"RogerN" wrote in message
m...
"Hawke" wrote in message ...

On 7/11/2012 2:45 PM, George Plimpton wrote:

snip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_...hinking_skills

Whatever the truth may be you can't blame a rational person for thinking
that in Texas they are opposed to teaching children to think critically.
That sounds just like something they would do in Texas. They wouldn't
teach the kids to think but they would teach them scripture. Sounds like
Texas to me.

Hawke

The problem is what you/they are calling it, it's not thinking critically,
it's better described as "liberal fantasy insanity". So the subject
should really read "Texas Republicans are opposed to liberal fantasy
insanity". Other suitable names for what liberals consider "critical
thinking" include stupidity, stinking thinking, lies, distortion, spin,
BS, etc......

Like I explained to you about the book of Isaiah, liberals using their
"critical thinking" decided about half of Isaiah was written by a
different author at a much later date. They figured the fulfilled
prophecies in Isaiah must have been written after the fact because they
couldn't handle the truth, so they choose to make up their lie and believe
it. But then the book of Isaiah from the Dead Sea Scrolls was dated
before the time the liberals said part of Isaiah was written. So it ends
up the conservatives that didn't fall for the so-called "critical
thinking" were right, and the liberals and their revision were found out
to be wrong.

But for you "critical thinkers": How is it that "critical thinkers" think
they know more about something that happened in history than the first
hand eye witnesses that were there? You claim the stories handed down
through the ages are wrong, how did those stories get believed by the
people of the day? In the future you will be right, many things that are
taught today in the liberal education system will be known to be wrong, if
fact people are already writing about the lies:

http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Lies-A...ed+in+sc hool

http://www.amazon.com/The-Patriots-H...ref=pd_sim_b_3

http://www.amazon.com/Conservative-C...ref=pd_sim_b_4

http://www.amazon.com/Seven-Events-T...ref=pd_sim_b_6

http://www.amazon.com/Peoples-Histor...ref=pd_sim_b_7

http://www.amazon.com/Setting-Record...ref=pd_sim_b_8


RogerN



So, assuming you are correct in your summary, does pushing back the date of
authorship completely disprove the theory that the book was written by
several people at different times? Or is more likely that the original
estimate of when various sections were written was incorrect?

I am not a biblical scholar and I do not ever intend to be one. But I just
googled this issue and it seems many (if not most) biblical scholars believe
it was written by many people at different times. They must have their
reasons. A critical thinker who was interested in the subject would evaluate
those reasons trying to see if they are valid or flawed, and whether they
are stronger or weaker than the evidence pointing in the opposite direction.
Your diatribe against those scholars makes me think that is not the approach
you took. I suspect you instead latch onto one shred of evidence that points
to what you want to believe. One of your lines above is very telling. You
say, "How is it that "critical thinkers" think they know more about
something that happened in history than the first hand eye witnesses that
were there?" That argument assumes the conclusion as its premise.
Hopefully, that is the kind of fallacy they would teach you to watch for in
a class on logic or critical thinking.