|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Is Jesus the Circular Messiah? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member (Idle past 337 days) Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: |
Hi Ray,
Hundreds of millions of persons since the 15th century AD, from every ethnic backround, economic status and level of education, have sided with the Biblical authors. This massive group of persons disagree. Are you seriously telling us that you do not understand why this shameless appeal to popularity is fallacious? It doesn't matter how many people believe something to be true, it has no baring on whether or not it is actually true. Lots of people believe the moon landings were faked. Does that make it true? What if everyone believed it: would that make it true? I'm continuously amazed at your nerve. Huntard said;
Huntard writes: Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true or not. ,quite rightly pointing out your use of an appeal to popularity. You respond;
Cold Foreign Object writes: Point evasion. You then go on to say, in your very next statement;
Cold Foreign Object writes: Except when it is the Theory of Evolution and the number of scientists that support, of course. Wha?! Point evasion at all? Pot at all? Kettle maybe? Black perchance? Evolution is soooo far removed from being the issue here. If you are going to make shameless appeals to popularity, you can expect to be called on it. Mutate and Survive. "The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2594 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Cold Foreign Object writes:
It is not a straw man, it is a perfectly fine analogy to show that truth does not depend on popularity.
But we are not talking about your ridiculous straw men. The fact that hundreds of millions of diverse persons recognize the veracity of the textual evidence exposes the "evidence" of Atheists and Evolutionists to be non-credible and unreliable axe grinding.
Repeating time: Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true or not.
Evolutionists commonly support evolution by saying evolution is true because the vast majority of scientists support.
Do they now? If they do, they are idiots. There is mountains of evidence for evolution, all they have to do is refer to them to make clear why they are supporting it. I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3346 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
I'll go with the "scholar" at least there is some verification instead of old stories handed down through generations in which have most likely been altered. Also if one looks at the Biblical stories in the context of what what thought to be, at the time of these stories, one should be able to see that most is pure mythology. Talking animals, the sun stopping, people living over 900 years, tey are just myths. Hundreds of millions of persons, from all walks of life, and economic status, and educational credentials, disagree. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2356 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
Hundreds of millions of persons, from all walks of life, and economic status, and educational credentials, disagree.
That's cause they've had their Odinsense remove by Odin the Allfather, so of course they're blinded to the truth. soon I discovered that this rock thing was true Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world And so there was only one thing I could do Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3346 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Retard said that truth is not determined by popular vote. I pointed out that evolutionists routinely comfort them self that evolution is true based on near unanimous support by practicing scientists. In fact I have read many books and defenses of evolution that use this exact argument.
Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member (Idle past 337 days) Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: |
Retard said that truth is not determined by popular vote. I pointed out that evolutionists routinely comfort them self that evolution is true based on near unanimous support by practicing scientists. Retard eh? Very droll. Ad hominem too, are you collecting logical fallacies to make up a set or something?
In fact I have read many books and defenses of evolution that use this exact argument. But were any of them written by Huntard? If not, then why should Huntard be held responsible for other people's bad arguments? Not that evolution is even remotely on topic anyway... Point evasion, you see. Mutate and Survive. "The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3346 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Repeating time: Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true or not. Yes it does. Why else is something accepted as true? Of course this is rhetorical. Ray: "Evolutionists commonly support evolution by saying evolution is true because the vast majority of scientists support." Huntard: "Do they now? If they do, they are idiots." Ray: Evolutionists are idiots but they feel the near unanimous support of ToE by scientists is good evidence of its veracity. The Bible enjoys mammoth support from persons of all walks of life, social status, and education. The issue, which you keep avoiding and evading, is credibility and reliability. The Biblical authors are held to be----saints----literally. Atheists are held to be infidels or liars. Ray Edited by Cold Foreign Object, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2594 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Cold Foreign Object writes:
Am I getting through to you? Once again. If I take a bunny, and ask millions of people to vote on its sex, does the sex of the bunny change to whatever was voted for most?
Yes it does. Why else is something accepted as true? Of course this is rhetorical.
Because of the supporting evidence?
Ray: "Evolutionists commonly support evolution by saying evolution is true because the vast majority of scientists support."
Nice quote mine there, in the next sentence I point out there are mountains of evidence for evolution. You conveniently left out that bit.
Huntard: "Do they now? If they do, they are idiots." Ray: Evolutionists are idiots but they feel the near unanimous support of ToE by scientists is good evidence of its veracity.
If they do, they are idiots. Something makes me suspect they don't though.....what would that be....AH YES! The mountains of evidence mentioned earlier.
The Bible enjoys mammoth support from persons of all walks of life, social status, and education.
Here we go again: Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true.
The issue, which you keep avoiding and evading, is credibility and reliability.
I avoided NOTHING. Reliability and credibility can only be determined by supporting evidence, not by how many people believe something to be the way it is.
The Biblical authors held to be----saints----literally.
*scrapes throat* Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true. Further, this is an appeal to authority.
Atheists are infidels----liars.
And we top it of with an ad hominen. Well done, you almost completed the set. I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3346 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Here we go again: Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true. Hundreds of millions of persons from diverse backrounds, social and economic status, and education agree that the Bible is true: the Divinely inspired word of God.
I avoided NOTHING. Reliability and credibility can only be determined by supporting evidence, not by how many people believe something to be the way it is. Hundreds of millions of persons from diverse backrounds, social and economic status, and education agree that the Bible is most credible and reliable, that is, a Book which reports what many persons were thinking.
Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true. Further, this is an appeal to authority. Yes, it is. And you seem to think that your personal "authority" is exempt from your own belief. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4488 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true. Further, this is an appeal to authority. Yes, it is. And you seem to think that your personal "authority" is exempt from your own belief. Just because something is popular doesn't make it right even if 99.99% of all people accept it. Something is right because there is evidence to support it. Where's is the evidence that the Bible is correct?(note) the Bible can't be used as evidence that the Bible is correct. There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2594 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Cold Foreign Object writes:
So you say. To which I have time and time again replied with: Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true. And I'll do it just one extra time in the hope you'll get it now. Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true.
Hundreds of millions of persons from diverse backrounds, social and economic status, and education agree that the Bible is true: the Divinely inspired word of God. Hundreds of millions of persons from diverse backrounds, social and economic status, and education agree that the Bible is most credible and reliable, that is, a Book which reports what many persons were thinking.
Right.... Should I repeat myself three times now? Popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true. Only supporting evidence can show if something is reliable or credible, NOTHING else.
Yes, it is. And you seem to think that your personal "authority" is exempt from your own belief.
No it isn't. I might think something to be true, it could be entirely wrong. I believed in Atlantis when I was younger. Then I studied it some more, and found there was NO evidence whatsoever to support the story. So, now I don't. You know why? Because popularity has NOTHING to do with something being true. I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 5258 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Islam has more followers than any other faith, therefore Islam is the one true faith.
Refute that fundy boy!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
chemscience Inactive Member |
Here are 2 of many places the Bible holds data unknown & unknowable to humans when it was written:
1. There are fountains in the sea. In October '08 a broadcast about the abyss showed "black smokers", vents from which issue enormous quantities of superheated water. These were discovered in 1978 and reported in Natl Geo in '79. Earth's largest geophysical feature is the deep sea 40,000 mile intercontinental rift which is populated with these fountains. 35 centuries ago they were named at Genesis 7:11, 8:2 and centuries later at Proverbs 8:28. 2. Repeatedly we're forbidden to consume blood, a prohibition ratified at the Apostolic conference. (Acts 15:29 & 21:25) Logically that includes transfusions. Now enlightened MDs have named bloodless surgery as the "Gold Strandard". San Antonio Baptist Hospital went bloodless this year, and in Atlanta Catholic St. Joseph's hospital routinely does open-heart surgery on Jehovah's witnesses with no blood and splendid results. Read:"Treating Patients Like Jehovah's Witnesses Could Save Lives" D Oakes May 28, 2007 "SURGEONS could save lives by treating people as if they were Jehovah's Witnesses, a visiting US specialist told a conference yesterday. Addressing the the annual scientific meeting of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists, cardiothoracic specialist Bruce Spiess said blood transfusions hurt more people than they helped. "Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to accept blood transfusions, but Professor Spiess said a study in Sweden of 499 Witnesses showed their survival rates were higher than people who received transfusions. "He described blood transfusions as "almost a religion", because physicians practised them without any solid evidence that they helped. "Blood transfusion has evolved as a medical therapy and it's never been tested like a major drug," he said. "A drug is tested for safety and efficacy, blood transfusion has never been tested for either one. "There's a number of people around the world who are coming to these same conclusions and it's becoming more obvious that the old risks of hepatitis and AIDS have been defeated by blood bankers, and now what we're dealing with are events that make patients worse." Transfusions increased the probability of post-operative complications, including pneumonia and wound infections. "I think we need to focus on every possible mechanism we can to keep your own blood," Professor Spiess said. "If you come to surgery, we should ethically treat every patient as if they were a Jehovah's Witness and say, my goal is to not to transfuse you and to use every other technique I possibly can, and then only as a very last result transfuse you." ********The 1982 medical text CURRENT THERAPY lists 7 pages of "Adverse Reactions to Bood Transfusions", 28 ways they kill. "The law of Jehovah is perfect ... your own servant has been warned by them, in the keeping of them there is a large reward." Psalm 19:7-11 In this case the reward is escape from: STDs, AIDS, hepatitis, mismatched blood, malaria, trypanosomiasis, brucellosis, cytomegalic viral disease, mononucleosis, salmonellosis, typhus, hemosiderosis, post transfusion purpura, graft-vs-host reaction, hemolytic reactions, circulatory overload, rocky mountain spotted fever, etc, etc, etc, ALL MEDICALLY DOCUMENTED. My wife, Betty Martini, who once owned 5 med clinics, founded Mission Possible, an international educational program to warn against chemical sweeteners, saw a doctor kill his son with a transfusion. (She's done 700 talk shows, addressed a parlimentary committee of the EU and speaks at a California med conference next week. Aspartame & Splenda are neurotoxic!) Transfusions are a goldmine. Years ago the Houston Post ran a series on a pair of alcoholics who sold blood to buy booze. Note that blood banks are often in the skid-row part of town. Google these headlines: Blood scandal: Canadian Red Cross Fined June 1, 2005 FDA FINES AMERICAN RED CROSS $4.2 MILLION FOR FAILURE TO MEET BLOOD SAFETY LAWS Blood Transfusions May Have Killed Millions 5/12/08 Jon Barron No thank you. The Bible was right! Scriptures which proscribe blood: Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 3:17, 17:20-14 Deuteronomy 12:16 & 23 [NOTE TO COYOTE: I DON'T HAVE TO CUT & PASTE, I HAVE FACTS!] CHEMSCIENCE Edited by chemscience, : spelling & sentence structure
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2594 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
chemscience writes:
Alright, let's have them
Here are 2 of many places the Bible holds data unknown & unknowable to humans when it was written: 1. There are fountains in the sea. In October '08 a broadcast about the abyss showed "black smokers", vents from which issue enormous quantities of superheated water. These were discovered in 1978 and reported in Natl Geo in '79. Earth's largest geophysical feature is the deep sea 40,000 mile intercontinental rift which is populated with these fountains. 35 centuries ago they were named at Genesis 7:11, 8:2 and centuries later at Proverbs 8:28.
Gen. 7:11:
quote:This also speaks of the heavens having windows, somehow I don't think you want to claim that. Gen. 8:2:
quote:Again we have the windows here, but more importantly: "The fountains also of the deep{...)were stopped" they're still here today. Did god make a mistake when he put that in the bible? Prov. 8:28:
quote:Of course this talks about when god broke them up in the first place, it's a reference to Gen. 7:11. So, were the fountains stopped? They are still here today. Try again.
2. Repeatedly we're forbidden to consume blood, a prohibition ratified at the Apostolic conference. (Acts 15:29 & 21:25) Logically that includes transfusions. Now enlightened MDs have named bloodless surgery as the "Gold Strandard". San Antonio Baptist Hospital went bloodless this year, and in Atlanta Catholic St. Joseph's hospital routinely does open-heart surgery on Jehovah's witnesses with no blood and splendid results.
So, people that NEED a blood transfusion should be left to die, nice fellow, this god of yours. Edited by Huntard, : off topic and all I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3346 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Islam has more followers than any other faith, therefore Islam is the one true faith. Refute that [....] My point was that the Bible has diverse support from persons from all walks of life, social status, economic status, and educational credentials. The Koran does not. How do you explain this kind and degree of support of a Text that reports what persons were thinking? Ray
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025