Take 50 years back ago or more. In trading things like moving averages, RSI, STO and the plethora of other mainstream technical indicators probably worked well profitably, especially for the first comers. Also basic charting T/A computer software was probably a gold mine for the first initiators. These days most of this stuff no longer will give you an edge. The reason this stuff no longer works: The markets are more sophisticated, efficient, better more elborate software, and people are more educated, ie they trade against these well known indicators and place numerous dummy orders at the levels. Also more high frequency trading makes for a more efficient market where trends fail earlier. Now to the Bible/Torah. Thousands of years ago, humans were basically stupid, unsophisticated, they'd believe anything told them, especially if it came from the ruling class spinning a story. People were more subservient, trusting, naive. The scriptures back then in those days probably made sense even though still full of contradictions. The modern day christian 'thinks' they understand the bible. Well partially they do, from their current pastors/church/denomination point of view. Ie, with blinkers on they understand what is spoon fed to them. Lets have a quick look at Isaiah 53 which so many christian love: Yet it was our sickness that he was bearing, Our suffering that he endured. We accounted him plagued, Smitten and afflicted by God; But he was wounded because of our sins, Crushed because of our iniquities. He bore the chastisement that made us whole, And by his bruises we were healed. We all went astray like sheep, Each going his own way; And the LORD visited upon him The guilt of all of us.” Beautiful verses. There are many beautiful verses in the bible, it truly is a work of art. I say that sincerely. A christian will say: This speaks of Jesus (a prophesy) before his berth. The problem is, it was written so long ago, we do not know who it refers to. And that's the problem with the bible today, what was written thousands of years ago can have totally different meanings to how modern humans wish to interpret it. Lets take for example a modern day uneducated person. When it comes to the bible, that includes all of us, but some much less educated than others. A missionary tells me/you, "you must believe in Jesus to be saved". I tell him, "Why? Who says so? What authority do you have? A book written thousand of years ago where every church has a different opinion, it's fractured, deceitful, just need to look at Israel today - a basket case of liars, I'm not going to believe anyone, least of all a brainwashed christian or brainwashed Jew. Back to Isaiah....Chapter 53.... WIKI Interpretive options concerning the servant's identity The central interpretive question to be answered for the passage concerns Isaiah's intended referent for the servant. Important related questions include the Isaiah 53 servant's relationship with the servant(s) mentioned in the other servant songs, as well as the servant's relationship with the one preaching good news in Isaiah 52:7. Three major classes of interpretation have been proposed for the servant of Isaiah 53: Individual The individual interpretation states that the intended referent for the servant is a single Israelite man. The passage's third-person masculine singular nouns and verbs are cited as evidence for this position. Sometimes the entire pericope is interpreted concerning an individual, and in other cases only selected verses are so interpreted. Several individual referents have been proposed: Jesus of Nazareth (the New Testament and Christian tradition) Rabbi Akiva (y. Shekalim 5:1)[9] Moses (b. Sotah 14a)[10] The Jewish Messiah (but not Jesus): (Targum Jonathan,[11] b. Sanhedrin 98a-b,[12] Ruth Rabbah 5:6,[13] Midrash Tanchuma Toldot 14,[14] Yalkut Shimoni 476,[15] Midrash Tehillim 2:7,[16] Maimonides[17]) Jeremiah (Saadia Gaon)[18] A Righteous Israelite Remnant Some interpretations state that the servant is representative of any Israelites who meet a particular standard of righteousness, such that the passage applies to some Israelites and not others. Examples include: Whoever the Lord is pleased with, he crushes with suffering (b. Berakhot 5a)[19] Whoever is sick and has a seminal emission (b. Berakhot 57b)[20] National This interpretation states that the servant is a metaphor for the entire nation of Israel. The sufferings of the servant are seen as sufferings of the nation as a whole while in exile. This interpretation first appears with unnamed Jews familiar to Origen in the third century CE (see below), and it subsequently became the majority position within Judaism from the medieval period until today. Sometimes this view is combined with the "righteous remnant" view (e.g. Rashi on 53:3 and 53:8)[21] Representative commentaries include: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_53 The point: the bible can be interpreted a million different ways, its an old document. Because its old doen't make it non fiction. Because it originated predominantly from jews doesnt make it true. Some say the bible is God's word. My response - "What a load of tripe!" I'm certainly not going to idolize a book.
As a life-long Catholic, I agree there's no proof that anything in the bible ever happened or what the meaning is but that can be said of much of what we read in our history books today of even the more recent centuries. Do we just discredit everything because there's no proof? Do we have any proof of much of our history other than what people said? Isn't that the same as the bible? Not sure why people argue/fight about religion. I don't believe that man evolved from the ape but I have no proof so I'm not going to fight about it. OK, need to go. Time to get ready for church soon.
Problem is, so many swear on the bible that it contain truth, enlightenment, wisdom, life, guidance when in fact imo it offers a doorway into delusion. It's not 100% wrong, imo it's 50% wrong. Now church life offers benefits as well as a price to pay. A life without the bible is probably no better. A life which ignores most or all of bible's teaching is probably damned. The story of Jesus resurection imo is fiction. I once fervently believed. The old testament imo is a bunch of myths which over time of their writings have become stretched beyond the imagination. All this stuff about Adam, Eve, Noah, Moses, Abraham, were stories not written until centuries later, crock of nonsense and made so the Jews looked like God's favorites, just utter garbage. Just think..... this huge universe and Jews in the universe are something special. Laughable! But so many humans don't think, they just lap up this sop. I was like that once. Enjoy your day! Hope you are in a good space.
I don't necessarily believe everything in the Bible to be fact but I DO believe the Bible does the world good whether it's true on not. Many people try to improve their lives because they try following the teachings of the Bible.
Yes I understand, I believe the majority deep down wish to live better lives with greater dignity. Unfortunarely imo the world is brainwashed by the overwhelming influence of incorrect religious beliefs. If you were raised in Pakistan or Egypt or Iraq, Iran, North Africa etc, more than likely your beliefs would be islam. If you were raised in Asia then possibly you would believe a form of Buddhism. Is religion good or bad? Taken with a pinch of salt, religion is possibly benefitial. Taken with wholehearted "yes it comes from God", I'd say it would not be benefitial because all your decisions you make become from your leaders like being a brainless puppet.
Before the welfare state people needed a code of conduct for mutual support and survival of the community Being ruled by micro managing deviates, proves we have devolved from apes.
Overall I'd say religion is a benefit to the world but then there's some Islam beliefs that are just evil. You're right, I'm a Catholic because I grew up in a Catholic family. Most belong to a religion because of birth. Same goes for Dems/Repubs. Most people are essentially brainwashed from birth. Personally though, I'm pretty independent though. I don't believe/follow all the teachings of the Catholic church. Example, I don't think I should be required to raise my children Catholic if I marry a Protestant. What makes my religion (Catholic) superior to a Protestant? I think married men should be allowed to become priests. I think deacons should be allowed to say mass without the presence of a priest. These last 2 examples would eliminate most of the sexual abuse problems in the church.
I'd guess that Christian abhorance and ostracisizing humans due to different sexual preferences is evil. For example, homosexuals are humans, now I'm pretty well disdainful of a man shoving his penis up another man's anus because, well, it turns me off bigly, but evil......??? Not if they both consent imo and not coersed. Plenty of men and women are ok with a penis up a females's anus or the acts of Cunnilingus. So the teachings of the church in regards gays, lesbian, homos as evil, no I don't agree. The church itself is evil by cutting these people out of society. King James apparently liked it up the bum.
There's no battle, both are on the same footing, incredulous mythological claptrap mixed in with truth. The authors probably carried away, stoned on religous humbug. If there is a real God according to biblical standards he'd condemn the lot for spewing lies and self importance. (Chosen and saved people above the rest of the global underdog plebs).