Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-18-2019 3:06 AM
18 online now:
CosmicChimp, dwise1, Pressie (3 members, 15 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 853,982 Year: 9,018/19,786 Month: 1,440/2,119 Week: 200/576 Day: 3/98 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
5678Next
Author Topic:   Only one version?
Admin
Director
Posts: 12600
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 46 of 106 (19227)
10-07-2002 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by nos482
10-07-2002 7:52 AM


Hi Nos!

Nos writes:

Too little too late.
...
People who live in glass houses....

Normally a couple non-sequitur replies like this would be no problem, but your past conduct here is also a factor. Please follow the Forum Guidelines, particularly rules 1 and 2. Note the part about enforcement at the bottom, and please realize that you're at the limit of the warning stage. Thanks!

------------------

--EvC Forum Administrator


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by nos482, posted 10-07-2002 7:52 AM nos482 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by nos482, posted 10-07-2002 11:57 AM Admin has not yet responded

    
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 106 (19232)
10-07-2002 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Admin
10-07-2002 11:31 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Admin:
Hi Nos!

Nos writes:

Too little too late.
...
People who live in glass houses....

Normally a couple non-sequitur replies like this would be no problem, but your past conduct here is also a factor. Please follow the Forum Guidelines, particularly rules 1 and 2. Note the part about enforcement at the bottom, and please realize that you're at the limit of the warning stage. Thanks!


What I had meant was that that discussion was long over and I didn't want to start banging my head against his wall again, plus I don't want to attend his circus either.

[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-07-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Admin, posted 10-07-2002 11:31 AM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-08-2002 7:22 AM nos482 has responded

  
Wordswordsman
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 106 (19251)
10-07-2002 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Andya Primanda
09-13-2002 4:55 AM


quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
see, this is what happens if a large religion cannot keep its original texts. Poor you!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

WS: The Jews have no original autographs, copies only.
The Christians have no original autographs, copies only.
The Muslims have no original autograph, copies only.

What are you referring to? All are poor because of no original autographs? Why do you think it necessary to refer to the original to find validity? If I were to appeal to the U.S. Constitution in a matter of law, do you suppose I would be required to visit the National Archive Museum in Wash., D.C., to actually read the original document? Nobody has had to do that. Do you have a clue as to why that isn't necessary? If you need the answer from me, please indicate.

Assuming you are already answering correctly, for the same reasons it isn't necessary for anyone to refer to the original autographs from which our Bible came. Sufficient geographical distribution and shear numbers of copies assured that there was no need in having available the original manuscript. There are certain guarantees we have access to the original text of those original autographs, making it impossible for anyone to alter what was given originally, or lose the original message. As soon as only a few copies of the original letters were made and distributed, it was like casting feathers into the wind. Unless all those copies could be retreived, each carries the integrity of the true Word of God, checked by the contents of the other copies making their way through the world. As copies of copies proliferated, the true copies self-verified each other, and it became easier and easier to spot copies with error, especially omissions or additions such as marginal notes. There apparently were no erroneous copies circulating initially since that issue never came up in the several councils through several centuries. At issue was whether to honor the tenets of Judaism, then whether to accept certain copies as inspired, and later in what order the accepted books should appear together, together with other issues.

You, a Muslim, seem fond of slighting what we have possession of, being the Word of God usually presented bound together in "Bibles". Apparently you still don't realize the miracle of harmony between the 66 books written over thousands of years by many authors inspired of God. They exist in such accuracy and harmony such that it seems one person wrote them in one lifetime, never contradicting himself. We are talking 66 books. The Quran is all of one man in one generation. That seems suspicious to me. The Quran has no comparable base of previously existing revelations from which men can weigh the sayings of Muhammad. It is take all or perish. Everything hangs on the word of one man. Incredibly dangerous for anyone giving him serious consideration. Christianity, however, enjoys the benefit of having been prophecied to come through the Old Testament, with many witnesses contributing flawlessly to its precepts, all obviously by inspiration of ONE. The disciples of the Christ carried on the miraculous ministry of their master, in the same power of the Lord Jesus, again distributing the tenets of the faith among many, not just one authority. Since the gospel of Christ was duplicated many times over, there is the evidence of its efficacy, being reproducable. Muhammad's claims are not reproducable, nor can his words be verified. Therefore a follower of Islam cannot possibly have power or authority to question the authority of the KJV or any other Bible for that matter. You have no supportable base from which to judge. It would be more reasonable for you to make no reference to Islam when challenging the Bible or lack of original texts. Stick to comparing Bible verses to Bible verses to be safe. No outside reference could possibly do damage to the Bible.

These are just a few reasons Bible scholars and Bible friends know the integrity of those books is beyond reproach, cancelling out any possibility of Muhammad successfully "correcting" what was written long before he came along. The Quaranic version of history and its comments about the historically verified Jesus is incredulous, rediculous, but believable among people who will never be afforded a chance to read the Bible for themselves. That is why there are severe penalties for anyone making Bibles available in Muslim nations, lest the people believe the truth.

Every maker of a Bible version or translation has had access to either ancient manuscripts or other works based on copies of the original texts. The paths taken are a matter of record, demonstrating the foundation of every Bible was sure.

The problems experienced these days are very real, not experienced in the very first Bibles issued by hand copying, later by printing press. Languages remained relatively stable until people began widespread travel and commerce, effecting ever increasing language changes. That wasn't a problem in 1611. Up until that time English wouldn't even be considered suitable for such a book, the preferred language being Latin or French. It had not been long since the English language was considered suitable only for the poor. It was simply the desire of King James to get the Bible into the hands of the population at large. There is no valid point to be made that makes that project one of politics, or that the translation failed to capture the nuances of Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, or Latin, surprising the scholars of that time. Its handling of the original text, be they directly translated or borrowed from previous Bible works, did not fail to capture the message of those original texts, as attested to by many Bible scholars of many generations who could compare the KJV to known oldest copies of Scriptures.

It has been the modern versions of the past century that began a departure from the original textual messages, in mostly poor attempts to reduce the English language to even less quality than necessary. Other factors entered in, including socio/political pressures such as appeals to de-emphasize the male identity of God, and to diminish the condemnations of certain sins gaining tolerance in western culture. Some versions are even more blatant, obvious distortions of the record, such as the Jefferson Bible.

Learn the history of the Bible before castigating it. It's too easy to expose lies against the KJV, my pleasure to undertake.

[This message has been edited by Wordswordsman, 10-07-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Andya Primanda, posted 09-13-2002 4:55 AM Andya Primanda has not yet responded

  
Wordswordsman
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 106 (19297)
10-08-2002 7:22 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by nos482
10-07-2002 11:57 AM


quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What I had meant was that that discussion was long over and I didn't want to start banging my head against his wall again, plus I don't want to attend his circus either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

WS: My comment was current as of your post #31-33 of 48, which discussion was not complete in that your comment remains your opinion, not at all fact, still requiring a basis for stating it. I am pointing out that most of your comments are baseless, pure speculation, hardly fitting for any debate. You should back up your claims with SOMETHING besides what lies between your own ears. A for instance of the sort of comment that is inappropriate is the current one, "that discussion was long over". I have kept it open by adding to it. Any post from #1 onward is subject to comment and accountability applies. Until you yield admitting you have no basis for your comments, the matter remains open. So upon what do you base such comments about involvement of Shakespeare and politics in the making of the KJV? Where can I go verify your evidence?

The reason you find yourself "banging your head against" what you call a wall is because Jesus Christ is my wall, my fortress, against whom you cannot prevail. My trust and wisdom is in Him. You are dealing with HIM through me. Resistance is futile- you can't prevail leaning on forwarded lies of atheist webpages and other Bible skeptic sources. They are frustrated and desperate to find a crack into which they can thrust an arrow of deception. It's a delibrate rebellion against the one living, all powerful God of the Bible who will have the last word. It is no circus, but the most serious of matters you can imagine. Many authors of the Bible, a sea of scholarly experts, and live witnesses testifying to the influence, power and authority of God support those statements.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by nos482, posted 10-07-2002 11:57 AM nos482 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by nos482, posted 10-08-2002 7:54 AM Wordswordsman has not yet responded
 Message 51 by Mammuthus, posted 10-08-2002 7:58 AM Wordswordsman has responded

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 106 (19298)
10-08-2002 7:54 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Wordswordsman
10-08-2002 7:22 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
quote:

You quoted your message in such a way that on reply it all disappears.

Whatever makes you happy to believe. Have a nice life.

[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-08-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-08-2002 7:22 AM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Admin, posted 10-08-2002 10:28 AM nos482 has not yet responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 4639 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 51 of 106 (19299)
10-08-2002 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Wordswordsman
10-08-2002 7:22 AM


WS:
The reason you find yourself "banging your head against" what you call a wall is because Jesus Christ is my wall, my fortress, against whom you cannot prevail.

Hmm..as an atheist I never found anything about the bible compelling and am not even convinced that a real individual named Jesus ever existed...thus I have prevailed....so have lots of other people.

My trust and wisdom is in Him.

Whatever floats your boat

You are dealing with HIM through me.

This sounds like megalomania...so far your manner and reasoning hardly seem to represent the "loving god" you claim must be forced down everyones throats.

Resistance is futile-

Resistance is magnificently successful...thus the billions of other people who have completely different beliefs from you.

you can't prevail leaning on forwarded lies of atheist webpages and other Bible skeptic sources.

You can't prevail by the completely unscientific, dogmatic, wishful thinking of forwarded lies of fundamentalist conservative egocentric unskeptical sources either.

They are frustrated and desperate to find a crack into which they can thrust an arrow of deception.

Most don't give a crap until religious groups claim that their mythology should be taught as science...particularly when they do not even know what the science is they are against..i.e. do you personally even know what the theory of evolution entials? What are the major tenets? Have you read Darwin?

It's a delibrate rebellion against the one living, all powerful God of the Bible who will have the last word.

You have no evidence outside your own wishful thinking and that of others to support this..no physical evidence..you cannot even "disprove" that Vishnu is not the one true living god.

It is no circus, but the most serious of matters you can imagine.

Then argue seriously rather than criticizing a debate because nobody else here seems to agree with you.

Many authors of the Bible
Hardly says anything about its validity...there are lots of authors for lots of publications

, a sea of scholarly experts
LOL! Now you plead to the authority of experts...why did a Google search tell you that they must be correct...and I have yet to see a sea of scholarly experts find any scientific merit in the bible.

and live witnesses testifying to the influence, power and authority of God support those statements.

Live witnesses are notoriously unreliable....and you will witness anything you want to believe in your state.

Well here goes for evolution, thousands of scientists from every kind of religious background finding supporting evidence. A sea of scholars supporting it. Thousands of scientists actually doing expermimental research confirming it....does not require belief...only a sound mind, education, and hard work....the antithesis of the fundamentalist who requires a weak mind, blocking of access to education, and hard work threatening all those who disagree.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-08-2002 7:22 AM Wordswordsman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-08-2002 10:24 PM Mammuthus has responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12600
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 52 of 106 (19312)
10-08-2002 10:28 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by nos482
10-08-2002 7:54 AM


nos writes to Wordswordsman:

You quoted your message in such a way that on reply it all disappears.

Wordswordsman fooled the quoting code by using "quote:" to head a section that wasn't an actual UBB quote. This is a bug. I've added it to the bug list.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by nos482, posted 10-08-2002 7:54 AM nos482 has not yet responded

    
Wordswordsman
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 106 (19355)
10-08-2002 10:24 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Mammuthus
10-08-2002 7:58 AM


quote:
Hmm..as an atheist I never found anything about the bible compelling and am not even convinced that a real individual named Jesus ever existed...thus I have prevailed....so have lots of other people.

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: http://www.lifeofchrist.com/history/historians/

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:
WS:My trust and wisdom is in Him.

YOU: Whatever floats your boat


Falling for Nos's tricks? You are appearing to be quite irrational, more and more, disqualifying yourself as a possible credible debater.

quote:
WS:You are dealing with HIM through me.

YOU: This sounds like megalomania...so far your manner and reasoning hardly seem to represent the "loving god" you claim must be forced down everyones throats.


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:
WS:Resistance is futile-

YOU:Resistance is magnificently successful...thus the billions of other people who have completely different beliefs from you.


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: http://www.bib-arch.org/bswb_BR/barja00exodus.html

quote:
WS:you can't prevail leaning on forwarded lies of atheist webpages and other Bible skeptic sources.

YOU:You can't prevail by the completely unscientific, dogmatic, wishful thinking of forwarded lies of fundamentalist conservative egocentric unskeptical sources either.


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:
WS:They are frustrated and desperate to find a crack into which they can thrust an arrow of deception.

YOU:Most don't give a crap until religious groups claim that their mythology should be taught as science...particularly when they do not even know what the science is they are against..i.e. do you personally even know what the theory of evolution entials? What are the major tenets? Have you read Darwin?


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:
WS:It's a delibrate rebellion against the one living, all powerful God of the Bible who will have the last word.

YOU:You have no evidence outside your own wishful thinking and that of others to support this..no physical evidence..you cannot even "disprove" that Vishnu is not the one true living god.


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:
WS:It is no circus, but the most serious of matters you can imagine.

YOU:Then argue seriously rather than criticizing a debate because nobody else here seems to agree with you.


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:
WS:Many authors of the Bible

YOU:Hardly says anything about its validity...there are lots of authors for lots of publications


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:
WS:, a sea of scholarly experts

YOU:LOL! Now you plead to the authority of experts...why did a Google search tell you that they must be correct...and I have yet to see a sea of scholarly experts find any scientific merit in the bible.


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:
WS:and live witnesses testifying to the influence, power and authority of God support those statements.

YOU:Live witnesses are notoriously unreliable....and you will witness anything you want to believe in your state.


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:
Well here goes for evolution, thousands of scientists from every kind of religious background finding supporting evidence. A sea of scholars supporting it. Thousands of scientists actually doing expermimental research confirming it....does not require belief...

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:
only a sound mind, education, and hard work....the antithesis of the fundamentalist who requires a weak mind, blocking of access to education, and hard work threatening all those who disagree.

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Mammuthus, posted 10-08-2002 7:58 AM Mammuthus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by John, posted 10-09-2002 1:11 AM Wordswordsman has responded
 Message 55 by Mammuthus, posted 10-09-2002 5:45 AM Wordswordsman has responded

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 106 (19359)
10-09-2002 1:11 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Wordswordsman
10-08-2002 10:24 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
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.

But there are no extra-biblical accounts that are real, verifiable, and meaningful.

[quote]What do you do with extra-biblical historians evidencing the same Jesus the Bible describes?/quote

There are a very few references to a man named Jesus. Most of those references are questionable and none of them are detailed enough to justify the claim that they are "evidencing the same Jesus the Bible describes"

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/scott_oser/hojfaq.html

quote:
Josephus wasn't the only one: http://www.lifeofchrist.com/history/historians/

Thanks for the link.

quote:
No fact, just opinion based on.....what?

I'd guess it is based on a damned megalomaniacal statement you made in a previous post.

quote:
MY statement, however, is BASED on biblical statements meant for BELIEVERS.

Dumps an awful lot of power right in your lap doesn't it?

quote:
There is also far more secular ancient history on the side of the Bible than most people, including Christians, realize: http://www.bib-arch.org/bswb_BR/barja00exodus.html

Did you actually read this article?

quote:
Ashurbanipal was the last great king of Assyria. He ruled from 668 to 627 B.C.

Note: Ashurbanipal's library does not contain a record of current events but of a historical/legendary king.

quote:
The cuneiform text tells of a baby born to a priestess

Priestess? In Judaism?

quote:
who belonged to a class prohibited from bearing children.

In Judaism? What happened to be fruitful and multiply?

quote:
She hid him in a basket coated with pitch and placed the basket in the Euphrates River.

Ok. Here we have a match.

quote:
Carried downstream, the basket was opened by a gardener

Gardener? What about the princess and the jewish nurse-maid?

quote:
who took the child and raised him as his own. Favored by the goddess Ishtar

Ishtar?

quote:
the boy advanced and eventually became the first known emperor

Emporer? I don't recall moses ever being an emperor? of Babylon?

quote:
called Sargon

Not Moses...

quote:
In what was does the scientific method enter into religion?

It doesn't. If it did, religion would disappear.

quote:
The point to be wisely gained is that there is no way to disprove the Bible.

No way at all? Even hypothetically?

quote:
I use it as A source in deduction of what is reality.

The question I'd like answered, sincerely, is why should I care?

quote:
Few religions have their gods acting among men in any real way. They are more accurately concepts rather than beings able to interact.

Have you read much mythology? There are mountains of blatantly obvious contradiction of this claim.

quote:
Sure it does. That so many authors independently wrote of the same God and His message so harmoniously is evidence of divine inspiration.

A harmony in your head perhaps.... freaking chaotic in mine.

quote:
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.

Pick a religion and I will show you many witnesses to the very same things. Now, how do we choose between them?

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

[This message has been edited by John, 10-09-2002]

[This message has been edited by John, 10-09-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-08-2002 10:24 PM Wordswordsman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-09-2002 9:10 PM John has responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 4639 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 55 of 106 (19371)
10-09-2002 5:45 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Wordswordsman
10-08-2002 10:24 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
[B]
quote:
Hmm..as an atheist I never found anything about the bible compelling and am not even convinced that a real individual named Jesus ever existed...thus I have prevailed....so have lots of other people.

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: http://www.lifeofchrist.com/history/historians/

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:
WS:My trust and wisdom is in Him.

YOU: Whatever floats your boat


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:
WS:You are dealing with HIM through me.

YOU: This sounds like megalomania...so far your manner and reasoning hardly seem to represent the "loving god" you claim must be forced down everyones throats.


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:
WS:Resistance is futile-

YOU:Resistance is magnificently successful...thus the billions of other people who have completely different beliefs from you.


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: http://www.bib-arch.org/bswb_BR/barja00exodus.html
****************************************

Every religion has its own dogma that each believes is "obviously" supported and that all others are wrong.

quote:
WS:you can't prevail leaning on forwarded lies of atheist webpages and other Bible skeptic sources.

YOU:You can't prevail by the completely unscientific, dogmatic, wishful thinking of forwarded lies of fundamentalist conservative egocentric unskeptical sources either.


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:
WS:They are frustrated and desperate to find a crack into which they can thrust an arrow of deception.

YOU:Most don't give a crap until religious groups claim that their mythology should be taught as science...particularly when they do not even know what the science is they are against..i.e. do you personally even know what the theory of evolution entials? What are the major tenets? Have you read Darwin?


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:
WS:It's a delibrate rebellion against the one living, all powerful God of the Bible who will have the last word.

YOU:You have no evidence outside your own wishful thinking and that of others to support this..no physical evidence..you cannot even "disprove" that Vishnu is not the one true living god.


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:
WS:It is no circus, but the most serious of matters you can imagine.

YOU:Then argue seriously rather than criticizing a debate because nobody else here seems to agree with you.


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:
WS:Many authors of the Bible

YOU:Hardly says anything about its validity...there are lots of authors for lots of publications


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:
WS:, a sea of scholarly experts

YOU:LOL! Now you plead to the authority of experts...why did a Google search tell you that they must be correct...and I have yet to see a sea of scholarly experts find any scientific merit in the bible.


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:
WS:and live witnesses testifying to the influence, power and authority of God support those statements.

YOU:Live witnesses are notoriously unreliable....and you will witness anything you want to believe in your state.


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:
Well here goes for evolution, thousands of scientists from every kind of religious background finding supporting evidence. A sea of scholars supporting it. Thousands of scientists actually doing expermimental research confirming it....does not require belief...

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:
only a sound mind, education, and hard work....the antithesis of the fundamentalist who requires a weak mind, blocking of access to education, and hard work threatening all those who disagree.

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


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-08-2002 10:24 PM Wordswordsman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by nos482, posted 10-09-2002 9:54 AM Mammuthus has not yet responded
 Message 59 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-10-2002 7:39 AM Mammuthus has responded
 Message 64 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-10-2002 5:19 PM Mammuthus has responded

  
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 106 (19386)
10-09-2002 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Mammuthus
10-09-2002 5:45 AM


Originally posted by Mammuthus:

So rather than stick to your convictions you cut and ran? Didnt you accuse nos482 of having a weak character for doing so?

See what I mean. I was smart, I left his circus before he brought out the flaming hoops. But that won't stop him from putting on a performance and trotting out his "freakshow" as well.

[This message has been edited by nos482, 10-09-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Mammuthus, posted 10-09-2002 5:45 AM Mammuthus has not yet responded

  
Wordswordsman
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 106 (19449)
10-09-2002 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by John
10-09-2002 1:11 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Wordswordsman:
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.

John:But there are no extra-biblical accounts that are real, verifiable, and meaningful.


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:
WS:What do you do with extra-biblical historians evidencing the same Jesus the Bible describes?

John:There are a very few references to a man named Jesus. Most of those references are questionable and none of them are detailed enough to justify the claim that they are "evidencing the same Jesus the Bible describes"


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:
WS:In what was does the scientific method enter into religion?

John:It doesn't. If it did, religion would disappear.


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:
WS:The point to be wisely gained is that there is no way to disprove the Bible.

John:No way at all? Even hypothetically?


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:
WS:I use it as A source in deduction of what is reality.

John:The question I'd like answered, sincerely, is why should I care?


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:
WS:Few religions have their gods acting among men in any real way. They are more accurately concepts rather than beings able to interact.

John:Have you read much mythology? There are mountains of blatantly obvious contradiction of this claim.


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:
WS:Sure it does. That so many authors independently wrote of the same God and His message so harmoniously is evidence of divine inspiration.

John:A harmony in your head perhaps.... freaking chaotic in mine.


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:
WS: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 between God and men.

Johnick a religion and I will show you many witnesses to the very same things. Now, how do we choose between them?


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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by John, posted 10-09-2002 1:11 AM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Percy, posted 10-09-2002 11:09 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded
 Message 63 by John, posted 10-10-2002 3:32 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18482
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 58 of 106 (19459)
10-09-2002 11:09 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Wordswordsman
10-09-2002 9:10 PM


Wordswordsman writes:

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.

More like a fact unknown to anyone except fundamentalists. This sounds a lot like that other Creationism claim, "Did you know that more and more scientists are rejecting evolution and accepting Creationism as the better model?"


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?

There is far more evidence of Charles Darwin than there is of Jesus. Of course, that isn't really a fair comparison since Darwin lived very recently. He's buried in Westminster Abbey, I suppose you could dig up his bones if you could get the picks and shovels past the guards.

A more fair comparison would be with John the Baptist, who is featured far, far, far more prominently in contemporary accounts than is Jesus. In other words, Jesus gets barely any mention at all, and questionable and/or second-hand mention at that, while John the Baptist is written about all over the place.

John says:

There are a very few references to a man named Jesus. Most of those references are questionable and none of them are detailed enough to justify the claim that they are "evidencing the same Jesus the Bible describes"

You reply:

There are many.

There are few. Josephus (2), Tacitus (1), Suetonius (1), Thallus (1). They are so few we could quote them all in full in a short post. See this link that John posted on another thread:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/scott_oser/hojfaq.html


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.

And few are so incompetent as to claim evidence that doesn't exist.


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.

I don't know about that, but that's certainly what the gospel writers did.


I think God used him to get in a word. Can you prove He didn't?

The traditional scholarly approach is to accept those ideas that have supporting evidence. Lack of countervailing evidence cannot be construed as supportive for the simple reason that most ridiculous notions lack countervailing evidence. Find evidence that there aren't ethereal invisible elephants living in your refrigerator. I could claim that Jesus had a black mole on his left shoulder blade - prove that he didn't.


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.

I'm not sure you understand what is being claimed about the Bible. We're not saying it's a work of complete fiction. We're only saying that it contains some fact, some fiction, and some that we can't verify either way at this time. I don't know John's background, but he doesn't sound ignorant of Biblical issues. I read about Biblical archaeology all the time, and subscribe to Biblical Archaeological Review, so I'm constantly learning about all the recent discoveries. That the original Jericho has been identified and excavated lends no support whatsoever to the claim that, for example, Jesus was crucified, died, and was risen on the 3rd day.


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.

Most scholars are aware of the differences. The three synoptics are generally congruent but contain many substantial differences. Just check any synopsis, which places the three texts side-by-side in columns. Then there's John, which is totally unlike the other three and has a different chronology, for instance, of the last supper.


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.

Unless you only visit Christian bookstores, you can find plenty of books in any large bookstore that discuss the incongruencies of the Bible specifically and Christianity in general. Taking a look at my bookshelf I see that I've got around 30 titles myself. Oh, and 7 Bibles, but unfortunately I don't think any inerrant ones.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-09-2002 9:10 PM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

    
Wordswordsman
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 106 (19495)
10-10-2002 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Mammuthus
10-09-2002 5:45 AM


quote:
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.

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:
WS: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.

YOU: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.


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:
WS: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?

YOUlease 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.


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:
WSmit 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?

YOU: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.


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:
WS:You are dealing with HIM through me.

YOU: This sounds like megalomania...so far your manner and reasoning hardly seem to represent the "loving god" you claim must be forced down everyones throats.


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:
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.

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...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Mammuthus, posted 10-09-2002 5:45 AM Mammuthus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Mammuthus, posted 10-10-2002 8:21 AM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 4639 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 60 of 106 (19499)
10-10-2002 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Wordswordsman
10-10-2002 7:39 AM


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:
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.

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]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Wordswordsman, posted 10-10-2002 7:39 AM Wordswordsman has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Percy, posted 10-10-2002 9:58 AM Mammuthus has responded

  
Prev123
4
5678Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019