Reality Bender 09 Part 1 - Of Goats and other Greecy Things

[ooglebydoogleby]

Just watched your first video on reality got half way through and discovered it was pure fantasy. Clearly we would have to take your word for so much of what you fail to verify but clearly you think talking slowly somehow makes your reasoning sound. Prophecy! scientifically verifiable. No only for the hard of thinking.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Sorry these videos are for people who are quite capable of verifying the facts in them for themselves. It is quite easy to investigate these things for oneself. The Dead Sea Scrolls are well documented and copies of the Bible are everywhere, and recorded history is ... well recorded. Very easy to verify for oneself, which is the whole point.

There is only so much you can fit into a YouTube video. (cont.)

[IslandBard]

@IslandBard Regarding my method of speech I prefer that people can clearly hear and understand what I am saying as well as have time to think about what is being said. My experience has been, especially here on UT, that those who talk fast generally do so in the hope that people will not notice that much of what they are saying is silly rubbish.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby But which of it do you find hard to believe? That the Dead Sea scrolls exist and contain a number of copies of the Book of Daniel, scientifically dated well BEFORE the events they prophecy. That officially recorded and verified history records the events as actually happening precicely as previously prophecied?

These are all very REAL and EXISTANT documents that are a part of the reality you live in. It is all very real and EXISTANT evidence Atheism claims does not exist.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard Its definitely the prophecy bit. Its utter nonsense and i have been investigating claims like this all my life and they never stand up to impartial consideration. Are you under the impression that by mentioning the existence of widely known documents of antiquity and interpreting them without utilising hermeneutic principles that your fantasies are somehow true?

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby You SAY it is utter nonsense and yet the Book of Daniel existed IN REALITY centuries BEFORE the events it so accurately foretells. Even atheists and sceptics admit the accuracy of the detailed prophecies is remarkable. Their only solution was to claim Daniel must have been written after the events for such accuracy to be possible. And yet the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls scientifically PROVES the Book of Daniel was existant BEFORE the events foretold. (cont)

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby (cont.)

You cannot just dismiss REALITY as "nonsense" - it IS the reality you live in. You have to explain HOW it is possible that a book in your REALITY is able to record future world history centuries BEFORE it happens.

You cannot simply dismiss as nonsense that which is REAL. You actually have to ask HOW it is possible such a book can exist in reality as it clearly DOES

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I don't just dismiss your version of reality I have several family members who subscribe to your version of reality, its just a pity that it doesn't overlap with any objective version of reality.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Everything in the video is actual fact of reality. Actual words of the Book of Daniel, actual words of official world history, actual ancient documentation, actual archeological findings, etc. I have simply drawn people's attention to the EXISTANT facts. That you might wish they were not does not make them go away I'm afraid.

There are no "versions" of reality. Reality has its own independent existence regardless of what anybody chooses to believe or not believe about it.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I think your standards for accuracy and mine are very different and probably your standards for evidence too. Do you have a hermeneutic understanding of ancient text do you understand how modern apologist interpretations bend meanings utterly out of context.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby They probably are, I'm not happy until I know the truth. The question is do you know how much sceptics, modern and old, have tried to bend meanings and ignore reality and evidence in order to cling to a belief that does not stand up when tested against actual reality?

But if your not going to test what people TELL you against actual factual reality how will you ever know who is telling you the truth and who is not? BUT to do that YOU have to know what IS factiual reality.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I have spent my whole life testing these sorts of claims but your interpretation of reality is demonstrably selective. this video is evidence of that. Please disregard the other comment I just posted as i thought I was posting it to a different conversation.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Vague generalities are meaningless when discussing reality. Their only use is to evade and avoid confronting reality. So exactly which of these well documented thoroughly investigated and established FACTS are you claiming are not facts?

But please do not speak of "interpretations" as many try and do. A fact of reality is not an interpretation. You cannot make the FACT of gravity go away by "reinterpreting" it. Or explain away the existence of trees, etc. (cont.)

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby (cont.) You may WISH these things (fulfilled Biblical prophecy) were not facts of reality (most atheists wish they weren't) but you cannot make reality disappear by closing ones eyes to it or ignoring it. If you want to address reality you must first address, and then accoiunt for the FACTS of it, not avoid or deny them or pretend they do not exist.

The most "intellectual" argument in the world is just so much hot air if it does not address and account for the existant facts.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I agree with this comment but vague similarities reinterpreted with hindsight does not impress me.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Probably not but then again that is not the REALITY. it is only a vague generality people make up to avoid confronting reality and encourage others to also lest what they say and want others to believe is exposed as quite wrong.

Again you have not addressed the facts, simply invented an excuse to avoid them that does not accord with the facts.

Illusion can only survive away from the light of reality/truth. The wise take note of those who shun reality and those who embrace it.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I think you will find that prior to Newton and Einstein disagree about the fundamentals of gravity in many ways. Interpretation is important. As for trees at what point does a bush become a tree? When you can answer that question you will understand why the idea that there are just facts without interpretation is rather silly.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby I am always amazed how atheists have trouble even admitting gravity is a FACT of reality. I do not care how many theories you quote about the nature of gravity I only have to throw an apple in the air to prove it is a FACT of reality.

The experts can argue as much as they want, I only have to point to the nearest thing with branches and leaves to prove they are a FACT of reality.

Do you guys actually expect such arguments to be taken seriously by the intelligent???

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard no one disputes gravity some of us just don't think you should interpret what it is as god trying to keep you down. Belief is unimportant, interpretation of evidence is. you see how can i trust your interpretation when you can't even interpret my comments accurately?

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Ummm I said gravity was a fact of reality and *YOU* disputed it. (The rest of the sentence is not worthy of a response). "Interpretation" of facts does not alter the facts. You cannot "interpret" facts into non-existence as you are trying to do.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard No I did not in any way but you think by interpreting my comment as though i did it some how makes it true. The comments there go back and read it at no point did i deny the existence of gravity and i don't now either. Clearly you have no filter on your own fantasies. Go back and read my comments. I'll tell you what I'll do though. I will read Daniel and send you a message about why its BS.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby @ooglebydoogleby I said: "You cannot make the FACT of gravity go away by "reinterpreting" it."

You said: "I think you will find that prior to Newton and Einstein disagree about the fundamentals of gravity in many ways.

Why did you not simply agree gravity was a fact of reality but instead inferred it depended on how it was interpreted? After all what Newton or Einstein thought is totally irrelevant. The fact of gravity existed long before they did.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard Clearly the fact of something existing that we call gravity is beyond doubt but the thing that we agree to call gravity is explained in an utterly different way by Einstein when compared to Newton Because of evidence and interpretation of the evidence. I hope this clears up why interpretation is important and why I clearly was not denying the existence of gravity. Do you agree with Galileo or Aristotle or do they mean the same thing when they talked about gravity?

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Gravity is that thing which makes everything in the vicinity of the Earth fall toward it. I know it is a fact because - everything in the vicinity of the Earth falls toward it unless another force is applied to it. No matter how many times I or anybody else throws an apple, orange, pear, .... whatever into the air the result is the same. left to its own devices it falls toward the Earth. I do not have to know WHAT gravity is to know it EXISTS and is a fact of reality. (cont.)

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby (cont.) But here's the thing you are not getting. I do not care who puts up what theory, but if it does not accord with the FACT of gravity and the REALITY of its behaviour then the theory is clearly wrong. For any theory to be right it MUST accord with ... the FACTS of the REALITY of Gravity.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby But it is good that you will read Daniel although I am not sure how you can judge a book before reading it.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I have read it. I have not read it recently though. As for dismissing it I think Hume said it all and Spinoza got it right as well. If there were a god I see no reason to think that an entity so profound would be reduced to a celestial conjuring trick. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, not vague old books. The laws of nature according to Spinoza make miracles a sheer absurdity. I am inclined to agree.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby And yet for all Hume and Spinoza protestations and grand sounding theories there the Bible stands a PROVEN FACT of the reality you live in. Accurately declaring in incredible detail the history of the world BEFORE it happens. The thing you are missing is REALITY proves the arguments and theories of Hume and Spinoza are ... WRONG and not in accordance with reality.

Agree, disagree, make up your own theories, it doesn't matter, fulfilled Biblical Prophecy stands a FACT of REALITY

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby (cont.)

The question you have to ask yourself is are you going to believe arguments and theories that are contrary to the facts of reality or are you going to look for an answer that ACCORDS with the facts of reality?

It is entirely up to you but personally I am not so readily deceived as to believe that which is not true. I will test a person's every word to SEE for myself if they are true (in accordance with reality) or not. The only thing I will agree with is - the TRUTH!

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I think it is not on words that reality rests but despite them. does what we observe cohere with the models of reality we have developed and does what we find correspond with our experience of reality? Can three men be put into a furnace and then four men be seen walking about in the furnace and three leave the furnace unscathed? This is in the book of Daniel or do you only see what you want to see?

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Be careful you do not use one thing you do not believe to justify disbelieving something totally unrelated. The furnace incident has nothing to do with disproving Daniel's knowledge of future world history. THAT knowledge is proven by the coming to pass of that future world history so accurately foretold REGARDLESS of what else Daniel said.

But has not modern science proven there ARE ways to stay alive in the midst of a fire? Do not firemen do it on a regular basis? (cont.)

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Just because Daniel and the others did not know what method was employed to protect those in the furnace does not make it impossible just as not knowing HOW the angel joined them is not proof he did not. It is a common error of logic and reason that sceptics and atheist especially fall prey to. To assume something is impossible simply because THEY do not know HOW it is possible.

(cont.)

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby I do not believe in the "supernatural", but that there is a very large part of reality mankind knows nothing of. That we have hardly any knowledge of what is and is not possible, only what WE can and cannot do.

But the Elohiym are not of Earth, nor flesh and blood beings as mankind is. You think of the Bible as myths of primitive man. However I understand it to be the account of the interactions of mankind with those who are far older, far wiser and far more ADVANCED than we.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby (cont.) What the Elohiym can and can't do cannot be measured or defined by what mankind can and cannot do. Any more than what an adult can and cannot do can be measured and defined by what a baby can and cannot do. Just because something is impossible for a baby to do does not mean an adult cannot do it. And we are, to the Elohiym and to the rest of the universe still very much as babies.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard Reality! Elohim! Look your living in a fantasy world. Not knowing how something is posible does not mean you can absolutely disprove it. Your correct in this respect. But if you accept that then you have to accept that not being able to show how a thing could be gives you no grounds for believing it. You can't have it both ways if there are no grounds for falsifying it there are no grounds for believing it.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Is ignorance of knowing how a thing might be possible grounds for believing it is impossible? No that would be arguing from ignorance would it not? "I do not know how something might be possible therefore it is impossible" is neither a logical nor rational argument.

It is not that you have no idea if these things are possible or not (for that is not what you are saying) but that you hold them to be impossible and therefore REFUSE to believe them possible. (cont.)

[IslandBard]

@IslandBard Understand that fulfilled Biblical Prophecy is a proven FACT of the reality you live in. That means SOMEBODY exists in this reality who is able to do the seemingly impossible and see and control the future history of mankind. AND to do it far beyond the scope of man's LIFESPAN. (We are talking thousands of years here)

This "impossibility" is a FACT of the reality you live in. It is highly unlikely this is the only "impossible" thing He is able to do.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I had no idea that men could be thrown tied up into a fire and come out totally unscathed. I am beginning to really see your sense of reality for what it is. But do all objects fall towards the earth at equal speed? Aristotle said no Galileo said yes. Whose version of gravity are we to accept? Is gravity mediated by Newtons inverse square law or Einstein's notion of the warping of space time? These are very different propositions. Which version of gravity are you referring to?

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby A fireman will tell you it is entirely possible to come out of a fire totally unscathed even if WE do not know HOW it is done. But even firemen do not know what might or might not be possible for them even 10 years from now. Such is the nature of unknown reality. (cont.)

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby As to gravity clearly the way to KNOW which claim / theory is correct is to test it against reality. To SEE if objects do actually fall at the same speed or not (in a vaccuum of course to avoid wind resistence). In the end there is always only ONE way to test for the truth and that is "Does it accord with reality?"

REALITY is ALWAYS the ultimate truth and the ultimate test of truth. That which is true is that which is REAL.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard We can't test the correct version between Newton and Einstein by dropping in a vacuum but I agree with your basic point. Men generally don't survive being forcibly burnt in fires. We can test this. We can also test the likelihood of a man surviving being fed to hungry lions who devour those given over for the same purpose moments latter. We know its incredibly unlikely. It does not cohere or correspond with reality.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Something you have to understand about sceptics and disbelievers is the frequency with which they are eventually proven to be wrong. Every great discovery, every great achievement had its sceptics. The Wright brothers had theirs, Columbus had his, Marconi his, etc. The reason for this is that their scepyicism and disbelief is not based on actual knowledge but on ASSUMPTIONS.

You ASSUME the elohiym do not exist. You assume if mankind cannot do it nobody can. (cont.)

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby You assume the only way to protect yourself from fire is by special clothing. You assume there is no way to control the behaviour of hungry lions. You assume the elohiym are just the figment of somebodies imagination and not beings from another place with far greater knowledge and capabilities than mankind.

It is up to you as to what you choose to believe and disbelieve but understand you only ASSUME these things are impossible because you cannot see how they might be done.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I see so when Daniels brothers were thrown bound into the fire to be burnt your version of reality has them dressed in some sort of fire suits? One minute your talking about there only being one reality and the next anything is possible so what meaning does reality have for you? Let me help you out here did you know that the Egyptians made asbestos suits for special fire ceremonies? Maybe they borrowed some though the point is not what is posible but what is likely.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby They weren't Daniel's brothers they were his companions. and I said nothing about them being dressed in suits. Daniel does not say HOW they were protected, only they were protected by some means. You are just assuming it is not possible.

But WHY are you not asking yourself how is it Daniel COULD do the "impossible" and accurately record the history of the world two to nearly four CENTURIES in the future? Clearly it is not impossible either for we have proof he actually DID it.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby You cannot seek the truth if you simply assume you already know it. You do not know these things are impossible you simply look at reality through the meagre, scant knowledge mankind has of it and ASSUME they are.

Personally I do not let other people's blinkered and limited vision close my mind to all the possibilities that may exist in the vast portion of reality mankind still knows nothing of. Mankind does not even know how much it does NOT know about reality.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I agree and i am not closed to possibility just making up reality on the basis of some internal voice and a large slice of wish fulfilment.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby "i am not closed to possibility just making up reality"

I agree Atheism does tend to make up its own reality :-)

However I choose to pay careful attention to it and listen to what the facts of reality are telling me. That is why most of my conversations with atheists (this one included it is beginning to seem) consists of me drawing attention to the facts and those Atheists I speak to going to incredible (indeed sometimes unbelievable) lengths to avoid confronting them.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard I read it and i don't see what you see. There is no prediction just very subjective dreams that can be interpreted with the benefit of hindsight. I do not have absolute knowledge but i do know that on the balance of probability and on the track record of prophesy these things are untrue. Mumbling pseudo mystical mumbo jumbo may make you feel closer to some divine imaginary divinity but from where I am standing It is entirely unimpressive. I wish you well.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby So you think passages like "20 The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. 21 And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king. 22 Now that being broken, whereas four stood up for it, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not in his power. " Where Gabriel is EXPLAINING the vision is not a prediction but a "subjective dream"? Especially as Alexander WAS the first king.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby With respect but to be honest, the only reason I can think of why somebody would make such an irrational declaration denying what is clearly written in the book of Daniel is a desperate measure to cling to a belief that is contrary to the actual facts by pretending the facts do not exist. I can think of no other reason for such an easily disproved and patently erroneous statement.

You must choose what to believe, but can you REALLY choose to believe what you have just said?

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard As i said your easily impressed.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby With the truth - always.

[ooglebydoogleby]

Respond to this video... I think you calling anyone irrational when you base what you believe on a few slightly vague tracts from ancient scripture is hilarious. How many words are in the Bible and how many prophecies get anywhere near correct in comparison to those that are clearly nuts. Why does the prophecy get so much wrong?

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby All the prophecies that have come to pass have come to pass as prophecied. Some are still to come to pass in our future.

"Why does the prophecy get so much wrong?"

When you actually start addressing and specifying some actual facts and not keep making vague generalised claims such as this perhaps I can clarify what you are referring to. As it is all you are making is an unsubstantiated claim with no factual basis at all. I don't see the prophecy getting anything at all wrong.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard Ok here is a fact, the book of daniel says men can be burnt in a furnace and survive unharmed? This is a fact that goes against everything we know about nature. Fact! But its worse than this sounds because the intent of the executioner was to utterly kill them. Thats why they were tied together. this is clearly nonsense and as for the prophecy the fact that the historicity of the book is in doubt should be enough to make you at least skeptical. Reality!

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby OK, firstly the furnace event is not part of the future prophecies you are avoiding discussing. But it is a fact that there are ways to survive a fire NOW that were "impossible" even 100 years ago. So it is a fact that 100 or even 3,000 years ago it was not "impossible" to survive being in the middle of a fire it is just that they didn't know HOW to do it. So it is not impossible for Daniel's friends to be protected, it is just that we don't know HOW the angel with them did it.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby (cont.) Now you may not believe Daniel but science has now proved it IS possible to be protected while in the middle of a fire so we cannot say the story of Daniel is impossible, only that we do not know HOW it was possible. But then there is an awful LOT of things about the universe mankind does not know.

As to the "historicity" of Daniel you seem to have forgotten the DSS that scientifically proves copies of the Book of Daniel existed well before many of the prophecied events

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard The angel protected them. You can prove that? Is that what your going to say every time something pops up. That does n't count because their magic pal sorted the problem. Is that reality. I have read the book of Daniel from back to front now but the problem is that you want me to trust that the scholarship underlying the claim that it was written early rather than later is reputable when clearly those championing that claim ignore anything that undermines their contention.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby You are still missing the point. You cannot prove an angel did not protect them. You only *ASSUME* an angel did not because YOU do not know HOW it is possible. Your lack of knowledge is not proof or evidence of anything except your lack of knowledge. The bigger problem you are anxiously seeking to sidestep is that the book of Daniel accurately foretells future world history well AFTER the earliest scientifically proven existence of copies of it. (Don't forget Leviticus 26:14-46)

[ooglebydoogleby]

Respond to this video... Nothing in the dead sea scrolls changes the scholarly consensus that they were written in around 167BC and the Vaticanus manuscript is from AD 400 and is the oldest new testament manuscript other than the Qumran texts. In fact only the blindness of dogma leads anyone to the conclusion that it was written earlier. To be honest I have no doubt that you have far better knowledge of the content of Daniel but uncritically.

Prophecy has to precede events. It doesn't

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby You are forgetting the scholarly consensus that these are copies of a much EARLIER highly revered document. Also even 167BC is still well BEFORE many of the events Daniel prophecied. The date 167BC does not make your problem go away it PROVES the reality of fulfiled Biblical prophecy.

Likewise you are avoiding the reality of the writings of the early church "Fathers" of 100-330AD who regularly quote and refer to the existing, and widely circulated and available NT documents.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard only on your planet. and even if it comes from an earlier document there is no way to know how it has altered. The dead sea community appear not to have considered it canonical that much can be told from the presentation of the script. There are at least four differing copies of the book of Daniel in the dead sea scrolls alone. Only a fantasist would accept a story which is the 9/11 conspiracy fantasy of its time as having validity. So much wrong so much.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby No, in THIS reality. The DSS copies THEMSELVES contain the prophecies that were only fulfilled AFTER the documents existed regardless of any earlier documents. Not only does the existence of 8 copies point to the canonicity of the Book of Daniel but at least one other DSS has the reference "as written in the Book of Daniel the PROPHET" a reference the Qumran community used only in connection with canonical scripture. Remember also Daniel *IS* part of the Jewish scripture canon.

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby (cont.)

There are not 4 versions of Daniel as you imply. They have identified two literary forms (further evidence of prior existence) but one of those is the Masoretic form and identical to the Masoretic Text of 980AD from which the OT derives. The DSS prove the MT to be an accurate and unchanged rendition of the OT Scriptures. BUT regardless you are still confronted by the reality of EXISTANT documents that accurately foretell world events that occur AFTER they are recorded.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard No it does not. Clearly it is not old enough to prove anything at the best it can provide an indication but to be honest I am bored of talking to you. I have better things to do that involve reality as it is not as fantasy. I wish you well. I would recommend you consider sources beyond apologist web sights. You are getting an extremely biased take on this. Good luck though and I wish you well BYE

[IslandBard]

@ooglebydoogleby Actually I gather information from quite a wide and varied range of sources but I always invite people to check out and investigate these things for themselves. Of course whether or not they actually do is beyond my control and dependent on their own desire to know the truth, the reality.

But thanks for wishing me luck. Of course, as a follower of Christ I do not believe in "luck" and so cannot return the compliment. However I do pray that you find the truth should you seek it.

[ooglebydoogleby]

@IslandBard Well I know prayer doesn't work but do what ever makes you feel better. Stay well.