Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Pat Robertson on natural disasters
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 271 of 302 (256117)
11-02-2005 1:14 AM
Reply to: Message 267 by jar
11-01-2005 8:29 PM


Re: Bashing Robertson
Jar, all Icare to say to you is read the specific texts I cited thoughtfully, prayerfully and carefully. Then go figure. Your mind, too is completely closed and I'm not wasting any more of my busy life on stuff you distort so badly.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by jar, posted 11-01-2005 8:29 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Silent H, posted 11-02-2005 4:58 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 275 by nator, posted 11-02-2005 8:52 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 285 by jar, posted 11-02-2005 11:01 AM Buzsaw has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 272 of 302 (256119)
11-02-2005 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 12:56 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
In other words your whole post was intended to evade the point.
You don't have a prophecy that links an increase in natural disasters to the events of 1948. And you know it. That is why you try to evade the point again and again
Even then you somehow manage to misrepresent Ezekiel 37. You even manage to miss the latter half of Ezekiel 37:22 (it does not just say that there will be a single nation, does it ? it says that there will be one nation INSTEAD OF TWO reuniting the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Modern Israel is at most a reestablishment of Judah - and not as a kingdom).
As for your other claims, no duration is given for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorroah (although I will note that nuclear weapons will destroy a city in rather less than an hour)
I've read Daniel carefully enough. My mind is not so closed that I have to assume that the prophecy must be correct. That it says that the events it refers to are at "the time of the end" does not mean that it has to be right on that point.
Which comes to the assertion that I am the closed minded one. That is an outright lie. I am the one that reads the Bible and carefully considers it. You reject or twist the words of the Bible on a regular basis - as you just did with Ezekiel 37.
The fact remains that I was right. You have no prophecy indicating that an increase in natural disasters will followe the events of 1948. Thus evne if there was such an increase it cannot be said to be a fulfilment of prophecy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 12:56 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 9:08 AM PaulK has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5810 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 273 of 302 (256129)
11-02-2005 4:56 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 12:56 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
Yes, there's tribes missing, but with modern DNA tech, it may be possible to sort the others out soon.
So I want to get this straight... you do believe that dna tech is a capable tool for discerning branches of animal speciation?
Also, you said Israel would be without walls, but as is well known, they have walls. Not to mention that humans seeking to fulfill prophecy is different than actually doing such a thing. It is a simulation and meaningless.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 12:56 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 9:17 AM Silent H has replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5810 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 274 of 302 (256130)
11-02-2005 4:58 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 1:14 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
on stuff you distort so badly
Can I get an answer on how quoting a section more fully qualifies as a distortion? Distortion of text is done through selective and so minimal quotation.
Jar really seems to have you on this one. An explanation of how that was a distortion seems in order.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 1:14 AM Buzsaw has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2160 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 275 of 302 (256160)
11-02-2005 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 1:14 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
quote:
Jar, all Icare to say to you is read the specific texts I cited thoughtfully, prayerfully and carefully.
Sure seems like he did, to me.
He actually quoted the entire passage, while you only referenced a line or two with your own interpretation.
(By the way, is that interpretation of yours infallable or not?, and if it is fallable, and if you turn out to be wrong about the "facts" you have based your faith upon, does this mean you will lose your faith?)
quote:
Then go figure. Your mind, too is completely closed and I'm not wasting any more of my busy life on stuff you distort so badly.
You have given up so easily, buz.
Is that what Jesus would want you to do?
Can you please show exactly where jar has distorted scripture?
Be very specific. ...as in, maybe go line by line and explain how jar's reading is so "distorted".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 1:14 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 276 of 302 (256165)
11-02-2005 9:08 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by PaulK
11-02-2005 2:41 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
PaulK writes:
In other words your whole post was intended to evade the point.
You don't have a prophecy that links an increase in natural disasters to the events of 1948. And you know it. That is why you try to evade the point again and again
Read the stats on landfall major hurricanes since 1948, for example. Nearly all of them since 1900 were after 1948. I've shown where the upspike in the frequency since '48 is significant. Link this data to the prophecies and go figure. As I said, you don't want to be bothered by the facts. I'm wasting my time, except that likely some reader guests who aren't part of the close knit comradery here who support one another, right or wrong, will read and learn. It's very obvious who's being objective here.
PaulK writes:
Even then you somehow manage to misrepresent Ezekiel 37. You even manage to miss the latter half of Ezekiel 37:22 (it does not just say that there will be a single nation, does it ? it says that there will be one nation INSTEAD OF TWO reuniting the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Modern Israel is at most a reestablishment of Judah - and not as a kingdom).
I'm not missing anything. it clearly says that there will be one kingdom, not two. Skew it all you want, but you can't read more than one nation in the land, no matter how you cut it and that's what we are observing. The Ezekiel text says that the nations will invade at Armageddon, but their presence there will be very short lived and only 1/6 of the hoard of invaders will survive.
PaulK writes:
As for your other claims, no duration is given for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorroah (although I will note that nuclear weapons will destroy a city in rather less than an hour)
Oh, come now. It's obvious you're getting real desperate for debate fodder now, PaulK. This's simply straining at gnats and swallowing camels on your part. It'll likely take roughly that long for the major blast effect and smoke to settle.
As for the rest of you're post, its simple yadda, not worth a response. You're running outa steam, my friend, claiming victory when your down on the count and about out.
Some of you people here are laughable, as one observes how your exclusive secularist core here hang together and come running to one another's support, no matter how weak your argument may be, with even some of the moderators chiming in, ignoring the rediculous obfuscative off topic tactics used by some of you, like jar's feeble attempt to lengthen the timeframe of the subject to as long as billions of years.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by PaulK, posted 11-02-2005 2:41 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by PaulK, posted 11-02-2005 9:37 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 279 by Asgara, posted 11-02-2005 9:56 AM Buzsaw has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 277 of 302 (256167)
11-02-2005 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 273 by Silent H
11-02-2005 4:56 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
Holmes writes:
So I want to get this straight... you do believe that dna tech is a capable tool for discerning branches of animal speciation?
Off topic: as I've told you before, don't expect to be able to draw me off with you. It's keeping me busy enough to address all the on topic stuff in my busy schedule.
Holmes writes:
Also, you said Israel would be without walls, but as is well known, they have walls. Not to mention that humans seeking to fulfill prophecy is different than actually doing such a thing. It is a simulation and meaningless.
I see you're getting desperate also, Holmes. We all know that what walls remain are nothing but useless archives and the most grown/expanded way beyond the ancient walls.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Silent H, posted 11-02-2005 4:56 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by Silent H, posted 11-02-2005 10:21 AM Buzsaw has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 278 of 302 (256170)
11-02-2005 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 9:08 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
quote:
Read the stats on landfall major hurricanes since 1948, for example. Nearly all of them since 1900 were after 1948. I've shown where the upspike in the frequency since '48 is significant. Link this data to the prophecies and go figure.
Since there's no prophecy to link it to - as proven by your evasion - the statistics are moot.
quote:
As I said, you don't want to be bothered by the facts. I'm wasting my time, except that likely some reader guests who aren't part of the close knit comradery here who support one another, right or wrong, will read and learn. It's very obvious who's being objective here.
Yes it is obvious that you are evading the point, attempting to decieve the readers and misrepresenting the Bible. And telling malicious lies about me since I persist in telling the truth instead of kowtowing to you and your falsehoods.
quote:
I'm not missing anything
Well then you are lying about something because if you have read Ezekiel 37:18-22 you cannot honestly deny that it is about the reunification of the tribes of Isrel and Judah into a single kingdom.
quote:
Skew it all you want, but you can't read more than one nation in the land, no matter how you cut it and that's what we are observing
A unified Kingdom - of all the tribes of Israel. What we see is not a kingdom and it includes only the desendents of the people of Judah.
No matter how much you try to obscure the truth THAT is what Ezekiel 37 says.
He rest of the post is just more evasion. The heat and the shcokwave from a nuclear blast will pass in much less than an hour (the blast is the slower of the two and travels at the speed of sound). The rest of the effects will all take far longer. Those are the facts.
As for your dismissal of my other points with your usual lies it's just another sign that I've won. But then we already knew that because you have never even attempted to directly deal with my point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 9:08 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 10:30 AM PaulK has replied

Asgara
Member (Idle past 2293 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 279 of 302 (256178)
11-02-2005 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 9:08 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
Buz, I've asked you before. Please give me a "LINK" to your NOAA data so I can verify it for myself.
Read the stats on landfall major hurricanes since 1948, for example. Nearly all of them since 1900 were after 1948
Your list is not from the NOAA's The Most Intense Hurricanes in the United States 1900-2000...
It is not from the NOAA's The Thirty Deadlist Mainland US Tropical Cyclones 1900 - 2000 ...
Nor is it from the NOAA's Costliest U.S. Hurricanes 1900-2000
Buz, I am NOT saying you are definately wrong, I haven't seen where you are getting your information from. I AM saying that you haven't shown anything yet.
So far you have given us a list from a websearch with no links, two actual links that boil down to one because they are exact copies of each other. I went to the database where the information in that link comes from and it is useless because a large portion of the early data is MISSING. The last information you gave was an unlinked list from what you claim is a NOAA list of major US landfall hurricanes since 1900, but it doesn't match the NOAA reports that I have actually supplied.
Buz do you understand what I am looking for?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 9:08 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by PaulK, posted 11-02-2005 10:08 AM Asgara has not replied
 Message 286 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 11:07 AM Asgara has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 280 of 302 (256182)
11-02-2005 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 279 by Asgara
11-02-2005 9:56 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
I had to track down the Webpenny's report to find the page they used.
It is simply a list of major hurricanes but it does not claim to be complete and it does not give any selection criteria.
In other words Buz relied on a website devoted to Penny stocks which happened to have published a shoddily researched report on hurricanes. Buz didn't bother to check against more reliable sources - like NOAA itself. Instead he just goes on claiming that his source must be right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Asgara, posted 11-02-2005 9:56 AM Asgara has not replied

Silent H
Member (Idle past 5810 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 281 of 302 (256186)
11-02-2005 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 9:17 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
Off topic: as I've told you before, don't expect to be able to draw me off with you.
How is this off topic if you brought it up in defense of your position? We don't have to go into a detailed discussion. I am just trying to clarify that you believe that dna research is capable of discovering branches of related offspring over several generations based on chemical signatures.
I see you're getting desperate also, Holmes. We all know that what walls remain are nothing but useless archives and the most grown/expanded way beyond the ancient walls.
Desparate? You have to actually start discussing things with me in a meaningful way to get me in such a position. I was merely pointing out some factual errors.
As far as the walls go, where have you been? Israel has been building an extremely controversial WALL around CITIES in order to keep out terrorists. If you do not know this then it is time to do some research on current events.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 9:17 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 282 of 302 (256192)
11-02-2005 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by PaulK
11-02-2005 9:37 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
Whatever. It appears nobody's budging here, so we might as well move on.
In my morning reading today I was reading Psalms 83 and though this Psalms may not be a prophetic Psalm perse, it's sure relevant to what we are observing in and around the new Israel of today, involving the same old enemies of Isreal, the Ishmaelites, et al. Again, , imo, the significance of this is just more corroborating evidence for my argument about the OP of this thread. There's plenty of evidence, but few care to accept it, for it is damning to their secularistic ideologies and mindsets.
The relatively puny arrogant little human creatures of this speck of a planet in the cosmos, defiantly and arrogantly wag their heads, claiming to be the ultimate intelligent beings of all the universe, pshawing any notion that there could be other intelliget beings of far greater intelligence and energy, the head and greatest of all, being the designer and manager of it as some significant evidence appears to indicate.
Psalms 83:2-8 writes:
For lo, your enemies make a tumult;
And they that hate you have lifted up the head.
They take crafty counsel against your people,
And consult together against your hidden ones.
They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation;
That the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. For they have consulted together with one consent; Against you do they make a covenant;

The tents of Edom and the Ishmaelites;
Moab, and the Hagarenes; Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; Philistia with the inhabitanmts of Tyre; Assyria also is joined with them; They have helped the children of Lot.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buzsaw

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by PaulK, posted 11-02-2005 9:37 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by PaulK, posted 11-02-2005 10:41 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 284 by NosyNed, posted 11-02-2005 10:50 AM Buzsaw has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17815
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 283 of 302 (256199)
11-02-2005 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 10:30 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
There's no need for anyone else to budge.
Your supposed increase in major hurricanes is the result of shoddy research. On your part as well as the author's - you didn't bother to check the actual figures from NOAA which are available online.
You don't have any prophecy which predicted an increase in major hurricanes would follow the creation of the modern state of Israel.
Hell, you can't even explain how your supposedly careful reading of Ezekiel 37 managed to miss the fact that it was talking about a reunification of the tribes of the two ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah.
And that lot isn't enough to make you change your position even slightly ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 10:30 AM Buzsaw has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 284 of 302 (256205)
11-02-2005 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 10:30 AM


Greater beings?
The relatively puny arrogant little human creatures of this speck of a planet in the cosmos, defiantly and arrogantly wag their heads, claiming to be the ultimate intelligent beings of all the universe, pshawing any notion that there could be other intelliget beings of far greater intelligence and energy,
Other than those who think the creator of the entire universe takes us as being special and "in His image" I don't think anyone was claiming any such thing. Those of us with a real interest in the real universe are very interested in the notion that there might be others equal or greater than we.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 10:30 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 11:40 AM NosyNed has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 384 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 285 of 302 (256216)
11-02-2005 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 271 by Buzsaw
11-02-2005 1:14 AM


Re: Bashing Robertson
I'm not wasting any more of my busy life on stuff you distort so badly.
How can I possibly be the one doing the distorting when I place your quotemining in context. Are you saying that by showing folk how the meaning YOU assign to one or two lines is not there when read in full context is distorting the facts?
Are you saying you do NOT want to discuss what is actually written in the Bible, but only want us to accept what you assert is the meaning?
Jar, all Icare to say to you is read the specific texts I cited thoughtfully, prayerfully and carefully.
Unlike most Fundies and Evangelicals, buz, not only have I read the specific texts you cited, I've read the lines before and after them.
Can we not look at what is actually written in the Bible, in context, as it was meant to be read?
All I can say is I hope someday that you carefully and prayerfully read the Bible.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Buzsaw, posted 11-02-2005 1:14 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by PaulK, posted 11-02-2005 11:07 AM jar has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024