because it is not an interpretation to say that the aforementioned countries are not in the Bible. It is, instead just a brute fact. And that brute fact, by itself, refutes Nietzsche's aforementioned famous phrase. — Arcane Sandwich

But, by fact do you mean Truth? Because I think that's up to interpretation. And, if fact and Truth are not the same, what is the difference? Does Truth even deal in difference?

Arcane Sandwich was banned.

sorry to hear that. Thank you

It is, instead just a brute fact. — Arcane Sandwich

That's not what a brute fact means in philosophy. A brute fact isn't just "a fact we can confirm". A brute fact is a fact you can't explain with deeper more fundamental facts.

We can explain why the bible doesn't mention those places. Simply, the civilizations that produced the bible didn't know about them.

One can still interpret that his/her country somehow appears in the Bible. — Zebeden

"Confabulate" would be a better term.

He was unfortunately banned.

Dang, didn't think mistaking what a brute fact was is ban worthy.

A brute fact is a fact you can't explain with deeper more fundamental facts. — flannel jesus

It would be better to say that a brute fact does not have any further explanation.

it's not just that the explanation is not available to us, but that things just are that way.

Don't worry - there was more involved in banning Sandwich. You are safe.

i was merely jesting. what was the reason?

It is a fact that the United States of America is not in the Bible. — Arcane Sandwich

Babylon (OT).

Rome (NT).

Jesus was not mentioned in Genesis. It was written well before his birth, yet he is found throughout it for those looking. https://www.pursuegod.org/jig/

Whether there is a turtle riding a horse in the clouds in the sky depends upon what your purpose is for cloud gazing. Are you looking for inspiration or are you trying to figure out if it's going to rain? I would think if the former, you wouldn't ask a meteorologist what's in the clouds, nor do I think you would be confused as to the different ways clouds might be interpreted.

One could believe the clouds hold inspiration and precipitation simultaneously without being troubled by the fact that they hold those two things in very different ways.

For secular or non-religious citizens the absence is irrelevant. The Bible's historical context is understood to reflect the geopolitical realities of its time, rather than a limitation on its moral or cultural significance.

I saw this thread title today, the day after I saw the (absolutely wonderful) play/musical The Book of Mormon. Serendipitous perhaps.

Mormons consider the Book of Mormon to be another testament of Jesus Christ. North and South America are central to this new New Testament.

There are no facts, there are only interpretations — Arcane Sandwich

I dont give a fuck if AS(s) Boy isn't even here... heres the facts. WHO THE FUCK SAID THERE ARE NO FACTS ONLY INTERPRETATION? Nietzsche said there are no MORAL FACTS ONLY MORAL INTERPRETATION OF PHENOMENON...

When you're a retard who doesn't read Nietzsche, perhaps you shouldn't comment on trying to refute Nietzsche. There's a reaaon Ole boy AS was posting 33 times a day... Nietzsche spells it out: Powerlessness.

I swear, middling fuck wits thinking they know something...

My leading doctrine is this: there are no moral phenomena, but only a moral interpretation of phenomena. The origin of this interpretation itself lies beyond the pale of morality. — Nietzsche, WtP

We can see Nietzsche discusses this very concept as early as HATH (Aphorism 2), all the way to Ecce Homo and Antichrist... Which even Peter Gast gets right in WtP...

"I hate Nietzsche, so I want to try and refute something Nietzsche doesn't even say." 99% of "Bannos/Low calibre Russels" in the world.

Though, I suppose if you fancy a shit interpretation... don't be surprised when you end up covered in the shit of your own poor interpretation.