See something you'd like to change or add, but you've never edited an open encyclopædia before? This overview was written to help absolute beginners get started.


From A Storehouse of Knowledge
Jump to: navigation, search

On strike in solidarity with my atheist brothers and sisters

Location USA, Earth
Membership Member
Joined 24 March 2009
Role(s) Not sure yet
Education/ qualifications College dropout + self-edumacation
Expertise Stuff (and nonsense)
Status warning.png"<s>Exalted</s> Egomaniac?" cannot be used as a page name in this wiki. Exalted Egomaniac?

I doubt I will participate much here, but I just wanted to avoid being doppelganged/counterfeited. Hi PJR, and congratulations on getting this started!


An interesting thought experiment

Still working on this, hold your fire for now.

1. Imagine, if you will, that the Bible (or at least the NT) was completely lost at some point in history. This means any written materials and also any clear oral traditions. It could have been at any plausible time between 0 and now.

Now, according to the premises of this web site, of course, God exists beyond any reasonable doubt, and without support from Man. Likewise, His Son walked the earth about 2,000 years ago, preached His gospel, was crucified, resurrected, and finally returned to Heaven. This is held to be absolute Truth.

In the absence of the Story, how will these truths then be uncovered after the loss of the records of it?

2. Imagine, if you will, all known (for example) physics were lost (records and stories) in a similar fashion (or, of course, never discovered).

According to the premises of science, the universe is consistent, and clearly observed events are repeatable. This supports the claim that many "laws" of physics are actual descriptions (if not full explanations) of how the universe works - whether or not we know them. In other words, to stick with an easy example, the law of gravitational attraction, F=Gm1m2/r^2, is an "eternal truth".

In the absence of the books and teachings and discoveries of physics as we know it, how will these truths then be uncovered?

3. Answer to (2) - the same way we did it before - observations, hypothesis, experiment, observe, refine hypothesis, experiment, & repeat as necessary.

I am curious what the answer to (1) would be, and there are two corollary questions. 1a, if the Bible were completely lost in the future, how would the Truth it tells be rediscovered; and 1b, what if the real Bible was lost? How do we know the one promulgated on this site is accurate, truthful, or, at a minimum, complete?

Boxes don't play well together

A human in a box of boxes
AE-3 This user has a clumsy mastery of Ostralinglish (and does their best).
RW This user is a RationalWikian.
Blame the goat.
This user is was a
Trus me.
This user is a former Conservapedian
This user believes that "Magic man done it" isn't science.

An idea

Since wikis are notorious for periodic breakdowns, especially during version upgrades, I thought it would be cool if RW and ASK "gave" each other a little corner (a page in project namespace, I guess) for reports (& whining) during such times. For instance, right now RW seems to be pooched, it would be cool if there was a place here where there might be some info on what's happening. And vice versa for issues at ASK, of course. Originally I thought it would be fun to include CP in the cooperative, but then they'd have allow people like Trent and Philip to edit there at all hours, so they have nothing to "offer" in return...

Yeah, ain't gonna happen. When it mattered, Bob M gave us a home away from home. Very generously indeed, especially considering we borked his wiki for a day or two.

Boring wiki

This place is boring. The site owner does not read or listen, and his "Biblical worldview" is a stiflingly stupid version of "Christianity", if indeed it is a version of it at all. His comments on talk pages usually ignore points people are making. He is also a desperate quote-miner as evidenced by my getting books out of the library that he claims support his "position". They don't.

Personal tools

visitor navigation
contributor navigation