The parable of the three Bicycles

[The Rifle Brigade]

If you are not interested in the answer, Why should I spend energy and thought to provide you one.

Because you're not interested in giving me the answer. Why should I spend time and energy doing your homework for you?

I told you I would give you the answer, but didnt want to derail THIS discussion to do it.

How would it derail this thread? Do you honestly believe anyone here didn't catch on that you were using the example of bicycle manuals as a thinly veiled allegory for God and the Bible? It seems more and more likely that you simply don't have an answer that will stand up to scrutiny.

well it has for MILLIONS of people. So we are all ID-10-T's... Fine. See you next millenium.

The Koran has "stood up to scrutiny" in the opinion of millions of people. The Catholic Church has stood up to scrutiny in the opinion of far more people than has the Book of Mormon. Thus, by your reasoning, you better leave the LDS and get baptized Catholic. See you at Lent.

[Treznor]

If you are not interested in the answer, Why should I spend energy and thought to provide you one.

Because you're not interested in giving me the answer. Why should I spend time and energy doing your homework for you?

I told you I would give you the answer, but didnt want to derail THIS discussion to do it.

How would it derail this thread? Do you honestly believe anyone here didn't catch on that you were using the example of bicycle manuals as a thinly veiled allegory for God and the Bible? It seems more and more likely that you simply don't have an answer that will stand up to scrutiny.

well it has for MILLIONS of people. So we are all ID-10-T's... Fine. See you next millenium.

Appealing to popularity doesn't make it valid. Just because millions of people put together the bicycle in the same way doesn't mean it's correct.

[New Kereptica]

Good question. If your bicycle does not look like mine, but works fine, and wasnt built with the manual, I say, HUZZAH, good for you. It is the working fine part.

One part I was thinking about tonight was if you grew up in an isolated area where people didnt know that you had to pump up the tires, or use the chain for mechanical advantage rather than as a security device, you would assume your bike worked fine, but it was not working as intended. this is how they did it for centuries, they didnt have a manual, and they did the best with what they had. Fine, it is a bike, it works, but not as efficiently as possible.

That is always the case. There are innumerable religions that could be considered "better" or "more efficient" than Christianity, and yet I don't see you arguing for them.

[The Rifle Brigade]

Appealing to popularity doesn't make it valid. Just because millions of people put together the bicycle in the same way doesn't mean it's correct.

Especially when, until the 1970's, milliions of people weren't allowed to ride the bicycle because they were black and had been judged by God as not deserving the bicycle because of something they did in the "Pre-mortal existence".

[Muravyets]

No. I am ignoring him because he is disrepectful. Sort of the way a Father who is trying to teach a son a lesson, and the son keeps talking back, talking back, saying But, But, But. The Father finally says, fine, do it your way, you think you know everything. I told you the stove was hot, touch it if you must.

Fine. Dont believe me, argue all you want. Say what you want. Touch the stove.

Whoa-HO! Hubris, much? Are you the author of that book you're always trying to sell us?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Good question. If your bicycle does not look like mine, but works fine, and wasnt built with the manual, I say, HUZZAH, good for you. It is the working fine part.

One part I was thinking about tonight was if you grew up in an isolated area where people didnt know that you had to pump up the tires, or use the chain for mechanical advantage rather than as a security device, you would assume your bike worked fine, but it was not working as intended. this is how they did it for centuries, they didnt have a manual, and they did the best with what they had. Fine, it is a bike, it works, but not as efficiently as possible.

That is always the case. There are innumerable religions that could be considered "better" or "more efficient" than Christianity, and yet I don't see you arguing for them.

There can only be one RIGHT religion. I accept that there can be NO right religion. If 2 religions were the same, they'd be the same religion.

Now, there is one right way to build the bike, at least there is one set of specs to which that the bike was designed. It is true that all people who have ever built this bike could have built it to sub-optimal specs. It is also true that because a set of bike makers have another reference manual, they a bit more information to work with, and their bikes have greater potential of becoming optimal. That is not to say the bikes WILL be optimal, it is saying that the new information makes it possible to have a more optimal outcome.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

No. I am ignoring him because he is disrepectful. Sort of the way a Father who is trying to teach a son a lesson, and the son keeps talking back, talking back, saying But, But, But. The Father finally says, fine, do it your way, you think you know everything. I told you the stove was hot, touch it if you must.

Fine. Dont believe me, argue all you want. Say what you want. Touch the stove.

Whoa-HO! Hubris, much? Are you the author of that book you're always trying to sell us?

No.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

If you are not interested in the answer, Why should I spend energy and thought to provide you one.

Because you're not interested in giving me the answer. Why should I spend time and energy doing your homework for you?

I told you I would give you the answer, but didnt want to derail THIS discussion to do it.

How would it derail this thread? Do you honestly believe anyone here didn't catch on that you were using the example of bicycle manuals as a thinly veiled allegory for God and the Bible? It seems more and more likely that you simply don't have an answer that will stand up to scrutiny.

well it has for MILLIONS of people. So we are all ID-10-T's... Fine. See you next millenium.

Appealing to popularity doesn't make it valid. Just because millions of people put together the bicycle in the same way doesn't mean it's correct.

Very true, like I said before, we could be riding the bike with flat tires. The reality is that you think we are all idiots following some con artist and are brainwashed. While I admit that logic would say it is possible, I would think it improbable. We have just as much intelligence as anyone else who has formulated a religious viewpoint (contratry to popular belive, Athiests and Agnostics are religions).

[New Kereptica]

There can only be one RIGHT religion. I accept that there can be NO right religion. If 2 religions were the same, they'd be the same religion.

Not every religion says "we're the only ones who are correct; everyone else is wrong".

Now, there is one right way to build the bike, at least there is one set of specs to which that the bike was designed. It is true that all people who have ever built this bike could have built it to sub-optimal specs. It is also true that because a set of bike makers have another reference manual, they a bit more information to work with, and their bikes have greater potential of becoming optimal. That is not to say the bikes WILL be optimal, it is saying that the new information makes it possible to have a more optimal outcome.

So you're a Platonist, then? You hold that there's a universally perfect model of a bicycle, and that we're working toward that perfect model?

We clearly haven't reached it yet. Even the most efficient bike is nowhere close to completely efficient. Furthermore, there are many different designs of bicycles that have the same efficiency.

[Muravyets]

No. I am ignoring him because he is disrepectful. Sort of the way a Father who is trying to teach a son a lesson, and the son keeps talking back, talking back, saying But, But, But. The Father finally says, fine, do it your way, you think you know everything. I told you the stove was hot, touch it if you must.

Fine. Dont believe me, argue all you want. Say what you want. Touch the stove.

Whoa-HO! Hubris, much? Are you the author of that book you're always trying to sell us?

No.

Then you've got even more of a nerve.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

There can only be one RIGHT religion. I accept that there can be NO right religion. If 2 religions were the same, they'd be the same religion.

Not every religion says "we're the only ones who are correct; everyone else is wrong".

Now, there is one right way to build the bike, at least there is one set of specs to which that the bike was designed. It is true that all people who have ever built this bike could have built it to sub-optimal specs. It is also true that because a set of bike makers have another reference manual, they a bit more information to work with, and their bikes have greater potential of becoming optimal. That is not to say the bikes WILL be optimal, it is saying that the new information makes it possible to have a more optimal outcome.

So you're a Platonist, then? You hold that there's a universally perfect model of a bicycle, and that we're working toward that perfect model?

We clearly haven't reached it yet. Even the most efficient bike is nowhere close to completely efficient. Furthermore, there are many different designs of bicycles that have the same efficiency.

I didnt say every one was wrong. I just said not everyone had the complete picture. In a binary world, where there is only right and wrong, your case is certainly true. If it's not right, it is wrong. But in my views, there is right and there is incomplete.

For THIS parable yeah, I think I get your point. There is one Universally correct Bike and we all have some varying concept of it. Is that bike attainable? No way. But it is the model of what to shoot for.

Imagine the engineer going to your town and holding a demonstration on how to built the perfect bike, and he uses a perfect bike as an example. He is the engineer, he knows how to built the perfect bike. He shows it to some townsfolk, and they write it down, because the instructions that he dicated to the older tech writers wasnt being followed too well.

Now, those people who saw the bike, and trusted the engineer to show them a perfect bike, wrote down what they thoguht the bike looked like. Now there were 12 tech writers, and each saw the bike slightly different, so each manual they wrote was slightly differnt than the others.

Because so many people had been building bikes thier own way based on what the ancient tech Writers wrote, the new bike didnt look much like thier bikes. They resented the fact that this new bike was more optimal than thiers. So they broke the bike. (Stay with me now) The Engineer repaired the bike. The people didnt like that, so they killed the bike builders. The way to make the perfect bike was lost, but was it lost forever?

[Muravyets]

This bike story is starting to sound like the deleted scenes from Ken Russel's "War and Peace."

[Pope Joan]

My ironclad rule used to be never to refer to the instructions until after I had injured myself.

Now after some ER trips and possibly permanent damage, I surrender to the inevitable, I try to think in Chinese as I tinker.

Here are some favorite instructions:

On a Korean kitchen knife:
Warning: keep out of children.
(hmm...something must have gotten lost in the translation...)

On a string of Christmas lights:
For indoor or outdoor use only.

On a food processor:
Not to be used for the other use.
(Now I'm curious.)

On a Swedish chainsaw:
Do not attempt to stop chain with your hands.
(Raise your hand if you've tried this...)

Shamelessly stolen from this site, which stole it from another site
http://www.wocka.com/11026.html

[Sdaeriji]

Good question. If your bicycle does not look like mine, but works fine, and wasnt built with the manual, I say, HUZZAH, good for you. It is the working fine part.

One part I was thinking about tonight was if you grew up in an isolated area where people didnt know that you had to pump up the tires, or use the chain for mechanical advantage rather than as a security device, you would assume your bike worked fine, but it was not working as intended. this is how they did it for centuries, they didnt have a manual, and they did the best with what they had. Fine, it is a bike, it works, but not as efficiently as possible.

That is always the case. There are innumerable religions that could be considered "better" or "more efficient" than Christianity, and yet I don't see you arguing for them.

There can only be one RIGHT religion. I accept that there can be NO right religion. If 2 religions were the same, they'd be the same religion.

Now, there is one right way to build the bike, at least there is one set of specs to which that the bike was designed. It is true that all people who have ever built this bike could have built it to sub-optimal specs. It is also true that because a set of bike makers have another reference manual, they a bit more information to work with, and their bikes have greater potential of becoming optimal. That is not to say the bikes WILL be optimal, it is saying that the new information makes it possible to have a more optimal outcome.

Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles? There are multiple ways to manufacture a bike. Multiple materials, multiple tools, multiple designs. Your analogy fails even on a literal level. Why not just admit this isn't a terribly good analogy and spare yourself further embarassment?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

This bike story is starting to sound like the deleted scenes from Ken Russel's "War and Peace."

heh, the last part of my last post, IMHO, was pretty cool.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Good question. If your bicycle does not look like mine, but works fine, and wasnt built with the manual, I say, HUZZAH, good for you. It is the working fine part.

One part I was thinking about tonight was if you grew up in an isolated area where people didnt know that you had to pump up the tires, or use the chain for mechanical advantage rather than as a security device, you would assume your bike worked fine, but it was not working as intended. this is how they did it for centuries, they didnt have a manual, and they did the best with what they had. Fine, it is a bike, it works, but not as efficiently as possible.

That is always the case. There are innumerable religions that could be considered "better" or "more efficient" than Christianity, and yet I don't see you arguing for them.

There can only be one RIGHT religion. I accept that there can be NO right religion. If 2 religions were the same, they'd be the same religion.

Now, there is one right way to build the bike, at least there is one set of specs to which that the bike was designed. It is true that all people who have ever built this bike could have built it to sub-optimal specs. It is also true that because a set of bike makers have another reference manual, they a bit more information to work with, and their bikes have greater potential of becoming optimal. That is not to say the bikes WILL be optimal, it is saying that the new information makes it possible to have a more optimal outcome.

Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles? There are multiple ways to manufacture a bike. Multiple materials, multiple tools, multiple designs. Your analogy fails even on a literal level. Why not just admit this isn't a terribly good analogy and spare yourself further embarassment?

Dude. I said in the story that they were buying different makes and models. Chill out. Take a breath. Please.

[Sdaeriji]

Good question. If your bicycle does not look like mine, but works fine, and wasnt built with the manual, I say, HUZZAH, good for you. It is the working fine part.

One part I was thinking about tonight was if you grew up in an isolated area where people didnt know that you had to pump up the tires, or use the chain for mechanical advantage rather than as a security device, you would assume your bike worked fine, but it was not working as intended. this is how they did it for centuries, they didnt have a manual, and they did the best with what they had. Fine, it is a bike, it works, but not as efficiently as possible.

That is always the case. There are innumerable religions that could be considered "better" or "more efficient" than Christianity, and yet I don't see you arguing for them.

There can only be one RIGHT religion. I accept that there can be NO right religion. If 2 religions were the same, they'd be the same religion.

Now, there is one right way to build the bike, at least there is one set of specs to which that the bike was designed. It is true that all people who have ever built this bike could have built it to sub-optimal specs. It is also true that because a set of bike makers have another reference manual, they a bit more information to work with, and their bikes have greater potential of becoming optimal. That is not to say the bikes WILL be optimal, it is saying that the new information makes it possible to have a more optimal outcome.

Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles? There are multiple ways to manufacture a bike. Multiple materials, multiple tools, multiple designs. Your analogy fails even on a literal level. Why not just admit this isn't a terribly good analogy and spare yourself further embarassment?

Dude. I said in the story that they were buying different makes and models. Chill out. Take a breath. Please.

Why is it that you act like anyone who posts in disagreement with you needs to "chill out"? Are you incapable of accepting criticism?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Good question. If your bicycle does not look like mine, but works fine, and wasnt built with the manual, I say, HUZZAH, good for you. It is the working fine part.

One part I was thinking about tonight was if you grew up in an isolated area where people didnt know that you had to pump up the tires, or use the chain for mechanical advantage rather than as a security device, you would assume your bike worked fine, but it was not working as intended. this is how they did it for centuries, they didnt have a manual, and they did the best with what they had. Fine, it is a bike, it works, but not as efficiently as possible.

That is always the case. There are innumerable religions that could be considered "better" or "more efficient" than Christianity, and yet I don't see you arguing for them.

There can only be one RIGHT religion. I accept that there can be NO right religion. If 2 religions were the same, they'd be the same religion.

Now, there is one right way to build the bike, at least there is one set of specs to which that the bike was designed. It is true that all people who have ever built this bike could have built it to sub-optimal specs. It is also true that because a set of bike makers have another reference manual, they a bit more information to work with, and their bikes have greater potential of becoming optimal. That is not to say the bikes WILL be optimal, it is saying that the new information makes it possible to have a more optimal outcome.

Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles? There are multiple ways to manufacture a bike. Multiple materials, multiple tools, multiple designs. Your analogy fails even on a literal level. Why not just admit this isn't a terribly good analogy and spare yourself further embarassment?

Dude. I said in the story that they were buying different makes and models. Chill out. Take a breath. Please.

Why is it that you act like anyone who posts in disagreement with you needs to "chill out"? Are you incapable of accepting criticism?

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

[New Kereptica]

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

No. It's an interrogative one.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

No. It's an interrogative one.

Not in context.

Anyways, Im going to bed.

Have fun riding your bikes. Dont get a flat.

[Sdaeriji]

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

No. Are you done with that cross?

[New Kereptica]

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

No. It's an interrogative one.

Not in context.

Anyways, Im going to bed.

Have fun riding your bikes. Dont get a flat.

I'll have more fun... driving my car.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

No. Are you done with that cross?

cross? I dont "DO" crosses.

[The Rifle Brigade]

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

No. Are you done with that cross?

cross? I dont "DO" crosses.

You play the martyr often. He wasn't referring to your use of religious symbols, he was saying you were playing the persecution victim. (And just so you know, asking if the other person knows about what's being discussed is a reasonable question, and only hostile to those with a track record of not knowing the terms they use).

If you had any understanding of allegory (for example, that its inherent to parables, despite your claim) you would've caught that.

[Allbeama]

As I have stated previously, I want to ask: What if your bicycle doesn't look like what I think a bicycle is but mine works fine and it wasn't built with your manual?

Good question. If your bicycle does not look like mine, but works fine, and wasnt built with the manual, I say, HUZZAH, good for you. It is the working fine part.

One part I was thinking about tonight was if you grew up in an isolated area where people didnt know that you had to pump up the tires, or use the chain for mechanical advantage rather than as a security device, you would assume your bike worked fine, but it was not working as intended. this is how they did it for centuries, they didnt have a manual, and they did the best with what they had. Fine, it is a bike, it works, but not as efficiently as possible.

Well, to return to my question, it is entirely possible that I built a better bike than you without your manual. Our bikes our basically very similar, but mine is tweaked to be more efficient and faster, and aesthetically more appealing. We have the same parts as far as basic design is concerned, but yours doesn't run as well as mine or maybe has some severe technical issues. What then?