|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: Only one version? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Admin Director  Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
nos482 Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wordswordsman Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wordswordsman Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
nos482 Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6494 days)  Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wordswordsman Inactive Member |
quote: I find that attitude quite puzzling, a common flaw in so many atheists who refuse to believe extra-biblical historical accounts that are very real and verifiable. Amazing! What is most amazing to me is the irrational denials against so much evidence. I suspect that fault carries over into atheistic presentation of science, guaranteeing suspicion from anyone more logical, reasonable, certainly those who actually taste of faith in God. You don't PREVAIL with pure opinion with no substance. What you DON'T believe is even farther from legitimate debate substance. Such UNBELIEF is simply subjective nonsense that can't be backed up except within your own mind. You can't project unbelief without proof against something to believe in. What do you do with extra-biblical historians evidencing the same Jesus the Bible describes? Deny all who include Jesus? Is that your basis for denial? If I find time to enter the science debates, will you change the rules there to demand I not support my opinions with simple denial of what you call science? Historical verification of Jesus Christ in the same venue as found in the Bible:http://members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/quotes.htm#James "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man IF IT BE LAWFUL TO CALL HIM A MAN, for he was a doer of wonders, A TEACHER OF SUCH MEN AS RECEIVE THE TRUTH WITH PLEASURE. He drew many after him BOTH OF THE JEWS AND THE GENTILES. HE WAS THE CHRIST. When Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, FOR HE APPEARED TO THEM ALIVE AGAIN THE THIRD DAY, AS THE DIVINE PROPHETS HAD FORETOLD THESE AND THEN THOUSAND OTHER WONDERFUL THINGS ABOUT HIM, and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day (Antiquities 18:63-64)." Josephus wasn't the only one: Runtime Error Omit the sources obviously/possibly biased. Just look at the secular sources. Are you so biased yourself you can't believe any witness that dares mention THAT name?
quote: Falling for Nos's tricks? You are appearing to be quite irrational, more and more, disqualifying yourself as a possible credible debater.
quote: Megalomania defined: a mental disorder marked by feelings of personal omnipotence and grandeur(c)2000 Zane Publishing, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. All rights reserved. Qualify that remark as not a direct violation of group rules, being you are a licensed physician qualified to diagnose me with the information available. Otherwise, once again you appeal to personal opinion AGAIN. No fact, just opinion based on.....what? Rule 3:"Respect for others is the rule here. Argue the position, not the person. The Britannica says, "Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach." MY statement, however, is BASED on biblical statements meant for BELIEVERS.Col. 1:27 "To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:" 2 Cor. 5:20"Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." John 17:21"That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." 2 Tim. 1:14"That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us." etc., etc.
quote: Opinion without basis. Numbers of rebels is no proof the minority belief is wrong. Virtually all of those religions have no proofs of any intervention whatsoever between their gods and men. No accounts of neighboring nations(kings) acknowledge they were physically punished or affected by the gods of neighboring enemies. The Babylonian kings so acknowledged. There is a WEALTH of extra-biblical evidence of much of the stories of God's dealings with the enemies of Israel. There is also far more secular ancient history on the side of the Bible than most people, including Christians, realize: Page not found - Biblical Archaeology Society
quote: Sure I can, if those sources are validated in more ways than the obvious biblical ones such as historical accounts etched on tables of stone and pottery, but for us Christians we know it is pointless to rely on those extra-biblical sources for our own comfort, being the sort of proofs needed for skeptics. In what was does the scientific method enter into religion?
quote: Can you back that up? Sounds like your OPINION omly. Got some polls to support you? ANYTHING? Besides, you atheists are losing in the education arena. I think the list is up to 31 states now allowing insertion of official creation science curriculum. Where is your majority now? The minority appears to be getting its way. Hummmmm. Evolution. I taught it for 17 years, in ever increasing doses as the textbooks included more. I considered evolution one of those givens from high school days until I began to run into creation science knowledge. I was changing my views already by the time I became a Christian. I read Darwin, and many other now classic books on evolution, but added to that many written by creationists. There is enough material on both sides to warrant a balanced presentation, if for no other reason than to stimulate young minds.
quote: The point to be wisely gained is that there is no way to disprove the Bible. I use it as A source in deduction of what is reality. Note that I did not claim I sought to prove anything about Vishnu, real or unreal. However, I have yet to meet anyone believing in that claiming any personal relationship or intervention from Vishnu. Few religions have their gods acting among men in any real way. They are more accurately concepts rather than beings able to interact.
quote: I am very serious with my approach, citing sources, THEN opinions based on sources. I am directly criticizing that last post to which I respond now as not fitting to be considered any form of debate whatsoever.
quote: Sure it does. That so many authors independently wrote of the same God and His message so harmoniously is evidence of divine inspiration. The statistics involved as staggering, further evidence the writings are immutable, solid references as to God's Word to man.What body of authors have come close to that feat, another collection of works that contain no contradictions between the authors? quote: Why are atheists so insulting with their LOL's? Is it so easy to laugh at someone who is sincere? In a live debate I suspect you would be publicly derided for such behavior in the midst of actual intellectuals. Experts exist for the purpose for which I use their knowledge. Of course I appeal to their collective contributions, including those of creationist scientists. You labor under a misconception that the Bible itself provides the scientific data of creationists. The Bible INSPIRES men to recognize the truth of creation, opens their eyes to God's perspective, frees them of the pain of rebellion. The Bible convinces them there is a wrong way to view reality, guiding them through encouragement in other areas to pursue the truth against overwhelming odds. The results are evident these days in the many convincing books, speeches, debates, articles, technical papers, research, and other supports from esteemed scientists on the creationist side.
quote: Should you ever find yourself needing the favorable testimony of live witnesses, I suspect you will learn to appreciate that source of support. Most societies place GREAT reliance on two or three witnesses testifying the same information. Actually, I can't think of a single society that doesn't. Christianity has MANY witnesses to answered prayer, miracles verified by physicians, financial miracles attested to by unexplained wealth, and a long list of other evidences of a dynamic relationship beteeen Gos and men.
quote: When these Bible attacks stand exposed for what they really are, I will have time to address all that. The current "challenges" are my priority. But I'll capture that last thought as being typical of a sterile scientist with no spirit, no life, just a "dead" observer with no convictions except denial of the spiritual with no support at all. Ah, the atheist scientist. Millions of Christian mothers are learning their children must approach science atheistically. Wonder how they will react? I wansn't taught that way in all my years of education. When did that become the norm?
quote: Support, please. Opinions AGAIN without a single shred of support from any source whatsoever! I can list many famous people considered the best minds of all times that subscribed to creation science in some aspect of the subject. Blocking of access of education? How? Where? When? Once again, false accusations, all opinion, no basis. How could ADDING creation science block education? Few students even care about evolution anyway, which is a very real block of their education. People can SENSE there is something very wrong about the claims of evolutionists who EXCLUDE God. People are sick of that according to many polls. But there is a growing interest in science as students enter the DEBATE in their classrooms, studying the opposing sides. In time virtually every state will have sanctioned official inclusion of both disciplines FOR the benefit of advanced education (FACT, school boards are considering the changes all across the land, and so are education experts in charge of directing curriculum). FEW students in public schools are inspired to pursue any more than the required minimum of topics of science (FACT, painfull, awful, but reality). Why? Because they were turned off by creation science? Hardly, for it has been excluded (FACT). All they had was evolution (FACT), which IMHO has been killing interest in science, being a depressing chain of unreal thoughts sure to put anyone into general educational apathy. So why the depressed state of education in the sciences and math? Think about it, then answer me. I would suggest first reading up on the many hundreds of current articles and statistics generated by national, state, and local education institutes and governing bodies. Those reports are right down my line, making me lament I left teaching. Ah, but all that OTHER mess teachers put up with these days, and getting worse! Nope, I'm reminded why I left. 
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
John Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6494 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
[B] quote: I find that attitude quite puzzling, a common flaw in so many atheists who refuse to believe extra-biblical historical accounts that are very real and verifiable. Amazing! What is most amazing to me is the irrational denials against so much evidence. I suspect that fault carries over into atheistic presentation of science, guaranteeing suspicion from anyone more logical, reasonable, certainly those who actually taste of faith in God.*************************************** You exclude yourself as you are neither logical nor reasonable and your posting history is the evidence to back it up. Also you show your woeful ignorance of science by claiming all scientists are athiestic as most are christians....but this is a common flaw of fundamentalists. Your definition of irrational appears to mean anyone who disagrees with you hence I think you are a megalomaniac..the definition still stands. You don't PREVAIL with pure opinion with no substance. What you DON'T believe is even farther from legitimate debate substance.**************************** CAPITALIZING your WORDS do not give THEM any more FORCE  Your second sentence makes no sense. Such UNBELIEF is simply subjective nonsense that can't be backed up except within your own mind. You can't project unbelief without proof against something to believe in.***************************** Your BELIEFS are subjective as you can provide no evidence for them physical or otherwise and cannot show that yours are better supported than those of any other religion no matter how much you denigrate them. What do you do with extra-biblical historians evidencing the same Jesus the Bible describes? Deny all who include Jesus? Is that your basis for denial? If I find time to enter the science debates, will you change the rules there to demand I not support my opinions with simple denial of what you call science?************************************************* Please do enter the science debates. However, when a group of people who a priori believe anything the bible says then claim that anything they see or read supports the bible while all contradictions are the work of a great conspiracy then there is no reason to take them seriously. John in his post also makes this point. Historical verification of Jesus Christ in the same venue as found in the Bible:http://members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/quotes.htm#James "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man IF IT BE LAWFUL TO CALL HIM A MAN, for he was a doer of wonders, A TEACHER OF SUCH MEN AS RECEIVE THE TRUTH WITH PLEASURE. He drew many after him BOTH OF THE JEWS AND THE GENTILES. HE WAS THE CHRIST. When Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, FOR HE APPEARED TO THEM ALIVE AGAIN THE THIRD DAY, AS THE DIVINE PROPHETS HAD FORETOLD THESE AND THEN THOUSAND OTHER WONDERFUL THINGS ABOUT HIM, and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day (Antiquities 18:63-64)." Josephus wasn't the only one: Runtime Error Omit the sources obviously/possibly biased. Just look at the secular sources. Are you so biased yourself you can't believe any witness that dares mention THAT name?****************************************** Nope, but an a priori belief that the bible is true is similar to what the ICR does in its research. It specifically states that evidence inconsistent with the bible will not be tolerated so I dismiss them entirely.
quote: Falling for Nos's tricks? You are appearing to be quite irrational, more and more, disqualifying yourself as a possible credible debater.****************************************+ How convenient for you....you disqualified yourself long ago.
quote: Megalomania defined: a mental disorder marked by feelings of personal omnipotence and grandeur(c)2000 Zane Publishing, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. All rights reserved. Qualify that remark as not a direct violation of group rules, being you are a licensed physician qualified to diagnose me with the information available. Otherwise, once again you appeal to personal opinion AGAIN. No fact, just opinion based on.....what?**************************** Running to Percy hoping I get banned there WS It is an opinion based entirely on your post. You claim that you personally speak for your god, that resistance is futile, and other chest beating low brow statements....it certainly fits the definition you posted. Rule 3:"Respect for others is the rule here. Argue the position, not the person. The Britannica says, "Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach."****************************** Then you should also be on the way out soon. You are neither emotionally uncommitted, preserve detachment or maintain a coolly academic approach...on the last we can let it slide as you are clearly not an academic scholar. MY statement, however, is BASED on biblical statements meant for BELIEVERS.Col. 1:27 "To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:" 2 Cor. 5:20"Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." John 17:21"That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." 2 Tim. 1:14"That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us." etc., etc.********************************************* How convenient for you....so for the billions of people with other beliefs or no beliefs, we can all feel free to ignore this rambling. You must be really desperate...you are appealing to just about every different authority you can pull out of your hat
quote: Opinion without basis. Numbers of rebels is no proof the minority belief is wrong.************************************+ However, you are the one who almost without exception makes appeals to the authority of poll results you find doing Google searches as demonstrating that what the majority thinks must be correct as you do further down in your post to me. So you can't have it both ways. Virtually all of those religions have no proofs of any intervention whatsoever between their gods and men.********************* Opinion without basis No accounts of neighboring nations(kings) acknowledge they were physically punished or affected by the gods of neighboring enemies.**************************** You sure about that...LOL! The Babylonian kings so acknowledged. There is a WEALTH of extra-biblical evidence of much of the stories of God's dealings with the enemies of Israel. There is also far more secular ancient history on the side of the Bible than most people, including Christians, realize: Page not found - Biblical Archaeology Society**************************************** Every religion has its own dogma that each believes is "obviously" supported and that all others are wrong.
quote: Sure I can, if those sources are validated in more ways than the obvious biblical ones such as historical accounts etched on tables of stone and pottery, but for us Christians we know it is pointless to rely on those extra-biblical sources for our own comfort, being the sort of proofs needed for skeptics. In what was does the scientific method enter into religion?********************************+ Sure you can you say...well, we are all waiting to see you do so even once. The scientific method does not enter into religion...the entire point of this forum is that religion (specifically a fundamentalist sub sect) is trying to claim that it is the same as the scientific method i.e. creation science.
quote: Can you back that up? Sounds like your OPINION omly. Got some polls to support you? ANYTHING? Besides, you atheists are losing in the education arena. I think the list is up to 31 states now allowing insertion of official creation science curriculum. Where is your majority now? The minority appears to be getting its way. Hummmmm.******************************* No, America is losing in the education arena...further erosion of the primary school system will lead to a nation of morons dependent on foreign talent for economic advancement...And do YOU have any support that all evolutionary biologists are athiests..You are truly ignorant.As to backing up the statement...when do you see scientists engaging religious groups other than in cases where relgious fundamentalists try to impose their mythology on scientific principles...or are you asking a different question? Evolution. I taught it for 17 years, in ever increasing doses as the textbooks included more. I considered evolution one of those givens from high school days until I began to run into creation science knowledge. I was changing my views already by the time I became a Christian. I read Darwin, and many other now classic books on evolution, but added to that many written by creationists. There is enough material on both sides to warrant a balanced presentation, if for no other reason than to stimulate young minds.******************************************************++ However, I find this highly unlikely as you have taught evolution as you have shown absolutely no knowledge of it....you only answered one part of the question as well...what are the tenets of the theory of evolution? What was the great synthesis? Hint: what does transmission genetics have to do with evolution....
quote: The point to be wisely gained is that there is no way to disprove the Bible. I use it as A source in deduction of what is reality. Note that I did not claim I sought to prove anything about Vishnu, real or unreal. However, I have yet to meet anyone believing in that claiming any personal relationship or intervention from Vishnu. Few religions have their gods acting among men in any real way. They are more accurately concepts rather than beings able to interact.**************************************+ You use it as a source in deduction of reality? So you do or do not take it literally? Just curious. Ever meet a Hindu? There are other religions that also believe in direct interventions of their gods so your statement is not supported by fact.
quote: I am very serious with my approach, citing sources, THEN opinions based on sources. I am directly criticizing that last post to which I respond now as not fitting to be considered any form of debate whatsoever.************************************* That is your opinion. You quote scripture and claim it is fact. You claim your opinion is fact including the denigration of Islam and other religions,..even other christian sects particularly catholics. So your manner is even more unfit in a forum of debate. Here is a question for you..actually a few related questions,If you think you are right and everyone else is a fool, why not just enjoy yourself and leave everyone else to their folly. After all you would avoid using a computer and the internet..those scientific developments by evil athiest scientists that you hate so much. Also, if you think so highly of your god, why do you limit that same being by believing that it needs you as an intermediate? Shouldnt an all powerful being be able to stand up for itself? Otherwise, it is not very powerful. And if people chose to ignore it, it is there choice, not yours..however, you seem to disagree with this. quote: Sure it does. That so many authors independently wrote of the same God and His message so harmoniously is evidence of divine inspiration. The statistics involved as staggering, further evidence the writings are immutable, solid references as to God's Word to man.What body of authors have come close to that feat, another collection of works that contain no contradictions between the authors? ******************************************+ To bad that is an opinion and not supportable with physical evidence.
quote: Why are atheists so insulting with their LOL's? Is it so easy to laugh at someone who is sincere? In a live debate I suspect you would be publicly derided for such behavior in the midst of actual intellectuals.*********************************** You would of course also be derided for denigrating those of contrary opinions...but I use LOL because you make me laugh sometimes...and I just wanted to share the joy Experts exist for the purpose for which I use their knowledge. Of course I appeal to their collective contributions, including those of creationist scientists.*********************************+ However, you do not appeal to the collective contributions of the overwhelming number of non-creation scientists. You labor under a misconception that the Bible itself provides the scientific data of creationists. The Bible INSPIRES men to recognize the truth of creation, opens their eyes to God's perspective, frees them of the pain of rebellion.******************************** No, creationists 1) do not present a testable hypothesis 2) provide no data to support their claims (mostly because step one is not possible)3) mis-state the scientific method (hint: you do not prove a theory) 4) when shown to be mistaken either they build a new straw man argument or take statements out of context from abstracts of scientific papers and claim the authors said something they did not...and the evidence for this is in the thousands of posts on this and other forums debating creation and evolution. The Bible convinces them there is a wrong way to view reality, guiding them through encouragement in other areas to pursue the truth against overwhelming odds. The results are evident these days in the many convincing books, speeches, debates, articles, technical papers, research, and other supports from esteemed scientists on the creationist side.************************************* Esteemed creationist scientists?Please list them all List their publications Please give a citation list in peer reviewed journals (I will settle for 20 citations) List the organizations to which they are invited as speakers quote: Should you ever find yourself needing the favorable testimony of live witnesses, I suspect you will learn to appreciate that source of support.************** Witness testimony in criminal cases is notoriously unreliable. If I am ever in a situation where I need favorable testimony I would rather have DNA evidence or other physical evidence to exonerate me than hope that so and so can remember if the person they saw was white, black, short, tall, etc....can you remember exactly what the first stranger who passed you by looked like this morning well enough to incriminate him or her? Most societies place GREAT reliance on two or three witnesses testifying the same information. Actually, I can't think of a single society that doesn't. Christianity has MANY witnesses to answered prayer, miracles verified by physicians, financial miracles attested to by unexplained wealth, and a long list of other evidences of a dynamic relationship beteeen Gos and men.****************************************************+ I have never heard of a miracle verified by a physician....and plenty of miracles have been debunked as fraudulent. The "it was great and I dont understand it so goddidit" argument is not compelling.
quote: When these Bible attacks stand exposed for what they really are, I will have time to address all that.**************************** Hmmm, what does this mean? The current "challenges" are my priority.*********************** Evolution versus creation board...what are the current challenges? ******************** But I'll capture that last thought as being typical of a sterile scientist with no spirit, no life, just a "dead" observer with no convictions except denial of the spiritual with no support at all. **************************** Ad hominem..la la la Got any evidence to back up what a typcial scientist thinks? Warning you may not find it doing a Google search So I have no convictions...LOL! You migh want to open your eyes someday and actually meet people with other worldviews...sheesh! Ah, the atheist scientist. Millions of Christian mothers are learning their children must approach science atheistically. Wonder how they will react? I wansn't taught that way in all my years of education. When did that become the norm?****************************************** What are the millions of fathers doing Your years of education appear to have been wasted as far as science goes. You better log off...you are using a computer and "the athiest scientist" developed this evil construction ...actually why are you not Amish? They reject science completely...I guess they are closer to god than you....bum deal
quote: Support, please. Opinions AGAIN without a single shred of support from any source whatsoever!*********************************** Your posts are a start I can list many famous people considered the best minds of all times that subscribed to creation science in some aspect of the subject.*****************************+ Go for it...I requested a list earlier in this post so you only need do it once. Blocking of access of education? How? Where? When? Once again, false accusations, all opinion, no basis.**************************** YOU yourself claimed to much education was a bad thing! Of course it is for fundamentalists! Those who expose themselves to the diversity of thinking, data, and philosphies of the world are not so easily subjugated as those who hole themselves up in their little world of self glorification. How could ADDING creation science block education?********************* Because creation science is not science...please give the testable hypothesis, the experiments that could be done to obtain supporting evidence, the data from other fields of science that support it, and the predictions that could be made from the hypothesis of creation science...you cannot and that is why it is not science. Few students even care about evolution anyway, which is a very real block of their education.************************** This is a very odd statement...could you elaborate? People can SENSE there is something very wrong about the claims of evolutionists who EXCLUDE God.************************+ Which people and why does this matter? People are sick of that according to many polls.************************** Polls show that most Americans don't know anything about science at all so this is hardly compelling. But there is a growing interest in science as students enter the DEBATE in their classrooms, studying the opposing sides.***************************** Please support the growing interest in science with data... In time virtually every state will have sanctioned official inclusion of both disciplines FOR the benefit of advanced education (FACT, school boards are considering the changes all across the land, and so are education experts in charge of directing curriculum).************************** Ah, products of their own broken system. FEW students in public schools are inspired to pursue any more than the required minimum of topics of science (FACT, painfull, awful, but reality).******************************** Which is why such a large proportion of scientists in America are foreign or of foriegn decent....my graduate school was almost 50% Chinese. Why? Because they were turned off by creation science? Hardly, for it has been excluded (FACT). All they had was evolution (FACT), which IMHO has been killing interest in science, being a depressing chain of unreal thoughts sure to put anyone into general educational apathy.*********************** As students take the bare minimum number of science classess as YOU state it is hard to see how this issue is the defnining one for all science education...why would lack of creationism in school prevent one from becoming a chemist?....the sad truth is all sciences are very difficult subjects and only a very small subset of the population have the resources, the intelligence, the creativity , the motivation, or the opportunity to become scientists....when it comes to evolution however, every armchair weekend warrior suddenly thinks they are an expert in molecular biology. So why the depressed state of education in the sciences and math? Think about it, then answer me.************************ I answered you above I would suggest first reading up on the many hundreds of current articles and statistics generated by national, state, and local education institutes and governing bodies. Those reports are right down my line, making me lament I left teaching. Ah, but all that OTHER mess teachers put up with these days, and getting worse! Nope, I'm reminded why I left. ************************************ So rather than stick to your convictions you cut and ran? Didnt you accuse nos482 of having a weak character for doing so? Don't feel so bad though, we scientists that do remain are making wonderful new discoveries daily. Cheers,M
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
nos482 Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wordswordsman Inactive Member |
quote: Your simple denials of fact are pitiful and worth nothing. Respected archeologists, historians alike have and are verifying not only Jesus but much of the Bible, a fact denied by few scholars. The large majority differ only in the details, such as what exactly Jesus did say, and what was meely attribute to Him. You are not cognizant of facts. I gave you a start with sources, yet you just up and deny. Well, that can work with your beliefs about evolution and the alleged historical figures that supposedly began that myth. Can you prove Charles Darwin lived? PROOF. Not some website cut and paste. Do you have a witness that knew him, saw him, that can prove his claim?
quote: You contradict yourself from above already. You said there are NO accounts real, verifiable, meaningful. Pure speculation, unfounded opinion. Then you compound your errors saying there are few references. There are many. On what basis would you decide them questionable? Are you a Bible scholar? An archeologist? An historian? There are professionals in those fields who are in fact qualified to make that judgment. Few of them are so ignorant as to deny the evidences. They differ in the interpretations, the motives of Christ, his origins, other details that probably can't be settled empirically. Interesting that the Jews didn't publish contradictions to the claims of the writings of the apostles in that generation. If those things were not true, then where are the extremely important, vital refutals? I doubt any Jew of the day was willing to contradict what the masses saw, touched, believed. Skeptics had to wait until all the original witnesses were dead. Even then few stepped out to question Christian history. You miss the point that those known accounts with little detail do agree in summary of what the Bible says about Jesus. The matter was of little emphasis to a man like Josephus, more interested in chronicling Jewish history. I think God used him to get in a word. Can you prove He didn't? Deleting senseless babble...
quote: Religion came first, co-existed with science, continues unabated, and based on its track record would far outlive any science. Science can't satisfy the soul of man. It provides distractions, toys, machines that rust. Nice while we have it (some of it), but we could live without it. Men did before, and could continue without.
quote: Disappointed? Even the best hypothesis is not proof of a certainty. It is less potent than a theory. A hypothesis needs to be self-testable in its own assumption, so what value is there in any assumption that disagrees with the spiritual? What would it compare to?
quote: I'll remember that when it comes time for you to cite a precious source. Very likely I'll simply deny its validity, deciding that now, regardless its strength. Sources are out, right? Yours, mine, every source is pointless, meaningless, fabrication, not even real, just a quirk in an energy stream, which itself is probably not really there?
quote: I once enjoyed those stories, never once believing any of them to be real, but certainly entertaining. Relatively few people on earth believe any of that stuff. Why? Nobody I know claims to have seen any of the creatures, nor have I read of any claiming to have witnessed such characters as in Greek or any other mythology. They were not presented as visions or dreams, but supposedly actual experiences, therefore subject to proving by finding the relics. So where are the fossils? Where is the evidence? The Bible, however, enjoys the support of many scholarly Jewish, Christian, other religious, and entirely secular archeologists and other scientists digging up and studying actual verifying relics in Bible lands that testify to the veracity of the Bible. But of course you wouldn't browse such knowledge sources lest you realize the truth? There were no claims of impossible creatures seen by men, except for the obvious witness of dinosaurs and other extinct animals recorded in its pages. Their lithified remains remain as evidence they were real creatures.
quote: MOST scholars, even the most secular of them, agree on the harmony of the books of the Bible, though not necessarily the meaning of the contents. From a purely analytical perspective it is undeniable. Many just won't believe those words, many do. Your conclusion is lonely, baseless, pure opinion. Almost any search on the subject will turn up statements that verify what most scholars believe about that. What are you so afraid of? You put forth an agorophobic air about it.
quote: So let me see some examples of that. We know how easy it is to back that up concerning Christianity. How about some Buddhist prayers answered? Who would answer them? Yeah, let's begin with Buddhism. This should be interesting. We should be able to choose between sets of two at a time, right? Then lets take on Hinduism. Maybe by then I'll have in my home an actual native Christian missionary from Hyderabad, India, who comes here every year to raise funds preaching. His name is Satish Kumar, http://www.calvarymission.org. Maybe he can fill you in on that one, being a former high caste Hindu. He'll be staying with us a week, and we will be eating authentic Andrea Pradish fare, learning more about his home and his goals. Meanwhile, lets consider how much more or less palatable Buddhism is than Christianity. Are you up to backing your statements? Of interest to me will be the authenticity of their religious claims versus the veracity of the Bible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Percy Member  Posts: 22473 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wordswordsman Inactive Member |
quote: I won't drop to your pack-level. You can lash out all you want, for I understand your confusion, the terror of knowing you are wrong but can't admit it. We undersand you can't handle facts. It's OK. Calm down. As for most scientists being Christians, I challenge that. Most atheists challenge that. It appears to me the average polls reveal that about 55 percent of scientists believe no god was involvd in evolution, which also matches other polls that indicate 60% believe there is no god, and others have varying concepts of what God is, most of which don't qualify as true Christian beliefs. However, 40 percent who actually believe strongly in evolution admit "God guided the process, including the creation of man", labelling them theistic evolutionists, which is an unacceptable compromise, leaving such believers outside the spectrum of Christianity. Christians believe the teachings of Christ, else one can't possibly fit the definition. Of that 40% who admit some form of possible divine intervention, few match biblical descriptions of the relationship between God and man, most placing God far away and detached, unresponsive, as though He started everything off then left it to develop.
quote: If a person reads and believes men eventually evolved from primordal slime, is that subjective or objective thinking? Requires a little faith to believe, or is supported by empirical data? If proved beyond the realm of faith, then present your facts. Deduction laced with assumption won't cut it.
quote: I see you dodged my main point. Can't handle it? I would love to get into the science part of it, but these rediculous challenges to the Bible can't be left standing unchallenged. That is all I can find time for. I still work for a living. I have lots of ideas to test out on you guys, but it'll have to wait.
quote: It is fact that millions of people are regular witnesses to the truth of the Bible in their daily lives. God interacts with us on a regular basis in ways outlined in the Bible. Of course, atheists are not part of that community and experiences of it, so can't comprehend such a possibility. There is a world of testimony stretching back through time which they regularly simply deny or object to. I can't help you with all that. You must pursue such things yourself. I personally have experienced the world of unbelief, knowing what that is about. There is no manual for living it. One is on his own there, a wanderer in time with no real place to go to in life. I find the Bible way quite fulfilling and matching up with the good of life. There would be no logic at all in believing things of that dark side when I know those contradict the side of the light of God. ICR has an objective which leaves no time or resources for promoting antithetical agendas. Why would you expect them to carry opposing ideologies? Do atheists carry Bibles? The issue is black and white, extremely polarized.
quote: You need to read the rest of the story about our loving God. He is at the same time a jealous God, tolerant of nothing that opposes His Word. He already is the God of Judgment, a God of wrath against rebels. But yes, He is love, expressed in the giving of His Son Jesus on the cross for men's sins.
quote: That is a definition of fundamentalist belief in God as opposed to a quai-belief in some things about God. When I met Him, I decided to believe everything about God. I have great confidence in His abilities, His nature. He changed mine. My boast is in Him. I'll resume a little later today...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6494 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
WS:I won't drop to your pack-level. You can lash out all you want, for I understand your confusion, the terror of knowing you are wrong but can't admit it. We undersand you can't handle facts. It's OK. Calm down.
------------------------------ M: I am niether confused nor terrified and that you think I am working at a pack level suggests you have a persecution complex on top of your megalomania....and as to understanding facts...you have yet to present any...do you know what a fact is even? hypothesis? theory? Clearly not. ----------------------------- WS: As for most scientists being Christians, I challenge that. Most atheists challenge that. It appears to me the average polls reveal that about 55 percent of scientists believe no god was involvd in evolution, which also matches other polls that indicate 60% believe there is no god, and others have varying concepts of what God is, most of which don't qualify as true Christian beliefs. However, 40 percent who actually believe strongly in evolution admit "God guided the process, including the creation of man", labelling them theistic evolutionists, which is an unacceptable compromise, leaving such believers outside the spectrum of Christianity. Christians believe the teachings of Christ, else one can't possibly fit the definition. Of that 40% who admit some form of possible divine intervention, few match biblical descriptions of the relationship between God and man, most placing God far away and detached, unresponsive, as though He started everything off then left it to develop.[/b] ------------------------------------- M: LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You are so desperate and foolish that your only defense is to claim that they are not "real" christians..LOL! Your faith is truly feeble. Most of the "true" christians I have talked to would not consider you a christian. ---------------------- WS: If a person reads and believes men eventually evolved from primordal slime, is that subjective or objective thinking? Requires a little faith to believe, or is supported by empirical data? If proved beyond the realm of faith, then present your facts. Deduction laced with assumption won't cut it. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ M: And a wonderful display of ignorance of the topic yet again Know what the difference between abiogenesis and evolution is? Clearly not. Go inform youself instead of looking even more foolish. -------------------------- WS: I would love to get into the science part of it, but these rediculous challenges to the Bible can't be left standing unchallenged. That is all I can find time for. I still work for a living. I have lots of ideas to test out on you guys, but it'll have to wait.[/b] +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ M: Lovely excuse. Did your dog eat your homework to ---------------------------------------- WS: It is fact that millions of people are regular witnesses to the truth of the Bible in their daily lives. ------------------------------------- M: It is a fact that millions of people regularly witness the "truth" of other religions to...does not make it a fact or even compelling evidence. ----------------------------- WS: God interacts with us on a regular basis in ways outlined in the Bible. ------------------- M: Not with me ------------- WS: Of course, atheists are not part of that community and experiences of it, so can't comprehend such a possibility. ------------------------------------ M: My comprehension skills are just fine...and you just dicounted millions of people as christians who believe in theistic evolution so your ability to comprehend the world around you is questionable. ---------------------------- WS: There is a world of testimony stretching back through time which they regularly simply deny or object to. I can't help you with all that. -------------------------------------- M: Don't need your help and statements like "world of testimony" are empty appeals to authority for which you can provide no evidence. ------------------------- WS: You must pursue such things yourself. I personally have experienced the world of unbelief, knowing what that is about. --------------------------------- M: That is your BELIEF...you have no idea what my "world" is like regardless of what you think...I have personally experienced the world of belief as I was raised christian but by ten years old rejected it as pure unsupportable nonesense. ------------------- WS: There is no manual for living it. One is on his own there, a wanderer in time with no real place to go to in life. ---------------------------- M: Funny, I would consider that of you and other fundamentalists. You claim other christians are not true christians and that everyone else is wrong. Therefore all religious sects are on their own guided by personal beliefs in an empty life thinking they are going in the right direction with so many others telling them they are wrong. The only thing ALL of us have in common is we each think we are right. --------------------------- WS: I find the Bible way quite fulfilling and matching up with the good of life. --------------------------- M: Good for you. I am glad you feel fulfilled by your worldview. (note: I am not being sarcastic). --------------------- WS: There would be no logic at all in believing things of that dark side when I know those contradict the side of the light of God. -------------------------------- M: Dark and light...hmmm pretty light here where I am sitting. ---------------------- WS: ICR has an objective which leaves no time or resources for promoting antithetical agendas. Why would you expect them to carry opposing ideologies? Do atheists carry Bibles? The issue is black and white, extremely polarized. --------------------------------------- M: A group claiming to be a scientific institute that a priori claims that its conclusions are correct and will explicitly reject and data that contradicts its beliefs is not a scientific organization. Atheists carrying bibles is a poor analogy. -------------------------- WS: You need to read the rest of the story about our loving God. He is at the same time a jealous God, tolerant of nothing that opposes His Word. He already is the God of Judgment, a God of wrath against rebels. But yes, He is love, expressed in the giving of His Son Jesus on the cross for men's sins. ------------------------------------ M: Yes, I know that your god is the Rambo of the universe in your worldview who gets a kick out of murder and headgames. But since he does not exist i.e. not "our" god but "your mythology" I don't put any stock in such descriptions. ------------------------------- I said in a prior post:
quote: WS: responds:That is a definition of fundamentalist belief in God as opposed to a quai-belief in some things about God. When I met Him, I decided to believe everything about God. I have great confidence in His abilities, His nature. He changed mine. My boast is in Him. ------------------- M: That definition of a fundamentalist belief in God would also apply to the supporter of a dictator. -------------------- WS: I'll resume a little later today... ---------------- M: I can hardly wait. Cheers,M [This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 10-10-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
ick a religion and I will show you many witnesses to the very same things. Now, how do we choose between them?
mit the sources obviously/possibly biased. Just look at the secular sources. Are you so biased yourself you can't believe any witness that dares mention THAT name?