GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
And yet, only the Chosen People actually employed these 'common sense' practices in the ancient world.
Exactly how do you know this? We can see that there is literature proscribing certain things, true. But exactly how do you know that this wasn't common knowledge that the "chosen people" simply weren't following? In such a case, perhaps their religious leaders starting making sermons about it that eventually went into their religious literature? I'm not saying this is so, but it seems unlikely that we would have a world of both "chosen" and unchosen, and where the genes are essentially the same. One would have thought that generally poor hygiene would have been contra-survival in the non-chosen, but we don't see any evidence that this is the case. IOW, the chosen don't rule the world in numbers.
The problem with belief is that it encourages you to believe, rather than to think.
We can always start from God. God's very nature is to exist. He is reality (a good working definition of insanity is to be out of touch with reality - that is to be out of touch with God). God is an anchor we can always depend on.
Inasmuch as you have departed from logic, I don't think we can have a useful conversation. You believe. I appreciate that. But, your belief doesn't make it real.
Exactly how do you know this? We can see that there is literature proscribing certain things, true. But exactly how do you know that this wasn't common knowledge that the "chosen people" simply weren't following? In such a case, perhaps their religious leaders starting making sermons about it that eventually went into their religious literature? I'm not saying this is so, but it seems unlikely that we would have a world of both "chosen" and unchosen, and where the genes are essentially the same. One would have thought that generally poor hygiene would have been contra-survival in the non-chosen, but we don't see any evidence that this is the case. IOW, the chosen don't rule the world in numbers.
The problem with belief is that it encourages you to believe, rather than to think.
Indeed, the other cultures (we can look at Babylon and Egypt - two biggies during the time) did make advancements in the area of observational medicine. Things like setting bone and minor surgery are indeed impressive. But, a large portion of their 'cures' look more like sorcery than medicine. Wikipedia (referencing Dr. Michael Parkins) states about Ancient Egyptian medicine:
Quote:
"Some practices were ineffective or harmful. Michael D. Parkins says that 72% of 260 medical prescriptions in the Hearst Papyrus had no known curative elements,[5] and many contained animal dung which contains products of fermentation and moulds, some of them having curative properties,[4] but also bacteria posing a grave threat of infection. Being unable to distinguish between the original infection and the unwholesome effects of the faeces treatment, they may have been impressed by the few cases when it improved the patient's condition."
In the Mosaic laws, there are no special incantations that need be done, nor will you find any uber-polypharmaceutical recipes (though, there's some really good multi-grain bread and porridge recipes) to treat disease.
Inasmuch as you have departed from logic, I don't think we can have a useful conversation. You believe. I appreciate that. But, your belief doesn't make it real.
God exists, there is no way someone can deny that and be honest with themself, because He writes His law on every heart. To quote the Eastern Catholic Catechism (Light for Life: The Mystery Believed):
Quote:
Coming to such a living faith may involve a personal search, but even that quest arises from the operation of God in the depths of our being under the guidance of His Spirit. God has instilled in us a thirst for understanding, to seek the reasons of all things and ultimately to discover Him, the Creator. He is present on this path, even from its beginning, as a Reality deep within us. And whenever an aware and free human person is open in faith, then God is discovered as having been working within one from the beginning.
For a logic argument:
Man has a deep yearning for happiness. From our very soul we desire to be happy. And this desire is infinite. Therefore, nothing finite can fill it. We can even observe that there is nothing created that can make us completely happy for an indefinite period of time. Even pleasure (which many assume is happiness) is fleeting. And too much pleasure quickly turns to pain. And since we can desire it (and it is such a universal desire), we must be able to fulfill that desire. And since no finite thing can fulfill an infinite desire, there must be an infinite that will fulfill our infinite desire for happiness. The infinite is God.
As Saint Augustine said: You have formed us for Yourself, and our hearts are restless till they find rest in You. (Confessions 1,1)
"Some practices were ineffective or harmful. Michael D. Parkins says that 72% of 260 medical prescriptions in the Hearst Papyrus had no known curative elements,[5] and many contained animal dung which contains products of fermentation and moulds, some of them having curative properties,[4] but also bacteria posing a grave threat of infection. Being unable to distinguish between the original infection and the unwholesome effects of the faeces treatment, they may have been impressed by the few cases when it improved the patient's condition."
Why is this a surprise? Medicine has always been a "practice", rather than a science. Up until the late 80s, "learned men" were convinced that bad parenting, in particular bad mothers, was the cause of autism. Many of the medications we have available to us today have so many black-box warnings that it's a wonder that anyone takes them. Just today I had to tell the VA that I was not going to take any statin, and that I would see my civilian physician to be prescribed gemfibrozil, instead. And on and on.
Given that even 28 percent of the Hearst Papyris had curative elements, and a total lack of understanding of the "scientific principal", I'd say they were doing pretty good.
God exists, there is no way you can deny that and be honest with yourself, because He writes His law on every heart. To quote the Eastern Catholic Catechism (Light for Life: The Mystery Believed):
I believe that this is the point where the moderators become interested, so I bid you good-day.
God exists, there is no way you can deny that and be honest with yourself, because He writes His law on every heart.
The Greeks were just as sure as you are that their gods existed; as were the romans, the egyptians, celts, mayans and so forth.
Your delusion is no different from theirs, the only difference is that yours has managed to survive thus far.
But guess what? We are at the point where even christianity is starting to fade into the realm of mythology, where it belongs.
Even in the "One Nation Under God", non-religious people are the fastest growing group in religious surveys.
I'm not saying this is so, but it seems unlikely that we would have a world of both "chosen" and unchosen, and where the genes are essentially the same.
Oh, I could think of stories that tell things differently - keep in mind this is from Catholic teaching from about 100 years ago (as my grandma learned) - you won't find it in Vatican documents though because it was never official church teaching - just your usual teaching by priests and archbishops. So - it was widespread but not official. Anyway, as the story goes, the devil tried to mimic god but failed; instead he created the various species of monkeys. The devil kept on trying but the closest he could get to creating a human was a black african. I never could convince my grandma that black folk were just like everyone else except for a bit more skin pigmentation. You've got to wonder how many hundreds of thousands of people grew up believing the lies spread by the church though.
A more recent incident which more people may be familiar with was Mel Gibson's attack on the Jews. Like my grandma, Mel Gibson was brought up in a (catholic) church that told everyone Jews were evil because they murdered god. I don't believe my grandma ever met a Jew; I never met one until I was about 12 and they're like any other people I've met on the planet, not "intrinsically evil" as the catholic church would preach.
Anyway the short story is: genes don't matter, only whatever cockamamie story you can get people to believe. Never let facts get in the way of a good pogrom.
I never said that the Romans invented Christianity. Nor do I base anything I've written on Dan Brown's 3rd rate fiction. I said that, when Rome adopted Christianity, they sifted through all the available documents (gospels, etc) and chose what suited them to be the official canon. They also stole ideas from pagan mythologies: the virgin birth for example. And they shifted the blame for Jesus' execution from themselves on to the Jews. And even now, after all these centuries and proper historical research, a lot of people still believe their lies.
I think you're describing the Catholic (universal) Church. Everywhere they've spread, they adopt the local gods, subvert the meanings and add them to the local teachings.
Christianity is still a young religion, it's not even 2k years old yet. Rosicrucian, an offshoot of the Egyptian religion, is still around...could be about 6-7k years? The northwest American natives still practice their religion which archeologists suspect has changed very little from since before the iceage they share many similarities with the Red-Paint people. Australia natives also have an even longer heritage.
I think back on page one of this thread, someone predicted this thread would degenerate into arguments between hardcore believers and non-believers. How true!
Mankind has a history of turning fear and ignorance into a religion. Heck you can read about the technique in the Bible where it talks about "bending the twig and so grows the tree!", in reference to raising children. Humans aren't really any different than Pavlov's dogs, we can do the study and then read about the results while we salivate!
there must be an infinite that will fulfill our infinite desire for happiness. The infinite is God.
Excusing all of the nonsensical wordplay JMJ uses to justify his/her beliefs, i still have a simple question:
why must there be?
(and PLZ dont answer "there just has to be")
Some jerks even say that God and religion are different things.
If you have a God, you have a religion, even though you may be the only one practising it.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.