shamanism, but this church system was separate from their governing system. Shamanism started in ancient china and was most likely older than the religion originating from Mesopotamian. The problem was that Shamanism never really had truth to it making it die out. Its counter part how ever held truth until man misinterpreted its written documents which is why it still exist today in 3 split religions actually at war against each other.

now this is a lot of information but
for now you should have these to truths very clear in your head.

1. the religion originating with the garden does have some truth to it
2. this does NOT mean all other religions are false, for I have only proved a geographical location to exist.
3. the garden never had, every animal species in the world nor was it the origination location of man kind.
4. the geographical location was ideal location for great civilization but not the only location.
5. this religion was split into 3
6. this religion has been misinterpreted
7. this religion was also the first organized government for non-nomads

Id write more but I think I'm running out of space so I'll continue with more another time, but for now tell me what you think. I'd like to hear you guys rant about loop hole and inaccuracies to find simple proof and truth for that also. I have a feeling many of you have a reaction similar to one of these.

*okay I knew 70% of that load of s*** I refuse to listen to anymore*
*okay I knew 70% of that load of s*** but I'll give him a chance to tell me more*
*interesting but I bet I can find a loophole or inaccuracy*
*I already found an inaccuracy*
*this is insulting*
*man that chick is totally on to me*[/quote]

I'm posting with my phone, so I only read this post. Anyway, here is my response.

From what you said, I gathered that all the events are true to some extent. Basically, some smart guy decided to write all the events that were hapening as a sort of history book. Eventually, he realized everyone around him were idiots, so decided he was going to start something. So he claimed "God" had him write the book and that "God" did all those events. Thus we have an organized religion where everyone follows a figment of said guy's imagination.

...yeah, I'm atheist. :<

[Vough]

[quote name='Dwarven King' timestamp='1313304499' post='5441503']
I'm posting with my phone, so I only read this post. Anyway, here is my response.

From what you said, I gathered that all the events are true to some extent. Basically, some smart guy decided to write all the events that were hapening as a sort of history book. Eventually, he realized everyone around him were idiots, so decided he was going to start something. So he claimed "God" had him write the book and that "God" did all those events. Thus we have an organized religion where everyone follows a figment of said guy's imagination.

...yeah, I'm atheist. :<
[/quote]

Could've happened.
However unlikely, as your argument is flawed, since the Bible traversed thousands of years, as one man could not live that long, it's unlikely. I hope that wasn't a run-on.

[Dwarven King]

[quote name='Vough' timestamp='1313309833' post='5441589']

Could've happened.
However unlikely, as your argument is flawed, since the Bible traversed thousands of years, as one man could not live that long, it's unlikely. I hope that wasn't a run-on.[/quote]

Actually, it is possible. Like mentioned before, the author of the bible may have gotten most of his facts from folk lore, tales pased from father to child, or even random scriblings on a wall. If you think about it, it is possible.

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

[quote name='Dwarven King' timestamp='1313345060' post='5442361']
Actually, it is possible. Like mentioned before, the author of the bible may have gotten most of his facts from folk lore, tales pased from father to child, or even random scriblings on a wall. If you think about it, it is possible.
[/quote]
"If you think about it" is the worst possible argument you can come up with, because if you think about it, it is also possible that the bible was written through those thousand years, and that people may have been influenced to write the bible by some unknown force.

I'm not saying that your idea isn't possible, but some people believe their religion and acknowledge that their religion may very well be wrong.

[Dwarven King]

[quote name='Miror B.' timestamp='1313351356' post='5442605']
&quot;If you think about it&quot; is the worst possible argument you can come up with, because if you think about it, it is also possible that the bible was written through those thousand years, and that people may have been influenced to write the bible by some unknown force.

I'm not saying that your idea isn't possible, but some people believe their religion and acknowledge that their religion may very well be wrong.[/quote]

...I live in a town where those who believe in God look down on those that choose to not blindly follow some deity.

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

[quote name='Dwarven King' timestamp='1313370178' post='5443475']
...I live in a town where those who believe in God look down on those that choose to not blindly follow some deity.
[/quote]
Then your town is full of a******s.

[Dwarven King]

[quote name='Miror B.' timestamp='1313370269' post='5443479']
Then your town is full of a******s.
[/quote]

Precisely.

[Dark]

[i]Because atleast 1 (semi-)reliable source points that the Garden of Eden was somewhere near Mesopotamia, or a place that would be Mesopotamia.[/i]

Whatever source you are talking about isn't any more reliable than my functional brain. I could just as easily right my own religious book saying that the Garden of Eden was definitely in Dark's pubic hair, but you would automatically discount that as false. Why? Why is the religious book I wrote any less credible than the Bible? I believe in my own book just as much as you believe in the Bible. If I don't believe in the Bible, I don't really consider it a reliable source point for where the Garden is, assuming I believe in the Garden of Eden (I don't). You are using a biased source to prove your point, aren't you?

[i]I still fail to see how even if he wrote it after the rule of King Hammurabai, they would be named as such. [/i]

...I've explained this twice or thrice so far.

[BehindTheMask]

Imagine the possibility that at this very moment you are actually a brain hooked up to a sophisticated computer program that can perfectly simulate experiences of the outside world. If you cannot now be sure that you are not a brain in a vat, then you cannot rule out the possibility that all of your beliefs about the external world are false. Let “P” stand for any belief or claim about the external world, say, that The Garden of Eden existed.[list=1]
[*]If I know that P, then I know that I am not a brain in a vat
[*]I do not know that I am not a brain in a vat
[*]Thus, I do not know that P.
[/list]
Argument edited from http://www.iep.utm.edu/brainvat/ . I've known about this argument but was too lazy to type out.

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

[quote name='BehindTheMask' timestamp='1313547925' post='5449248']
Imagine the possibility that at this very moment you are actually a brain hooked up to a sophisticated computer program that can perfectly simulate experiences of the outside world. If you cannot now be sure that you are not a brain in a vat, then you cannot rule out the possibility that all of your beliefs about the external world are false. Let “P” stand for any belief or claim about the external world, say, that The Garden of Eden existed.[list=1]
[*]If I know that P, then I know that I am not a brain in a vat
[*]I do not know that I am not a brain in a vat
[*]Thus, I do not know that P.
[/list]

Argument edited from [url="http://www.iep.utm.edu/brainvat/"]http://www.iep.utm.edu/brainvat/[/url] . I've known about this argument but was too lazy to type out.
[/quote]
Isn't that a little backwards? If.. then statements don't work in the reverse.

[BehindTheMask]

[quote name='Miror B.' timestamp='1313597264' post='5450488']
Isn't that a little backwards? If.. then statements don't work in the reverse.
[/quote]

1) If A, then B
2) I do not know that B
Therefore
3) I cannot know that A.

[Ieyasu Tokugawa]

If you are 19, you should be able to drive.

You are not able to drive.

I can still figure out if you're 19 or not.

Edit: Or I'm going off of truth tables too much.

[WTFauKorean]

oh god i haven't even started and people are still arguing about this, lol
I kind of want to delay the second post only to see how much further this could be argued
further more
I'm not telling you to change your beliefs, I'm just telling you to consider the evidence and decide for your selves whether this is a the most plausible possibility out of the many presented and keep it to/for yourself.
therefore if anyone does argue their beliefs as a biased for this "debate" then I must ask of the open-minded to completely ignore the insolent, instead of stooping down to his/her level

thanks brus and brudets