dye

Oh mine, is it for real?

dye

回覆 28# 抽刀斷水

回覆 28# 抽刀斷水

I would suggest to use the bible to defeat itself.

In the bible, it said a good tree would bear good fruit (Mathew 7:15-20)

If we find bad fruit on the tree, we do not to try every fruit on the tree to conclude it is a bad tree, or do we?  Mathew would suggest not to pick grapes from thornbushes.

Of-course in real life, an incomplete theory is still useful; the same tree can bear both good and bad fruit, then again, Mathew is not exactly a gardener, is he?

------------------
Below is the full verses in context (NIV) for quick reference

15Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.

16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

17Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.

18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.

19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

dye

回覆 32# 抽刀斷水

The core of your original argument is an economic one.  Look at it like an investor:

Step 1) The opportunity cost of reading the bible to the end, learning Hebrew and the related history.  It usually translate into spending the rest of your life.  People value their life differently.  Some people just have nothing better to do!

Step 2) The potential chance of being "saved".  Although past performance does not guarantee performance, it is a reference for future.  How else can be make a better estimate?  

If you find contradiction in the "past" reading, it is a reference for chances of contradiction in continue reading.  Of-course, if you read on and find more and more contradiction, you will have the more references.  The risk of getting the estimation wrong decreases.

Step 3) The benefit of being "saved".  Not everyone enjoy the heaven as described in the bible.  However, it is highly subjective as some people would care less about their friends and relatives in hell.

------------
If the result of step
1 < 2 X 3, continue reading (Notice the multiplication)
Otherwise, please stop.

dye

回覆 50# dye

In your original argument,

The cost is the potential to suffering from food poisoning.  Health is usually highly valued.

The benefit is the potential to eat a good egg.  Eating a good egg is unlikely very valuable.

The reference is the first bite that shows the egg is rot.  The probability of the egg being rot is low.  

----------
Conclusion, do not eat the egg.  

If the factors change, the conclusion can change.  For example, if the person is about to die any way and he really enjoy this only egg he has, it may worth a try to swallow the whole egg.  

Otherwise, if it can be demonstrated that the rot part is not representative to the egg, for example, it can be seen visibly that the egg is only rot at a particular part, the conclusion can be different.  (For an egg, it is unlikely because fungus/bacteria/chemicals would spread inside the egg rather rapidly.)

dye

回覆 32# 抽刀斷水

As a person spend a greater portion of their life on the bible, it would become harder for them to give up psychologically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escalation_of_commitment

Even though rationally, they know they should give up as greater evidence is gather (as I explained above).

----------------
Interestingly, the stress experienced by ex-christian can be understood this way.

dye

The quick and effective gardening technique to have a tree that bear two very different kind of fruits - grafting.
http://blogs.scientificamerican. ... -fruit-salad-trees/

Other alternative to have same tree growing good and bad fruit includes, growing in different year and therefore weather.
http://wine.about.com/od/winebasic1/a/WhyVintageMatters.htm

Or growing on different soil.
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%8D%97%E6%A9%98%E5%8C%97%E6%9E%B3
----------

Don't waste money in experimenting something you already knew.  As an experienced wine taster, you already know a bottle of 96 Bordeaux is very different from 92 of the same vineyard, eh?
----------------
Some Christians know in their heart there is natural variation of fruit on the same tree.  「樹大有枯枝」

http://chrisleung1954.mysinablog.com/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=2094779

As I would say, they are just unwilling to admit it as undisciplined investors are unwilling to cut loss.

dye

回覆 59# 抽刀斷水

回覆 59# 抽刀斷水

I briefly check a list of poisonous plants, please check out "Cassava"

Cassavas grown during drought are especially high in these toxins.[5][6] A dose of 40 mg of pure cassava cyanogenic glucoside is sufficient to kill a cow. It can also cause severe calcific pancreatitis in humans, leading to chronic pancreatitis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_poisonous_plants
---------------

Notice how soil condition matters.
-----------
Another common one is potato.  It is toxic if it begins to sprout.  You can imagine some potatoes from the same plants sprouting before the others.

The opposite is true of tomato. A very raw tomato is slightly toxic.

dye

回覆 58# 沙文

Tell a Christian to eat the WHOLE berry before deciding on whether it is good or bad.  Remember a look or a bite is inconclusive.

dye

回覆 73# 沙文

Foreskin.  However, it is useful in reminding God of his covenant (see the story of Moses's child).  You don't expect God to remember everyone he makes a covenant with?
At the end of debate like this, Christian can always claim the body part is useful because it is "pleasing to God".  After all, God's taste is quite mysterious to us (see Leviticus about burnt offering).

dye

I think you may need to agree on the meaning of "useful" before the discussion.

In evolution, "useful" is about fitness.  It is about the means to pass on the gene.  It is quite different from the usual understanding.

dye

網主係咪想話，刻意車死人同唔小心車死人係一樣罪，因為想法不計？
明知死路唔講，唔知唔講都冇錯，淨係有化但講錯果D先係錯.反正只計行為？

dye

由思想引起的不作為又和何？

dye

回覆 105# 沙文

I refuse.  It is too much work and I am too lazy for it.

dye

The problem is, there are so many problems in this FAQ.  There are a lot of "Chinese English" I don't think it is an easy task.

For example,
"Christians used to think they've already gotten the answers. "
or "Christians used to believe they have the answers already. "?

Notice how "have" and "gotten" repeat itself.

-----------
"A very short FAQs"
or "A brief FAQs"?
or "A concise FAQs"?

The problem here is about writing style.  There are so many "very" in the FAQs and "short" do not convey the same meaning you have in Chinese.  

-----------
"A: If you simply give up thinking in this way, sorry to have wasted your time reading this FAQ."
or
"A: If you have given up thinking independently, I apologize for wasting your time on this FAQs."?

In English, a subject is needed here and the original is too wordy.
------

I won't go on, I am lazy.  I admit my sin as always.

dye

Don't get me wrong, you should pick your own writing style.

-------------
"To help you understand / misunderstand Christianity in a very short time, "
or "To help you understand / misunderstand Christianity quickly, "

-------
"Contents of these websites do not necessarily state or reflect the positions or opinions of this FAQ."
or
"Contents of these websites do not reflect the positions or opinions of this FAQ."

---------
"A: This is one of the many interpretations.  Exegesis books also have several explanations in some verses.  Which one to follow?"
or
"This is only one of the many interpretations.  Exegesis books have many interpretations on same verses.  Which one should be adopted?"

--------------
"A: Are you suggesting to reside in Israel for several years?"
or
"A: Is residing in Israel for several years a prerequisite for a 'true understanding' of bible?"

dye

I think the problem lies in the original sentence has other meanings.

If you simply give up "thinking this way", (meaning giving up thinking in a particular way)

--------
Or "If you give up thinking because of this, ..."

----------
"Thinking" is not exactly a good way to put it to begin with.  I would think you mean "reasoning",
or "searching for answers" (mirroring the question, which is generally considered better writing style).

---------
I am lazy, I am not going to go on, ok?

Please refer to 沙文's post.  He knows my worry.

dye

The flaw in this logic is:

If you pick a number between 0 and 1 (infinite number of possibility),
For simplicity, we also assume the the probability of number being pick is evenly distributed

If we have check that the number you pick is not between 0 and 0.99, does it not say something about the number you pick?

-----------

If you have bought 10 eggs and 9 of them are rot, are you going to think that the last one is an exception?

--------
Using the "10 door problem".  If you open 9 doors and find no golden egg, does it not say anything about the probability for the existence of the egg?

-----------
The problem is that if the 9 doors (sample) are representative of the population (10 doors), it says something about the population.

You may ask the sample size needed?  If you do the math (with the usual assumption, of course), the answer is surprisingly small (500+ is enough in most cases).

dye

回覆 124# 沙文

In Hong Kong, they live in apartment (or flat).  An apartment with 10 rooms is luxurious (in term of cost), spacious (if you are talk to a real estate agent), ridiculously wasteful (if you ask me).  

I would think "large" would be appropriate for an apartment.   I think this is what he has in mind.
----------
The idea of 10 doors is merely a "poor copy" of the famous celestial teapot argument (which is sound).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

dye

If I were 抽刀斷水, I would "answer" very differently.  

The problem is that the God is not a golden egg.  He did something very visible on earth (example, global flood, creating stars, etc), and promise something visible if follow the "instructions"!  Look at the Book of Job, God agrees on this logic to show to Job his powers.

If there is an analogy, it would be like finding a raging fire behind a veil.  If we feel any heat raging out, we can already conclude there is no raging fire (fire maybe, but not a raging one).  We do not need to pierce the veil to prove that, do we?

Rather, if we do feel the heat, we may not be ready to conclude the existence of a raging fire.  For all we care, it can be from a electric heater.

Sometimes, it is harder to prove an existence than a non-existence.  In this case, check this out (to prove its non-existence)
http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

dye

回覆  dye

I know, but his intention is to introduce this to the English world. People will take a  ...
沙文 2014/4/15 11:47 提交

You are right.  I forget that part.