Again, as apparently in other threads and areas and topics , if the truth is not acceptable to society, and is not politically correct and socially correct , then with or without data, empirical or not, the truth will continue to be rejected. Meanwhile, by the Creator's Own Promise, who so ever seeks the truth, and keeps seeking the truth, will find it. This is always truth, and He Has Never Broken His Own Word. (notwithstanding religious folks often break their own words, and follow fables instead of reality - this is by far most common amongst men)
Well, by your own example... I never experienced the concentration camps but have only read about them. I have no doubt that they existed and were a horror.
For you it is a matter of being a cynic and a highly opinionated one at that. I deal with facts. Nothing more, nothing less. Personal facts start with experience and the wisdom to know how to best use that experience. Hard line facts without personal experience start with a lot of study and the wisdom to find out and then know the difference between rhetoric and the truth. Let’s see. You’re supposed to be a teacher and have been for 20+ years. So, I guess you’ve been telling people what to think and what is right and wrong for 20+ years so I guess what you told your friend comes from personal application that is well practiced. Alas, that dreaded sliver in another’s eye whilst sporting a plank in thine own syndrome.
Once y'all get this sorted out, could one of you please tell me exactly how many angels can, in fact, dance on the head of a pin??
That’s kinda what I am alluding to. We may know something of historical significance but since we weren’t there the only thing we have is mouth to mouth and some documentation of that history to prove it. Still, that seems to be enough for us to say that whatever it may be is true yet some will not believe it unless it happened to them personally. It’s just the nature of mankind. We believe what seems logical to us and disbelieve what isn’t. The thing about scripture is that it goes back over 5000 years and much of it seems rather dimly lit whilst other items seem extraordinarily exaggerated. In other words, there’s a whole lot of meat on that bone and some of it is hard to digest which is why I spent nearly 10 years trying to prove that nothing on that bone was edible. Unlike the example of the Jewish debacle which has empirical evidence that it occurred, we find it hard to find empirical proof of many of the incidents that happened as described in the Bible. Yet, empirical proof or not, some believe and some do not in both examples given. That’s when “experience” seems to bring everything into clarity. Whilst I was not there 2000 years to 5000 years ago to witness what some call miracles, I have seen with my own eyes and heard with my own ears incident after incident than cannot be explained any other way than in spiritual terms. If I wrote a book on that one subject it would be hundreds of pages long but all that is so insignificant compared to what happened to me personally. I changed. Not from what I read, saw or heard nor all the study that I did nor all the debates that I entered into. I changed. What I hadn’t realized is that the empirical proof I was seeking was inside, not outside. One doesn’t just read scripture but rather becomes a new chapter of scripture. One doesn’t just see a miracle, one becomes a miracle. What I was versus who I became is empirical proof enough for me. But that’s me and I thank God that He took the time to teach me what real empirical truth is all about.
[QUOTE Let’s see. You’re supposed to be a teacher and have been for 20+ years. So, I guess you’ve been telling people what to think and what is right and wrong for 20+ years so .[/QUOTE] No, no "supposed to be a teacher" but a teacher...and no, I didn't tell people what to think / what is right / wrong......No, my friend, I only provided them with information to research, to reason, to question, to debate. See, otherwise I would be a bad teach. Ciao.
No, no "supposed to be a teacher" but a teacher...and no, I didn't tell people what to think / what is right / wrong......No, my friend, I only provided them with information to research, to reason, to question, to debate. See, otherwise I would be a bad teach. Ciao.[/QUOTE] Whilst I do agree that a teacher’s job is to promote the question and personal research methodology of learning, I assume you still graded those individuals about what they had learned? If so, is that not telling someone what to think and what is right and wrong by awarding degrees of success or failure?
What the hell makes you think teachers tell people what to think or what is right or wrong. That is not the Teaching Profession.
Well, "y'all" won't ever get this sorted out. (See how many decades such has been unsorted ? ) But , in fact, angels do not dance, so the answer to your question, in any case, is ZERO.
Hey, Y'all, I just posted a note on Philosophy and Psych that argues that people who disagree should be able to discuss the issues vigorously without personal slaps and insults. I joined this group for exactly that reason.
I realize that Hoot was playing around and so are you. But, as minor as it may seem to be to you, the kind of research I do means that I do not guess which is why I have never answered that question the first hundred or so times I have heard it.