Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Here's an interesting piece.

Aug 6, 2018 1:01AM PDT

Haven't read all of it; I may spend some time with Loewen's book.
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/08/history-education-post-truth-america/566657/

"History and social studies, as taught in school, make us less good at thinking critically about our past."
I have to agree. Here in NM not all that much is taught, and even less about causality beyond the basics. Plus, our soundbite society wants quick and recent; "trending" is the watchword.

Fail example:
After WWII the West needed oil, and there was an oil-rich country with a weak government that directly bears on the current specific problems the US is having in the Middle East.

The kingdom of Persia, now Iran, was ruled more or less legitimately by the Pahlavi family, in the usual despotic way of their kind. The Dulles family, two of whom were Secretary of State and CIA chief, supported the Shah in what we now know was their usual despotic way. Now, Trump and a radical Muslim leader throw insults at each other, perhaps to be followed by nukes. The one caused the other, as we've seen since 1979.

I know this because of a casual news reference once to torture used by the newly installed mullahs, on their own people, as one despitic rulership succeeded another. That method came from the CIA.
'How do we handle this guy?'
'Remember what SAVAK* did to us when that American was here?'
'Sure, let's do that to him!'
*https://duckduckgo.com/?q=savak&t=fpas&ia=about

Now, nobody knows this, and a latter day Goebbels can tweet misstatements to his heart's content.
The result? At the very least, the wrong actions that arise from using wrong information.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
More evidence to support what I've said previously
Aug 6, 2018 4:27AM PDT

Written history cannot be complete or always comprehensive enough to form today's opinions of those long departed. We read and study it but it must come from more than one source if we want the larger picture. I see no reason to jump up and down in anger over events written into history. I also contend that much that we think of as being evil was done without evil intentions and we cannot apply today's standards when reading this stuff.
Remember that more has been passed down by mouth than could ever be written. Hmmm..., I think I've heard something like that from another source. Pounce if you wish. Happy

- Collapse -
Maybe you have in mind John 21:25.
Aug 6, 2018 12:12PM PDT

"There are also, in fact, many other things that Jesus did [that] I suppose the world itself could not contain the scrolls [that would have to be] written."
That verse - by itself - is taught by some, using a continued thought that John - in writing - did not continue. 'Therefore we must go to those who have written other, later things to learn about salvation.' Why? John had already given the reason Jehovah inspired him to write his Gospel.
Jn 20:30-32: "To be sure, Jesus also performed many other signs before his disciples, which are not written down in this scroll. But these have been written down so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ [sent one], the Son of God [not "God the Son"], and because of believing, you may have life by means of his name."
There's the written history. Yet so many "historians" teach that Jesus is the sender, not the sent, and they fail the third-grade preposition test.
With your kind permission I'll avoid their teachings as incorrect. All their teachings, since they've failed on such simple topics.
I'll also be suspicious of anyone who teaches blanket distrust of what was written on any topic, after research, vetted by peer review and by the test of time.

There are many books which contain wrong information about historical events.
Consider one class, those that have been corrected by later research. The old information is no longer relevant or even used.
A sub-class of the above, those that contained deliberate falsifications. Discovered, discredited, discarded.
Consider the book in its own class, the Bible, victim of both of the above. In 2018 its scholars, atheists among them, agree the teachings of its thousands of extant texts are the same as originally written.
Compare that with the twits of yesterday vs. today, of a world leader of the human persuasion.

And, reading does not equal understanding, or the ability to follow what was written, even simple commands. Let's look at one that's not so simple, Mt 24:14.

"And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come."

Much of what mainstream religions teach is hardly "good news". Hellfire and destruction of the earth don't look good to me, nor to most. But, there is good news, and it involves a kingdom government. Same speaker, some three years earlier: "thy kingdom come [and] thy will be done ON EARTH as it is in heaven." How much crime, pain, poverty, misery are there in heaven, do you think?
Tough question: Having heavenly conditions on earth would be good or bad?

"Will be preached". So it's a prophecy, then. When will Jehovah begin the preaching of this good news? And, since some say that only crazy people claim to hear from God, how will we sane ones know that it has begun?

Who will do it? Notice the scripture doesn't say. Will it perhaps be copyrighted, so that only those licensed by governments will have possession of it? The scripture doesn't say. History (!) does say that the Bible was once restricted thus.

"to all the inhabited earth [and] nations". Aha! It must refer to the digital age and Google Translate. Hallelujah! [= "Praise Jehovah, all you people!" No extra charge for the Hebrew lesson.]
...
But, my smartphone gives me only bad news, so the preaching can't have started yet. Is that right?

"and then the end will come". End of what? The scripture doesn't say. If it's the end of the earth, the only home I've ever known, that's bad news, not good.

So, not simple at all, with so many unanswered questions. We've already seen that man's answers prove unsatisfactory to his fellows, many of whom have their own answers, which prove ...

Some say that the answers to these biblical questions can be found in other parts of the same book, often [as we just saw] from the same speaker. This means the [written] Bible can teach the [written] Bible. What do you think?