December 2007 Screwballs

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

I don't think they know what a scholarly source IS. Anyway, back to nominations.

[Pate]

Why does his opposition always point out the 'prison librarian' thing....? :shrug: probably just ad hominem or something

I can think of at least two explanations:

1. There's a not so well-known exception to the rules concerning the relevant logical fallacies like poisoning the well and ad hominem. Namely, those are fallacies only when not aimed at former prison librarians.

2. They have a hard time answering the actual arguments.

But I just cant decide between these two options.

:shrug:

[Sparko]

I can't believe how many people think Google and Wikipedia count as scholarly sources.

but google says it is!!!

http://scholar.google.com/

[Kelp]

I didn't know that. Thanks.
np

[Raphael]

Nomination for Ratnat.

When discussing the prevalence of belief in witches in Africa.
It's in the "which" hunt thread
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=105719&page=7



A major difference is it's possibly only a few communities in the US, where as in Africa the belief is continent wide.I highly doubt any belief can be held continent wide...Do the Mandelas hold this belief? Kofi Annan and his family? Desmond Tutu?

As long as the continent has diamonds, oil and other resources...the powers that be will allow the people to adhere to the various superstitions and will spread stories about the atrocities done in the name of said beliefs.

Education(secular) is what is needed.

[Chaotic Void]

"As long as the continent has diamonds, oil and other resources...the powers that be will allow the people to adhere to the various superstitions and will spread stories about the atrocities done in the name of said beliefs.

Education(secular) is what is needed."

Translation: Don't adhere to those savage superstitions.... Adhere to Mine and you'll be smart!!!!
:lmbo:

[Teluog]

http://www.geocities.com/logic_faith/miracles.htm

[Spheniscine]

I nominate Mordochai:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=2169440#post2169440

[Bill the Cat]

http://www.geocities.com/logic_faith/miracles.htm

That was the most ridiculous crap I have seen in WEEKS! And I receive PMs from Sparko, so that's saying something! :haha:

[Sparko]

That was the most ridiculous crap I have seen in WEEKS! And I receive PMs from Sparko, so that's saying something! :haha:

burp

[Bill the Cat]

Fish stuck on your left hand/hook, Sparko?

[DesertBerean]

http://www.geocities.com/logic_faith/miracles.htm :lol: He doesn't read too carefully...there was nothing about the blind man at Bethsaida having been blind from birth. Since the man did tell Jesus he saw men walking like trees, it's more probable he lost his sight later in life.

...and that's all I'll say. I lost interest after reading about Jesus's walking on water.

[Sparko]

http://www.geocities.com/logic_faith/miracles.htm

hey its gotta be true! he uses all sorts of font colors and real capital letters with lots of exclamation points. You don't use those unless what you are saying is true. Just ask Incrus.

[Bill the Cat]

hey its gotta be true! he uses all sorts of font colors and real capital letters with lots of exclamation points. You don't use those unless what you are saying is true. Just ask Incrus.

:rofl:

[Teluog]

That was the most ridiculous crap I have seen in WEEKS! And I receive PMs from Sparko, so that's saying something! :haha:

I actually felt like refuting the first point only, about the blind man. But it's way too sloppy even for that.

[Teluog]

Found a site with one of those weird interpretations of Revelation: http://home-2.worldonline.nl/~hjhoekst/antichrist.html

[MrManNo1]

I actually felt like refuting the first point only, about the blind man. But it's way too sloppy even for that.

It took me a good 10 minutes to even understand the format that he was talking in, and after I finally did, I wasn't impressed.

[jpholding]

Email:


seems like your faith is pretty weak if you are so defensive, and insultated and feel like you have to defend it.

"Insultated"? :twitch:

Anyway, my first chance to use my Baloney Filter form letter....

[Raphael]

Email:



"Insultated"? :twitch:

Anyway, my first chance to use my Baloney Filter form letter....
So let me get this right: if you feel you have defend the faith it's weak. And if you didn't you would also be accused of having weak faith because you aren't willing to defend it.

Sound to me like that screwball is wanting to have his cake, and eat it.

[jpholding]

Email -- second chance to use my Baloney Filter today!


This encyclopedia talks about how Mitra (the deity behind Mithraism) was worshiped as early as 5th century BC is Persia. The term Mithraism wasn't given to it until it became a "world wide" religion. I find your faith admirable, but still blind. If you had done your research you could have found some better information about how Christianity IS mirrored closely to this religion. I think Ben Franklin said it best " The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason". I respect other's beliefs, except when they are not founded on truth knowledge and research.

:ahem:

[Chaotic Void]

That thing's probably gonna get a work-out JP.....

[energyman]

From the "Doesn't Understand Satire" Department (http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=openmytv)

[Teluog]

From the "Doesn't Understand Satire" Department (http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=openmytv)

I think that one came from a lot of departments.

[Mountain Man]

Nomination for nickcopernicus for his response to Rapheal's suggestions for reducing unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases:



It's called Abstinence programs. You may have heard of them.

1.) You cannot get pregnant if you do not have sex.
2.) You don't have to buy condoms or the pill if you don't have sex (not that you have to pay for those anyhow)
3.) You can't get STD's if you don't have sex.
4.) Your chances of getting HIV/AIDS are dramatically reduced if you're not having sex. (basically you're left with accidental infections)Nick:
What idiotic proposals.

[Chaotic Void]

More Gold from SteveC
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2172482&postcount=968
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2172486&postcount=969'

Man, this guy's hilarious.

[Chaotic Void]

Nomination for nickcopernicus for his response to Rapheal's suggestions for reducing unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases:
Should we be surprised that NickCopernicus is the one that said this?:huh:

[jpholding]

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/bill-ross-deconversion-story.html

Doubting John adds yet another Useful Idiot to his stable -- Bill Ross of "Bible Shockers". Watch this:



John has graciously invited me to contribute to his blog, and suggested I begin with my deconversion story, and so I shall...

Unfortunately, being as cerebral as I am, the story will not involve a car chase, but I'll try not to bore...

There is a wonderful scene in one of the Wallace and Gromit stories where Gromit sits in jail doing a jigsaw puzzle. As he places the last piece in the puzzle, he realizes that the puzzle has a personal message for him - he will be leaving jail tonight via a breakout!

This was my experience. I pondered the Bible for many, many years, trying to discover its central themes that would tie the whole thing together and unlock its cryptic design. As soon as I did so, I realized that it would not serve as my own mental framework.

I quote this from the introduction to my book, Bible Shockers!:

My lovely wife of twenty something years is an extremely capable person with a wide range of interests. She might be spending her day absorbed in an art project with the younger children, having some coffee or tea with friends or riding her bicycle up to the video store to see if they have anything new along the lines of Stephen King, or if not, something with some gut wrenching human relationships. She seldom thinks about the Bible. I, on the other hand, like many people, have had a long fascination with the Bible and have often neglected other important activities in order to understand some difficult passage or other. I spent many years as a Christian, treating the book as Protestant Christians are wont to do:

* As a vehicle of magic communication from God to me
* To reinforce the Catholic/Protestant traditions I had been taught

I have spent many more years approaching the text as an ancient religious text, driven to deeply understand as one would understand any other ancient religious text. The reasons I moved from reading the Bible as a vehicle of magic communication from deities, and from seeking proof texts for my faith, to methodical objective study were twofold. First of all, I was challenged by a passage in the Bible:

Hebrews 12:27 And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.

As I meditated on that passage I began to think to myself that rather than try to "prop up" my beliefs with the Bible, what if I began to see which ones I could knock over? Any that would not knock over were solid and I would know exactly why, but any that yielded were unreliable and could safely be discarded. All of my beliefs were quickly exposed as imposters.

Magic communication had failed me. I found that I received confusing, conflicting messages and silly ideas. I found I was insecure and misled by the thoughts that seemed to come from the deity but were just notions. Most troubling was the see-saw of alarm versus confidence that I found myself on. For example, one day I might read some condemning passage of scripture and find myself feeling, and believing myself to be, condemned because of my sins. The next day I would read a passage of assurances and feel, and believe myself to be, in favor. I found I could not really be secure about anything because my subjective moods often dictated my interpretation of the Bible as it concerned my personal relations. I needed to know the objective criteria for my relationship to God.

What I hoped to find was an understanding of God and of the Bible. What I actually found was shock and awe. What I found was that I had not understood the text at all, and that to an alarming extent, the ideas that I had been spoon fed were nasty viruses of misinformation. When I finally understood the Bible, I realized it was not magic, divine or credible.


:ahem:

It's funny how many of these apostates:

1) Claim to be "cerebral" or smart, yet
2) Tell stories about emotional turmoil, and
3) Come out of a bibliolatrous background

There is nothing new under the sun..... :lol:

Odds we can drag Ross here and watch him squirm?

[jpholding]

This email came from a nutcase who sent me this incoherent argument:




H3068 יהוה yehôvâh yeh-ho-vaw'

H113 אדן אדון 'âdôn 'âdôn
aw-done', aw-done'o-vaw'

applied to jesus right?

Psa 110:1 <A Psalm of David.> The LORD said unto my LordH113 --âdôn 'âdôn Jesus , Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.


proof:

(Matthew 22:42 KJVA) Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David.

(Matthew 22:43 KJVA) He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

(Matthew 22:44 KJVA) The LORD said unto my LordH113 --âdôn 'âdôn Jesus , Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

==


A DIFFERENT DIVINE BEING

compare and note the difference

(Psalms 110:5 KJV) The LordH136 --'ădônây at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath.



H136
אדני
'ădônây
ad-o-noy'
An emphatic form of H113; the Lord (used as a proper name of God only) : - (my) Lord.


I told him this was incoherent nonsense, and he replied:"



for a defender of Christianity and the bible, your knowledge is
is limited indeed.

tom harpur was right about you.

Ah. Tom Harpur. That explains it. :doh:

Third baloney filter letter in two days.

[Mountain Man]

The Bible is a "a vehicle of magic communication from God"? :twitch:

I just thought of a new slogan for Doubting John's blog-

Debunking Christianity: Because We're Too Stupid To Be Christians

[JB]

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/bill-ross-deconversion-story.html

Doubting John adds yet another Useful Idiot to his stable -- Bill Ross of "Bible Shockers". Watch this:



:ahem:

It's funny how many of these apostates:

1) Claim to be "cerebral" or smart, yet
2) Tell stories about emotional turmoil, and
3) Come out of a bibliolatrous background

There is nothing new under the sun..... :lol:

Odds we can drag Ross here and watch him squirm?

:rofl:

[Chaotic Void]

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/bill-ross-deconversion-story.html

Doubting John adds yet another Useful Idiot to his stable -- Bill Ross of "Bible Shockers". Watch this:



:ahem:

It's funny how many of these apostates:

1) Claim to be "cerebral" or smart, yet
2) Tell stories about emotional turmoil, and
3) Come out of a bibliolatrous background

There is nothing new under the sun..... :lol:

Odds we can drag Ross here and watch him squirm?

I'm starting to wonder if the Membership at Debunking Christianity comes with a Shotgun and a lifetime supply of Ammo and Foot Bandages.

[Teluog]

Found one of those sites by Christian fundamentalists who insist on very shallow interpretation of the Bible. Check what they have to say about R.C. Sproul and their anti-rock and roll articles: http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/

[Spheniscine]

Link?

edit: Whoops. I could have sworn it wasn't there...

[Chaotic Void]

Found one of those sites by Christian fundamentalists who insist on very shallow interpretation of the Bible. Check what they have to say about R.C. Sproul and their anti-rock and roll articles: http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/

[Italicized] Well, the fact that they're anti-Rock & Roll alone deserves a screwball.... :rant:

[ApologiaPhoenix]

I'd like them to see my collection of Final Fantasy games and Harry Potter movies so they'd freak out.

[energyman]

Um...So is anyone going to Heaven? Because if they're right, Heaven is going to be pretty empty.

[Teluog]

Um...So is anyone going to Heaven? Because if they're right, Heaven is going to be pretty empty.

Are you talking about the site I posted from the Ned Flanders Department?

[energyman]

Yes, although I think Ned Flanders would condemn fewer people to Hell (i.e., might not say that people of different denominations are going to Hell).

[Teluog]

Yes, although I think Ned Flanders would condemn fewer people to Hell (i.e., might not say that people of different denominations are going to Hell).

Where do you see this? The site has quite a few articles, and I only browsed through some of them.

[Alucard]

Found one of those sites by Christian fundamentalists who insist on very shallow interpretation of the Bible. Check what they have to say about R.C. Sproul and their anti-rock and roll articles: http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/

You know, I think the guy who made that site is one of Darwin Fish's former associates. The webmaster of BDM, however, disagreed with Fish on whether or not a certain evangelical leader was hellbound (Fish said they were, the other said they were not). Naturally, like with anyone who disagrees with him, Fish declared the BDM webmaster to be apostate also.

I could be wrong though.

[Alucard]

Oh, here is another nomination. While I agree that Left Behind is a load of pants...


Infants are not saved and they are not in Christ; nor are they part of the church. It would be wrong to point to a living infant and say, "That baby is saved and has eternal life and his sins are forgiven!" On the contrary, every baby is born in sin and every infant has a wicked sin nature (Rom. 5:12, Psalm 51:5; Job 14:4; Psalm 58:3). Babies are not saved and they do not possess eternal life. If this were true, then does this mean that when they get older they become UN-saved and forfeit eternal life? This is Biblically absurd. It would also be absurd to say that all the unsaved children around the world growing up in Hindu and Muslim and Buddhist homes are part of the church that is in Christ.

Keep in mind that an infant that is a year old at the time of the rapture will be approximately 8 years old at the time when Christ returns to this earth to rule and reign, and thus will be certainly old enough to make a responsible decision for or against Christ at that time or even prior to that time.

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/proph/lebehind.htm

[Teluog]

You know, I think the guy who made that site is one of Darwin Fish's former associates. The webmaster of BDM, however, disagreed with Fish on whether or not a certain evangelical leader was hellbound (Fish said they were, the other said they were not). Naturally, like with anyone who disagrees with him, Fish declared the BDM webmaster to be apostate also.

I could be wrong though.

Lol, I nominated Fish's site a few days ago too, only to learn that JPH already did a refutation of him.

[Alucard]

Lol, I nominated Fish's site a few days ago too, only to learn that JPH already did a refutation of him.

Haha, yeah I saw. Both JP and Phil Johnson beat Fish into the ground LOOOONG ago.

[Teluog]

Has this site been nominated yet? http://www.goatstar.org/

Here's another site that Goatstar links to: http://www.geocities.com/b_r_a_d_99/cultleader.htm

[Kelp]

You know, I think the guy who made that site is one of Darwin Fish's former associates. The webmaster of BDM, however, disagreed with Fish on whether or not a certain evangelical leader was hellbound (Fish said they were, the other said they were not). Naturally, like with anyone who disagrees with him, Fish declared the BDM webmaster to be apostate also.

I could be wrong though.
According to Phil Johnson, Rick Miesel (the BDM guy) was a mentor to Darwin Fish for awhile and then they anathematized each other over the question of whether the Bobgans of the Psychoheresy Awareness Network where heretics.

I don't know much about the Bobgans. I think they basically condemn all psychology cart blanche.

[Kelp]

Um...So is anyone going to Heaven? Because if they're right, Heaven is going to be pretty empty.
I think Fish says that only the people of his tiny little house church in California and possibly a few others somewhere in the world that nobody knows about are saved. I don't know about Miesel.

[Alucard]

According to Phil Johnson, Rick Miesel (the BDM guy) was a mentor to Darwin Fish for awhile and then they anathematized each other over the question of whether the Bobgans of the Psychoheresy Awareness Network where heretics.

I don't know much about the Bobgans. I think they basically condemn all psychology cart blanche.

Well, there you go.

[Alucard]

Oh my.

Platinum nomination for this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_gt-3plqf4

[Alucard]

And yeah, I'm nominating that for Non-Christian Theist Platinum Award.

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

Oh my.

Platinum nomination for this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_gt-3plqf4

oh my. and guess what: he's a former Christian who converted to Islam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Yasin

[Alucard]

oh my. and guess what: he's a former Christian who converted to Islam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Yasin

And Punkish, I get the feeling the person who uploaded the video onto YouTube is part of the Answering-Christianity crowd.

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

Has this guy been nominated yet?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSZYN8UV6yg

Pat Condell...stand up comedian critiques religion...with the expected results. (warning: rude and perhaps blasphemous)

[Alucard]

I don't think the title of "comedian" can really be extended to Pat Condell.

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

okay, stand-up twit.

[Alucard]

That's more like it. Are you still in the shoutbox?

[Teluog]

If you have a Myspace page you might notice that the advertisements have something to do with your profile. Since I have some Christian things on my page, it tends to be a goldmine of attracting screwball Christian or "christian" sites like this one: http://www.gay-bible.com/

...and this one too, a little apologetics site by a pastor who has over-simplistic, and often wrong, answers. He doesn't believe the Scriptures are inerrant, and his faith is blind: http://www.aybqa.com/index.php?go=quester&qid=366

[Alucard]

Yeah, the amount of screwy Christian MySpace ads is unbelievable.

[Teluog]

I nominate IncRus for acting like Theostudent: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=98583&page=12

While I'm at it, I also nominate Theostudent, for acting like Theostudent.

[Sparko]

arrrg

:argh:

would you guys at least summarize what you are nominating instead of just posting a link????

sheesh.

[energyman]

Where do you see this? The site has quite a few articles, and I only browsed through some of them.
Well, a good place to start is here. (http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Psychology/) I don't know about you, but when someone starts saying that things like Campus Crusade for Christ and the Institute for Creation Research are not fundamentalist enough for them, they've gone way beyond Ned Flanders fundamentalism.

[jpholding]

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/yet-another-unpleasant-truth.html

DJ's Useful Idiot Joe "the Jerk" Holman nominates for Platinum with the Crass Anti-Evgangelism Award, for using someone's mental illness to spread his fundy atheist Gospel. Key paragraph:


Frankly, if your son is a gift from God, then God doesn’t think much of you at all. If such a higher power exists, he hates you or else couldn’t care less about you; there’s simply no other way of putting it. Now I don’t find it sound to believe that a deity hates you or loves you. You deserve so much better, but unfortunately, there is no God who will do you better.

:bomb:

[Chaotic Void]

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/yet-another-unpleasant-truth.html

DJ's Useful Idiot Joe "the Jerk" Holman nominates for Platinum with the Crass Anti-Evangelism Award, for using someone's mental illness to spread his fundy atheist Gospel. Key paragraph:



Frankly, if your son is a gift from God, then God doesn’t think much of you at all. If such a higher power exists, he hates you or else couldn’t care less about you; there’s simply no other way of putting it. Now I don’t find it sound to believe that a deity hates you or loves you. You deserve so much better, but unfortunately, there is no God who will do you better.


:bomb:
:twitch:
Yeah... This guy deserves a Platinum Screwball award.... :argh: :rant:

It takes a lot more guts, courage and determination to raise a kid with a mental illness, compared to raising a perfectly normal [whatever that means] kid.



He will never get married and bring you grandchildren. He will never hold down a normal job or live in so much as a budget-sized apartment by himself. He will never host a thanksgiving dinner for the family, will never tend to his share of the chores, or even clean his own clothes.

I'd love to see where he got the notion that the Mentally Ill are unable to do such things... :argh: :rant:

:bomb:

[jpholding]

Reader nominates:


...I found a Christian screwball tossing a few howlers out.

"just like grace in the dictionary meaning is "an attractive quality, or endowment, or beauty. however, grace in the bible refers to mercy. the same goes for faith. the greek meaning and the biblical meaning have nothing to do with each other. "

He came at me scolding me for doing apologetics, saying that it's FAITH and I'm a heretic.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

That guy doesn't deserve just a screwball. He deserves a real boot to the head for that kind of jerkish remark.

It's things like that that make me sick.

[Chaotic Void]

That guy doesn't deserve just a screwball. He deserves a real boot to the head for that kind of jerkish remark.

With an Assassin Boot [the one with the pop-out knife], or Steel-Toe boot?



It's things like that that make me sick.

Tell me about it... The whole "Mentally ill people will never be able to do such-and-such" is an even worse stereotype/myth than the "All Immigrants are Criminals or Job-Stealers" Stereotype/myth you hear up here in Canada.

[Mountain Man]

It's just another example of atheism placing more importance on what's on the outside than what's on the inside. And, yes, it is disgusting. Is he somehow less inherently valuable as a human being because it's possible he won't ever live on his own and have the opportunity to invite the family over for Thanksgiving dinner?

[Chaotic Void]

That Letter was especially irking to me, as I have an adopted Sister who's ADHD/FAS, as well as another older half-sister who's Bi-Polar, AND my dad spent time in the psychiatric ward [though I don't think he has any mental disease. I think it was a Hormonal Imbalance or something].

[Teluog]

Aren't there plenty of normal sane people who don't invite their families over for dinner, perhaps because they don't get along too well with each other?

I was once severely mentally ill, but no more since I threw up a prayer out of desperation. I'm not mentally ill anymore and I intend on inviting my family over for Thanksgiving some day. That's pretty low what he's saying about the mentally ill.

[jpholding]

It occurs to me that we'd best preserve it all here before it gets erased....


Note: “Mrs. Jane Ortega” and “Michael Ortega” mentioned below are real people whom I have come to know and been corresponding—only their names have been changed to protect their identities. And, uh…well, the letter pretty much explains the rest…


“Dear Mrs. Ortega,

I hope this email finds you doing well. Being that we have been acquainted with each other for some time now, and being that we have had the opportunity to look at the academic side of the problem of evil, I wanted to offer a finishing piece to “drive home,” as it were, what has been discussed.

Please understand that the things I will mention are not intended to be insulting or hurtful, but are to make clear to you that you have not taken to heart what we are debating. The problem of evil is an emotional argument, as well as a logical argument, and that is why the best Christian apologists in the world keep coming back to reconsider it. When one seeks to avoid the logical force of the problem, they are confronted with the emotional discomfort created by it, and this makes them reconsider the logical force of it once again. This is always the situation when people say the problem of evil “doesn’t affect” (your words) them. Like a sleeping pill, the problem hasn’t affected you because you haven’t digested it yet!

As you know, I met your son Michael at the bus station. That put me in touch with you, which, of course, I deem a good thing. But the unfortunate circumstance of your son is not a good thing. It is a terrible thing.

Each time I see him I think to myself how hard it must have been for you to raise a kid like that, and for forty-two years straight, be reminded of the fact that he will never be a normal man, that he will never pay his own bills, and that his brain will never stop requiring a handful of special pills everyday just to keep him out of trouble with the law. He will never get married and bring you grandchildren. He will never hold down a normal job or live in so much as a budget-sized apartment by himself. He will never host a thanksgiving dinner for the family, will never tend to his share of the chores, or even clean his own clothes. I deeply feel for you, and although, right about now you’re probably preparing to tell me how much of a joy and a gift from God you consider your son to be, even with all the heartache that raising a severely bi-polar/schizophrenic can be, I’m here to tell you no less forcefully that you don’t deserve it.

You don’t deserve any of this. You are a good woman, a wonderful person, and you deserved to get a son who would carry on your legacy, who would take care of you in your older years. But you don’t have that. Instead, your son has given you a bruised lip and broken furniture on more than one occasion. Your son consumed Palmolive dish soap and thumbtacks as a means to end his life earlier this year. Someone clueless enough to try and kill himself in a manner such as this is worthy of the utmost pity. That alone is a fountain of sadness. Your son has been arrested a great many times, and each time, could not make a single coherent statement in his defense. These are monumentally sad facts that I know you are aware of, but there is a reason for why I am reminding you of them—and I think you know that reason.

I want to tell you what your boy said to me the other day. I was standing guard in the bus terminal as usual when he approached me and immediately began to carry on about how cruel you were to him as a child, throwing him in snake pits and whipping him with thorns from rose bushes. As he stood in my face, twitching madly, I gently moved him out of my personal space and began for the fourth time this week to assure him that you did none of those things to him, that it was all in his mind. Failing to get through to him, I tried to convince him that even if he still feels that way about you that he should try and just move on with his life, and not go around telling complete strangers about it and having them come to me and ask to have him removed from the facility because he won’t leave them alone.

I could tell by looking into his distant eyes that he comprehended not a word I said. He went right on accusing you and the government of poisoning him with bitter herbs and by putting deadly sound waves in the Rod Stewart songs he likes to listen to. It’s so sad to see him walking around like that, in a never-clearing fog of paranoia and disorientation. I had to ask him to leave the station again a few days ago (but I think I already told you that the other day).

I know you love him and try to hug him before he goes to pushing you back away from him at your weekly monitored meetings. In tears, you assure him you love him, but it does no good. You do love him, and you always will, and no one’s saying you shouldn’t, but I’ve seen how you break down every time you are around him. It crushes you to see him in such pain and not be able to do anything about it or get close to him. That must hurt in a way that only a mother can know. He’s such a handsome man too—if only he had a normal mind.

Frankly, if your son is a gift from God, then God doesn’t think much of you at all. If such a higher power exists, he hates you or else couldn’t care less about you; there’s simply no other way of putting it. Now I don’t find it sound to believe that a deity hates you or loves you. You deserve so much better, but unfortunately, there is no God who will do you better.

For the last four or five conversations, we have been discussing the problem of evil, and in that time, you have acquitted your God of all charges of cruelty and evil. I would ask that you keep deliberating on this, and when you are ready, look your son in the eyes the next time you see him and ask yourself: “Do I really and truly deserve this?” What does your heart of hearts tell you? The only way the problem of evil can be ignored is when the problem is someone else’s, but when the problem becomes your own, it is impossible to ignore.

You are a very strong person, Jane, so strong that you have been able to take in stride and accept what would be too much for some people. Maybe you will one day be strong enough to accept yet another unpleasant truth.

Best regards,

(JH)”



Darren, a Christian, added this comment that deserves kudos:


Behold atheistic compassion in action. Personally, I find it disgusting that you judge the value of a person based on their utility. So the kid may never produce grand children for his mother. So what? Does that somehow make him less valuable as a human being?

Hey, maybe if you raise your kids to believe your world view, they'll have the guts to put on a raft and send you out to sea to die when you're too old and feeble to productively contribute to society. Won't that be lovely.

Odds that DJ will erase this entry before Christmas?

[Mountain Man]

It's also just one big, fat emotional appeal, which is about all atheists have going for them. If they couldn't throw a tantrum every now and then, they wouldn't ever say much of anything at all.

[Chaotic Void]

It just seems all the more ironic when you factor in that they claim to be rational, logical, free-thinkers......
But it's more or less Sad/Sick irony.

[DesertBerean]

I am in rapt admiration of this display of compassion. If this is what it means to be an atheist, I'll pass.

[Mountain Man]

It just seems all the more ironic when you factor in that they claim to be rational, logical, free-thinkers......
But it's more or less Sad/Sick irony.
I often have the impression that the term "free-thinkers" means "free of thinking".

[Chaotic Void]

I often have the impression that the term "free-thinkers" means "free of thinking".

:lol: I wouldn't be surprised if that were the truth...

[jpholding]

Email in entirety:


Jesus is dead :-)


Wow. Thorough refutation. I'm impressed. :ahem:

Reader also send this worthy site:

http://www.godvsthebible.com/chapter08.htm

[JB]

Email in entirety:



Wow. Thorough refutation. I'm impressed. :ahem:

Reader also send this worthy site:

http://www.godvsthebible.com/chapter08.htm

:hehe: Why am I not surprised that as I scroll down the page, I see quotes from Paine, Doherty, Price, Freke, Gandy, Humphries, Acharya S, and Flemming?

[jpholding]

DJ's new Useful Idiot Bill Ross is making a hard run for Platinum at the end of the year. A comment from the blarg:


For example, one "shocker" is that the god of the bible is a manlike deity who lives in the sky. Popular religion says that he is a formless cosmic mind who is everywhere and nowhere. So how can one read about Jesus taking off rocket-like into the sky to sit at God's right hand? Why did John go up through a hatch and see God in a chair, handing Jesus a scroll? So you can't understand the Bible with modern ideas. You need to see these assumptions. Then the text does not require constant appeals to "Oh, that part is just allegory." No, this is what it says, and this is what it means - as primitive and barbaric as it may seem to you and I to think of God keeping scrolls with names on it. Why not at least use a computer?

:twitch:

You know, years ago I made this parody of The Jury is In...

http://www.tektoonics.com/etc/parody/ajinod_02.html

....in which I said:


He mentions other writing materials like ostraca, clay and wax tablets, and an iron pen. This should tell us how unprofessionally the Bible was written. An omniscient God would have used a laser printer.

It's pretty scary when one of my own parodies actually comes to life in reality. :lol:

[Raphael]

Dr. Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=301&objectid=10483648&ref=rss
The leader of the world's Anglicans has described the Christmas story of the three wise men as nothing but a legend and says not all followers must believe in the virgin birth of Jesus.
...
But Williams said almost everyone agreed on two things - that Jesus' mother was named Mary and his father Joseph. His approach was to stick to what the Bible said.
While some of the things he said were good and accurate, his comments about not needing to believe in the Virgin Birth deserves a Screwball.

[Sparko]

File this under hilarious....




Originally posted by LilPunkishOfTerror
Do you like arguing in circles?

Incrus: Of course, NOT! I wish people STOPPED arguing AGAINST what Jesus TAUGHT about himself in John 8:40and what Jesus DECLARED about the Father in John 17:3, so I can STOP arguing in circles.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2175682&postcount=368

[ApologiaPhoenix]

I just rid the further comments of that jerk. Well, I had to stop reading for awhile. I was about to punch out my computer screen. I rarely get that angry, but someone like that thoroughly sickens me.

Give that guy a giant boot to the head and if he comes over, I'll be glad to deliver it personally.

[Teluog]

I worry about how this person responded to that obnoxious post.

[Teluog]

Someone posted the Caesar's Messiah website in the apologetics forum, which is based on a book that Holding did a review on. But I'm not sure if JPH has seen their forum yet which attacks JPH: http://110559.aceboard.net/110559-971-3146-0-tektonics-review.htm

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

doesn't engage any of Holding's arguments :ahem:

[Mountain Man]

the text does not require constant appeals to "Oh, that part is just allegory." No, this is what it says, and this is what it means
Why am I not surprised the guy's a hyper-literalist?

[historic salve]

Nomination for Jimmy Higgins' burp that the Republican base is racist.


His [Bush's] crew did push polling about McCain having a black daughter... the insinuation that he had an inter-racial (the base hates that) adulterous affair. His black daughter is adopted. It doesn't get much lower than that!

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2176071&postcount=29

[Teluog]

DinkRus, for saying that man is created in the image of God AND cherubim: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2176388&postcount=382

[energyman]

Has anyone seen this (http://the-end.com/2008GodsFinalWitness/?gclid=CJ_YidHcuZACFQIQFQodzFaTLw) yet?

[jpholding]

Doubting John earns an automatic Platinum for tastelessness for this remark posted in the Toby Memorial Thread:


So, you're talking to a dead dog, eh?

Is he listening or something?

:lol: I don't think we should be surprised that someone like this:

1) Cheated on his spouse;
2) Allows the likes of Holman to post that trash about someone with a disability;
3) Insulted Nick based on his own disabillity;
4) Created a false blog and lied about it;
5) Reviewed his own book, then denied doing it....


.....am I missing anything else? :lmbo:

[jpholding]

doesn't engage any of Holding's arguments :ahem:

Heck, ignores them!


I'd particualarly like to see him (or any others, for that matter) explain away the many similarities in the names of the Maccabees, the gospels and The Jewish War. And I also wonder what he/they would say about all the Marys in the ministry of Jesus, since none of them appeared to be even the least bit "rebellious"! And why indeed were there two families that had two sisters named Mary, when this was not at all common at the time?

:twitch: Uh.....didn't I say a few things about Jewish names in that review????

[RumTumTugger]

That guy doesn't deserve just a screwball. He deserves a real boot to the head for that kind of jerkish remark.

It's things like that that make me sick.

He is up there with wyzaard as a Platinium Jerk.

JPH you need to add special achievement awards for Jerks like wyzaard and this guy.

[jpholding]

He is up there with wyzaard as a Platinium Jerk.

JPH you need to add special achievement awards for Jerks like wyzaard and this guy.

I might indeed do so. It has precedent with unique Platinum awards in the past.

[Teluog]

DinkRus again, for trying to use an idiom to prove that paradise means "the grave/tomb": http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2176557&postcount=35

Of course, everything else he says in that post is screwy as well.

[Teluog]

JPH suggested that I post this idea here. What do you guys think of the idea of starting a thread here in the Tek section where we post apologetics websites that we have bookmarked or that we come across as we browse the web?

[ApologiaPhoenix]

DinkRus again, for trying to use an idiom to prove that paradise means "the grave/tomb": http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2176557&postcount=35

Of course, everything else he says in that post is screwy as well.

Just that thread?

[Jnthn]

JPH suggested that I post this idea here. What do you guys think of the idea of starting a thread here in the Tek section where we post apologetics websites that we have bookmarked or that we come across as we browse the web?Sounds like a good idea. We could use the thread to draft a long list, and any sites with lots of "amens" could be compiled into a resource list on the main Tekton website.

J

[Teluog]

Sounds like a good idea. We could use the thread to draft a long list, and any sites with lots of "amens" could be compiled into a resource list on the main Tekton website.

J

We could also give our own reviews of the sites we use or come across so that other readers will know which ones are the better ones, and which ones to stay away from.

[Alucard]

A screwball nomination for Osama Abdullah for a conversation I had with him a while ago.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=2177152#post2177152

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

We know about that guy:

http://www.tektonics.org/TK-A.html
(2nd entry)

[Alucard]

Yes, I know he's known around the Tekton parts, but that doesn't stop him from being eligible for a Screwball, does it?

[Jnthn]

We could also give our own reviews of the sites we use or come across so that other readers will know which ones are the better ones, and which ones to stay away from.That's good. JPH may be able to integrate that into his library on the main site.

J

[Truth be Told]

DJ is still as dumb as a box of rocks, and I've been banned from Debunking Christianity:


John W. Loftus said...
Andrew you're an idiot. You could not begin to tell me what a lie is or when lying is wrong. That was my point. Read Sissla Bok's book Lying to get you up to snuff ont this. You are banned and you're alias' too.

5:36 AM, December 22, 2007

This was in response to my rehashing of John's words by the way which went something like this (the comment is now deleted of course): "Judging Jesus by pathetic ancient standards is stupid. We should be judging Jesus by modern contemporary criticism."

And DJ still hasn't managed to guess who I am yet. :duh:

[ApologiaPhoenix]

DJ is still as dumb as a box of rocks, and I've been banned from Debunking Christianity:



This was in response to my rehashing of John's words by the way which went something like this (the comment is now deleted of course): "Judging Jesus by pathetic ancient standards is stupid. We should be judging Jesus by modern contemporary criticism."

And DJ still hasn't managed to guess who I am yet. :duh:

"That's 'your' also."

I saw that book at the used bookstore here but I thought, "Eh. DJ recommended it and uses it to justify all he does. Why bother?"

[Truth be Told]

I saw that book at the used bookstore here but I thought, "Eh. DJ recommended it and uses it to justify all he does. Why bother?"


You must be joking.

Who in their right sanity would recommend a cheating scumbag like John and his piece of garbage for bookstore worthy material?

I think me and JP Holding should come up with a better book just to make him angry. :hehe:

[ApologiaPhoenix]

You must be joking.

Who in their right sanity would recommend a cheating scumbag like John and his piece of garbage for bookstore worthy material?

I think me and JP Holding should come up with a better book just to make him angry. :hehe:

Note it was a "used book" store.

[jpholding]

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/what-you-read-is-what-you-get-taking.html

DJ's Useful Idiot Harry McCall does it again:


If the simple one sentence statements of Jesus (as recorded in the four Gospel accounts) can not be taken at face value, the question must be asked: What good are they? Moreover, at just what point are these clear and simple statements (if not taken at face value) make Jesus as a liar?

Lets look at a well know example; a situation where Jesus makes such a clear and simple statements when eating and drinking with his disciples before his death as recorded in all four Gospel accounts: Matt. 26: 26-29 = Mark 14: 22 -25 = Luke 22: 15 – 20 and John 6: 51 – 58:

Of the bread Jesus emphatically states: “This is my body.”
Of the wine Jesus emphatically states: “This is my blood.”

These two statements are not given either as parables or as symbols; they are (as understood in grammatical terms), used as simple demonstrative limiting adjective sentences of possession. Thus, Jesus’ statements are clear and simple; no parables or symbols mentioned or implied.

Now before Protestant Christians claim that Jesus did not know what he was talking about and that he MUST be understood as using metaphors or hyperboles, let see just how the oldest Christian Church – the Roman Catholic Church – understands these Gospel statements when used doing the consecration of the Eucharist as defined at a major church council:

The Council of Trent declared subject to the ecclesiastical penalty of anathema anyone who "denieth, that, in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, are contained truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ; but saith that He is only therein as in a sign, or in figure, or virtue" and anyone who "saith, that, in the sacred and holy sacrament of the Eucharist, the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denieth that wonderful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood - the species only of the bread and wine remaining - which conversion indeed the Catholic Church most aptly calls Transubstantiation".

Furthermore, if the Catholic dogma is indeed just plainly mistaken and simply wrong in its understanding of Jesus (as I’m sure many non-Catholics Protestants are sure to argue in their forth coming comments) then - may I ask - just where and just when are the terms Heaven, Hell and Salvation not to be understood as simple metaphors, hyperboles or parables? Or, to put it another way, at what point does Jesus make logical sense for the simple believer who wants to take him at his word?

:twitch:

Without dissing the RC view on this -- it takes quite a simpleton to reduce the issue to the level Harry has here. :lolo:

[ApologiaPhoenix]

The oldest view is from the Council of Trent? Why not some citations of the ECF instead?

[BronzeArcher]

I asked some atheist to exegete some of his footnotes and he responded (http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41635700&postcount=40):


Christianity is not a religion of theologians, it is the religion of the common man. The large, large majority of people who follow the religion do not exegete everything they read. I think it is safe to assume that the meaning from the text is apparent from the text itself without delving into further critical examination.

Btw in the little username title thing that you have on forums, he put, "L'âge de raison"

Clearly.

[Truth be Told]

Doubting John for this entry:


Victor Reppert repeatedly discusses the "God of the Gaps" in which many Christians have argued that if science cannot explain something then this is evidence or a pointer to God's handiwork in the world. But since modern science has explained numerous things without recourse to a supernatual explantion, like how babies are born, why people get ill, and why it rains, this whole reasoning is now problematic. Let me explain...

This whole discussion reminds me of what I wrote when summing up my case against Christianity here: In every case when it comes to the following reasons for adopting my control beliefs the Christian response is pretty much the same. Christians must continually retreat to the position that what they believe is “possible,” or that what they believe is “not impossible.” However, the more that Christians must constantly retreat to what is "possible" rather than to what is “probable” in order to defend their faith, the more their faith is on shaky ground. For this is a tacit admission that instead of the evidence supporting what they believe, they are actually trying to explain the evidence away.

Robert M. Price echos this statement of mine when he says that for Christian apologists “the controlling presupposition seems to be, ‘If the traditional view cannot be absolutely debunked beyond the shadow of a doubt, if it still might possibly be true, then we are within our rights to continue to believe it.’”

Now let me try to explain how this applies to the god of the gaps reasoning. Many Christians claim that methodological naturalism (MN) has not closed all of the gaps, and since that’s so, they can still believe. According to them so long as there are gaps it hasn’t been shown God doesn’t exist. But the point is that MN has indeed closed numerous gaps because such a method has proven fruitful. Christians must admit that while MN is indeed fruitful it cannot or should not be used to explain the Biblical miracles or the origin of the universe itself. But when they take this tact they are already admitting the fruitfulness of MN which has had overwhelming success. They have to deny what seems to scientifically literate people undeniable, or at the very minimum, most probable. They must apply a double standard here, for while they accept MN in all other areas of their lives they deny it when it comes to the Bible. Why the double standard?

Other Christian theists faced with the onslaught of science and its method have changed the historic Christian view in which it was believed the gaps are evidence for God's handiwork. Now they are forced into claiming instead that even if the gaps were all closed it wouldn’t undercut their beliefs, since God is behind the whole ordered universe as the divine orderer. And while this is true if God exists, at the same time, as the gaps are closed there is less and less evidence to believe he does exist! If all of the gaps are closed, which is theoretically possible but not likely, would the theist then admit there is no evidence for God at all, or will she again switch tactics?

So Christian theists either have a double standard, or they have the we can’t beat ‘em join ‘em attitude towards MN. I consider both views to be an admission of the power of MN, and indicative that their only resort is retreating to what’s possible rather than to what’s probable.

Cheers.

This was so incredibly stupid I figured it would make an excellent blog entry parody:

http://debunkingcrap.blogspot.com/2007/12/god-and-science-contradict.html

[Teluog]

Yet again, DinkRus, for reminding me of L. Ray Smith: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2178114&postcount=399

[Darth Executor]

Nomination for John Powell:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2178284&postcount=142


Yes, I could. But, still DE, you're thinking that an ad hom is to attack the proponent without also attacking the argument. Where is that given as the definition? Who told you that THAT was the definition of ad hom? AFAICT, you believe that "X instead of Y" implies "X and not also Y." It doesn't.

[jpholding]

Doubtingt John features more future Useful Idiots, as he links to this deconversion testimony:

http://exchristian.net/testimonies/2007/12/cutting-tie-that-binds.html

-- by an alleged former seminary student who recommends Farrell Till's work, and notes Dan Barker as someone who "turned away from the faith after much research." :lolo:

Plus this one, which credits DJ's book for deconverting him:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/another-one-bites-duster-leaves-fold.html



That's when I got your book and was blown away! I couldn't believe the evidence. There were other gods who died and rose again? And the Bible is very inconsistent, which of course was never covered in church. Other books I've read that helped are Dan Barkers Losing Faith in Faith and Gary Lenaires An Infidel Manifesto. These all made so much sense when reading, as opposed to the Christian books that I needed a road map to follow the logic.

:twitch:

Like I said -- DJ attracts stupid people. But he can have 'em -- makes my job easier when he converts dimwits like this who accept stuff like Lenaire and "other gods who died and rose again". :lmbo:

[jpholding]

Email:


If nothing else, all this information offered by the ancient Egyptian myths, that predate Christianity by several thousand years, is circumstantial evidence that when added to all the scientific evidence that contradict biblical accounts, would be enough to convince any non delusional jury that Christianity is a myth like any other , in fact one derived and borrowed from earlier ones.

wake up and smell the coffee son. It's over. Your dream is over. It is time to put the childhood of our species behind us. Grow up and live your life with your eyes open. For this is your only life. It is you last life.

Have a wonderful and very Merry Christmas.


The Baloney Filter sure is getting a workout. :lolo:

[jpholding]

Dang! Another one for the filter this morning:


I was very dissapointed by your lack of objectivity regarding the topic of Mithraism and it's relationship to Christianity. I don't consider myself in either camp. I can clearly see however great bias displayed in your treatment of the subject. You yourself kept reciting other people's research as your evidence against the theories of Acharya.

I would have like to have seen a point-counterpoint where you personally referenced some ancient source texts that refuted Acharya's claims. I am ok with people existing on faith, but if they do they shouldn't bother to use reason to argue their beliefs.

Say this prayer with me.

"May I be objective in my search for truth."

Surely God values objectivity am I right?



:twitch:

Um, how do you reference a text for a NEGATIVE point????

[jpholding]

Reader sends these:



I encountered another screwball last night on Paltalk. He babbled the usual nonsense about the definition of faith, and when I told him about the Greek definition of faith, he brilliantly responded

"Hey, you stupid idiot, we're in the 21st century and nobody speaks Greek anymore so the Greek for faith doesn't matter!"






Philos2006 (on YouTube) enlightens us on the historical consensus, saying

"There is growing consensus that jesus never existed."

on this page: http://youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=JFD6hC6UqlM

[JB]

:rofl:

[Doubting John]

Doubting John for this entry:
This was so incredibly stupid I figured it would make an excellent blog entry parody:
http://debunkingcrap.blogspot.com/2007/12/god-and-science-contradict.html

Thanks for reading.

What makes it so stupid?

[Chaotic Void]

Thanks for reading.

What makes it so stupid?
Now that you're back, I have a question to ask you....

If Science and Religion are Polar Opposites, then what do you have to say to the fact that some of the most Critical Thinkers of all time were Theists?

[jpholding]

Thanks for reading.

What makes it so stupid?

Well, for starters....YOU wrote it.... :lmbo:

[Doubting John]

Doubtingt John features more future Useful Idiots, as he links to this deconversion testimony:http://exchristian.net/testimonies/2007/12/cutting-tie-that-binds.html -- by an alleged former seminary student who recommends Farrell Till's work, and notes Dan Barker as someone who "turned away from the faith after much research." :lolo:

Plus this one, which credits DJ's book for deconverting him:http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/another-one-bites-duster-leaves-fold.html:twitch: Like I said -- DJ attracts stupid people. But he can have 'em -- makes my job easier when he converts dimwits like this who accept stuff like Lenaire and "other gods who died and rose again". :lmbo:

You just fail to see that what convinces people to change their minds is largely personal and not necessarily intellectual, although there is a component of each involved.

Surely you won't disagree that there a great many Christian people who believe for ignorant reasons. You could ask them why they believe and their answers wouldn't be up to snuff. And yet you'd rejoice that they believe, right?

I think it's basic ignorance to claim that if people were are smart as you and as educated as you and as intelligent as you that they'd believe like you. That's ignorance of the highest magnitude, for several reasons, including the fact that you yourself are not all that!

It's about seeing things differently, not about education or intelligence. Until you understand this it it YOUR IGNORANCE that you parade here every day. It's about assumptions, biases and control beliefs.

I have provided a defense of my control beliefs here:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/summary-of-my-case-against-christianity.html

Now defend yours if you can.

You've never run across my type of argument before, I take it. And you don't know what to do about it, do you? It's the type of argument that will best debunk Christianity if it's ever to be debunked at all.

You've got your work cut out for you.

It'll be easier to throw ad hominems, but deep inside you know you cannot deal with my arguments despite your protestations to the contrary.

When you do, it'll be funny to watch you self-destruct before the eyes of some of your followers who will detect smoke screens and red herrings.

Maybe you just shouldn't even try. You'd be better off. it would require studying outside of your "expertise" if you have one at all. But when you do you'll find my arguments tough to crack.

-----------------------
Chaotic_void, to answer your question, various religious beliefs are held by scientists all around the world. Does that validate any particular religion? The method used by scientists makes all of us more and more secular oriented as time goes on. If we were to compare your beliefs today to those people 200 to 2000 years ago you would be much more secular in how you see the world than they.

[Chaotic Void]

Chaotic_void, to answer your question, various religious beliefs are held by scientists all around the world. Does that validate any particular religion?

No, but it does refute the claim that Science and Religion are Polar Opposites.



The method used by scientists makes all of us more and more secular oriented as time goes on. If we were to compare your beliefs today to those people 200 to 2000 years ago you would be much more secular in how you see the world than they.
Again... where do you get the notion that the Scientific Method is the "be-all-end-all"?

[Doubting John]

No, but it does refute the claim that Science and Religion are Polar Opposites.


Again... where do you get the notion that the Scientific Method is the "be-all-end-all"?

Can you propose a different method? What would that be?

[Chaotic Void]

Can you propose a different method? What would that be?
This doesn't anser my question...
I am wondering where you get the Notion that the Scientific Method is the "Be-All-End-All", even though it never claims to be able to do so.

[Doubting John]

This doesn't anser my question...
I am wondering where you get the Notion that the Scientific Method is the "Be-All-End-All", even though it never claims to be able to do so.

Because there isn't any better proposal, silly. That is, unless you can propose a better one.:poke:

[Chaotic Void]

Because there isn't any better proposal, silly. That is, unless you can propose a better one.:poke:
:lmbo:
So you're a "Scientific-Method-Of-The-Gaps" kind of guy?

Boy are you hypocritical... You sound like a Flesh-and-Blood-Atheist version of that Christian Strawman you keep burning.

[lilpixieofterror]

Because there isn't any better proposal, silly. That is, unless you can propose a better one.:poke:

Ok... scientifically prove that you used the bathroom this morning.

[Doubting John]

:lmbo:
So you're a "Scientific-Method-Of-The-Gaps" kind of guy?

What could you possibly mean by this?

[Doubting John]

Ok... scientifically prove that you used the bathroom this morning.

Science doesn't prove things, silly. It tests hypotheses. It eliminates false hypotheses.

[jpholding]

You just fail to see that what convinces people to change their minds is largely personal and not necessarily intellectual,

In other words, emotion and stupidity trump facts in all of your "de-converts". :lol:

I already SAID that. You're just stating the obvious!


Surely you won't disagree that there a great many Christian people who believe for ignorant reasons. You could ask them why they believe and their answers wouldn't be up to snuff. And yet you'd rejoice that they believe, right?

Um, excuse me, but 90% of my efforts these days are geared towards relieving such people of their ignorance so that they DON'T believe in ignorance. So, no, I do NOT "rejoice" in such people believing, thank you very much. It's better than NOT believing, but the time to "rejoice" is when they become solid Kingdom citizens.

Of course, I know you take specific pleasure in cheap deconversions, which is why you see no need to correct your material when you're called down on errors, and why you have no problem telling lies ("I recently noticed this blog....") to convince people of something. You WANT shallow deconverts, or deconverts whose basis is emotion or why-didn't-God-get-me-a-pony complaints, because you KNOW you lose on rational grounds. :thumb:



I think it's basic ignorance to claim that if people were are smart as you and as educated as you and as intelligent as you that they'd believe like you.

Well, you oughta know, Wile E. Gnosticoyote! :lmbo:


I have provided a defense of my control beliefs here:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/summary-of-my-case-against-christianity.html

Now defend yours if you can.

I have a site full of defenses. Get busy. :whistle:


You've never run across my type of argument before, I take it.

Dime a dozen. You're just another face (butt) in the crowd.


And you don't know what to do about it, do you?

Adding a laugh track came to mind. :hehe: It's all old news, DJ -- crap you've posted here before and have been beaten to a pulp on time and time and time and time again. Some is within my expertise; some I defer to others like Nick or Punkish for. Either way, it's all got mold on it. You're just repeating stuff you've been beaten on again and again; your only hope is to deconvert people who think stuff like Gary Lenaire and Dan Barker is intellectual. :lol:

[Rayado]

Anyone else find it amusing that John tries to justify his anti-supernatural presupposition as "a control belief?"

[lilpixieofterror]

Science doesn't prove things, silly. It tests hypotheses. It eliminates false hypotheses.

Gosh DJ... are you a scientist now? If the scientific method test things, it means that it is a measure of truth and thus proves things. Re-writing definitions I see.

[jpholding]

Ok... scientifically prove that you used the bathroom this morning.

Pixie, that's so obvious.

Just read his blog. That's where he puts it all. :lmbo:

[Doubting John]

Anyone else find it amusing that John tries to justify his anti-supernatural presupposition as "a control belief?"

And I find it amusing that you don't try to justify your supernatual control beliefs at all, except by referring to the god of the gaps.

[Chaotic Void]

What could you possibly mean by this?
Simple.
You sound like the Christian strawman you keep burning[We retreat from all possibilities, saying "God-Did-It"], only you replace God with the Scientific Method[You retreat from all other possibilities, saying The-Scientific-Method-Did-It].

[lilpixieofterror]

Pixie, that's so obvious.

Just read his blog. That's where he puts it all. :lmbo:

:rofl: But we don't know he wrote it. Maybe DJ is a myth! That's it!

[lilpixieofterror]

And I find it amusing that you don't try to justify your supernatual control beliefs at all, except by referring to the god of the gaps.

That's alot of straw your burning there DJ. Got another hard you care to play?

[Rayado]

And he's right on cue with a tu quoque that cannot hide the fact that it is a thinly veiled and poorly justified presupposition. :hehe:

[Doubting John]

:rofl: But we don't know he wrote it. Maybe DJ is a myth! That's it!

I can only stay here so long until the cheap shots start being thrown.

Why is that?

C'ya.

[lilpixieofterror]

And he's right on cue with a tu quoque that cannot hide the fact that it is a thinly veiled and poorly justified presupposition. :hehe:

I find it quite amusing that he seems to think he knows a thing about the scientific method. I wonder if he knows that I'm a science major and I think he's clueless and unaware of it. Think he can explain General Relativity in at least laymen terms?

[Meta Knight]

I can only stay here so long until the cheap shots start being thrown.

Why is that?

C'ya.
I dunno...maybe you should leave.




Again.

[Rayado]

Guess that explains why this at least the fifteenth time he's stormed off in a huff.

[lilpixieofterror]

I can only stay here so long until the cheap shots start being thrown.

Why is that?

C'ya.

Can't stand the fire you started DJ? Come on now... I'd love to see you explain what a hypotheses is.

[JB]

I can only stay here so long until the cheap shots start being thrown.

Why is that?

You're a cheap target?

[jpholding]

I'd love to see you explain what a hypotheses is.

That's simple. It's a very, VERY large theses. :smug:

[lilpixieofterror]

That's simple. It's a very, VERY large theses. :smug:

Think DJ knows that?

[JB]

That's simple. It's a very, VERY large theses. :smug:

:bonk:

[Rayado]

That's simple. It's a very, VERY large theses. :smug:

I...I thought 'hypo' meant small...

:uneasy:

[historic salve]

Shouldn't DJ's posts be moved to the Screwball whine and rant thread? :hehe:

[jpholding]

I...I thought 'hypo' meant small...

:uneasy:

Watch it, buster! DJ gets VERY upset when anyone thinks his theses are too small.... :uneasy:

[LostSheep]

I...I thought 'hypo' meant small...

:uneasy:

It does. "Hyper" means large.

[lilpixieofterror]

I...I thought 'hypo' meant small...

:uneasy:

:shrug:

I'm not sure of the whole word usage behind it, but I do know that in science a hypotheses is usually a smaller part of a theory.

[DoomRater]

And so, the TWeb people have a good laugh at DJ's emotional expense.

Seriously, the best part is where he threw down bullying cards and when the favor was returned he COMPLAINED about it. This ain't no schoolyard fight, son- it's a BOXING MATCH, and you're up against people with many fights on their record!

[jpholding]

By the way, CV is taking apart DJ's second control belief, but the first:


There is a strong probability that every event has a natural cause;

.....doesn't have any relevance, because the dichotomy between natural and supernatural is invented.

The Resurrection had a natural cause: a person named God performed it. Duh.... :ahem:

[DoomRater]

Ah, but which person?

[lilpixieofterror]

Here's a screwball award for something on DJ's blog:


Lets say that God saw a child being abducted but has decided not to get involved. Is God culpable of being an Accessory to the Crime? Is there any obligation in principle for God to report this Crime? God is an accessory to the Crime. There is at least a legal principle for him to report the crime.

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/god-as-accessory-to-child-abduction.html

[Chaotic Void]

Here's a screwball award for something on DJ's blog:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/god-as-accessory-to-child-abduction.html
[:rant:]
The sad thing is... They're not doing anything to help the Worried Families by saying that a God [which they don't believe exists] is an accessory to the disappearance of these kids... They're just giving them one more person to blame. And blaming someone never really solved anything... actually it can excaberate the situation...

Do these guys have ANY honor? Converting someone to Atheism with these kind of tactics is, IMO, highly Dishonorable.

By the way...
:rant: Is there ANY Atheist argument that doesn't boil down to Scapegoating, Conspiracy Theories, or Mis-interpretation, and then doesn't boil further down to "I'll believe what I want to believe and that's that"?!
[/:rant:]

[lilpixieofterror]

[:rant:]
The sad thing is... They're not doing anything to help the Worried Families by saying that a God [which they don't believe exists] is an accessory to the disappearance of these kids... They're just giving them one more person to blame. And blaming someone never really solved anything... actually it can excaberate the situation...

Oh I agree, it's emotionalism that takes advantage of parents around the world who had their children kidnapped and taken away from them. I guess DJ and company have no honor or respect for anybody....

[Chaotic Void]

Oh I agree, it's emotionalism that takes advantage of parents around the world who had their children kidnapped and taken away from them. I guess DJ and company have no honor or respect for anybody....

After reading that Blog Entry I'm Glad... Scratch that,... Grateful that DJ is an Atheist.

[lilpixieofterror]

Another award winner (read the comments he made too):


Mass? Christ-mass? I should think that any self-respecting Protestant should find the word offensive! But these days, Christians no longer kill eachother over issues of "transubstantiation versus consubstantiation" - those days are apparently behind us....

AS LONG AS YOU BELIEVE THE DOGMA OF THE TRINITY... (an unbiblical idea) then you are IN THE CLUB!

Never mind that the Magi are said to have read the stars to find Jesus... never mind that a star allegedly parked over a crib without so much as singing the baby therein...

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/christ-mass.html

[lilpixieofterror]

After reading that Blog Entry I'm Glad... Scratch that,... Grateful that DJ is an Atheist.

I can see why.

[JB]

Astonishing how dishonorable these "Christianity-debunking" apostates seem to invariably end up.

[lilpixieofterror]

Astonishing how dishonorable these "Christianity-debunking" apostates seem to invariably end up.

Yes it is. :sad:

[Chaotic Void]

And DJ didn't even respond to what I said before he did the First half of his repeated Disappearing/Re-Appearing Act..... :bawl:

[jpholding]

Another award winner (read the comments he made too):



http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/christ-mass.html

*WHUH* :twitch:



Jesus was born during the Pax Romana - hundreds of years of relative peace and prosperity. This gave way, when Rome became Christian and fostered intolerance and religious wars of aggression around the world.

Y'know, this BloatedEgo guys has his own site with its own forum, but nobody uses it. Maybe when I come back in an hour or so I'll start a place to discuss HIM and see if we can lure him over here.... :hehe:

[Meta Knight]

*WHUH* :twitch:



Y'know, this BloatedEgo guys has his own site with its own forum, but nobody uses it. Maybe when I come back in an hour or so I'll start a place to discuss HIM and see if we can lure him over here.... :hehe:
Hmm...maybe I should've called myself BloatedEgo instead of WoundedKnee...

[Chaotic Void]

Hmm...maybe I should've called myself BloatedEgo instead of WoundedKnee...

Maybe you should do a post announcing your name change? Sounds like something someone with a bloated ego might do.

[jpholding]

http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/C/can_you_believe_it/debates/hidden.html

I got a note from someone in the UK asking if I'd write a response to this:


As Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus, theologian Robert Beckford investigates remarkable parallels to the Christ story in other faiths, some of them predating Christianity by thousands of years.

The Hindu god, Krishna, was conceived by a virgin and his birth was attended by angels, wise men and shepherds. Buddha was also the result of a miraculous birth, and was visited by wise men bearing gifts. He too began his ministry at about 30 years old and performed such miracles as walking on water and feeding 500.

Some people in India believe that Jesus did not die on the cross but escaped from Roman Palestine and ended up in Kashmir. There, they say, he continued to preach, had a wife and child, and later died and was buried.

Jesus was, of course, born a Jew, and Christians believe he is the Messiah prophesied in the Torah – the Old Testament, which is the holy scripture of the Jews. Meanwhile Muslims revere Jesus as a prophet but do not believe he died on the cross; instead, according to Islam, God saved him and took him up to heaven, and he will return and be buried next to Muhammed.

In this Channel 4 Christmas Day programme, Robert Beckford attempts to unravel the mystery of why there are so many versions of the Christ story across the world and asks which is the real one, and where this leaves the Christian story and his own belief in Jesus.

I guess Beckford doesn't consider rampant stupidity as the reason "why".....by the way, this is the same Beckford of whom DJ once wrote:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/03/who-wrote-bible.html


This is a very well produced British documentary by Dr. Robert Beckford on Who Wrote The Bible? Although he's a believer, there is some very informative stuff here that conservative Christians need to learn. He sums up what he's saying in the last 10 chilling minutes. Definitely some great stuff here and worth a look.

:lolo: :lmbo: Yep. That's a credible DJ source.




Reader also sends:


A Christian screwball sent me a message today saying,

"u don't have any understanding of the scripture. why? because u keep on going to investigate the scriptures background, what was the original language, the cultural context, etc."

:ahem:

[Doubting John]

:shrug:

I'm not sure of the whole word usage behind it, but I do know that in science a hypotheses is usually a smaller part of a theory.

.....this coming from someone who thinks I know nothing about science is priceless! :duh: You have no right whatsoever to nominate someone besides yourself as a screwball.

I thought I'd stop back in. I never left in a huff nor did I say I was gone forever, you idiots!

Most of you are just plain ignorant...about more than just the Bible and theology. You are also ignorant about what it means to think and what science is all about.

Holding is fleecing this flock, and it looks easy to do, just so long as he feigns the same beliefs.

[lilpixieofterror]

.....this coming from someone who thinks I know nothing about science is priceless! :duh: You have no right whatsoever to nominate someone besides yourself as a screwball.

Wow, you are stupid! I was talking about the parts of the word and what then mean half wit. But a hypotheses is smaller parts of a theory or is used to explain a natural phenomena. Are you really this clueless?


I thought I'd stop back in. I never left in a huff nor did I say I was gone forever, you idiots!

:rofl: Yep, show us all that you're a hypocrite when you complain about name calling while you yourself engage in it.


Most of you are just plain ignorant...about more than just the Bible and theology. You are also ignorant about what it means to think and what science is all about.

Then let's see you explain what space/time is and how it effects light around objects. I'd love to see you teach everyone on basic physics.


Holding is fleecing this flock, and it looks easy to do, just so long as he feigns the same beliefs.

So you're a scientist now? AMAZING! Let's see you explain something simple... explain the first law of motion.

:pixie:

[jpholding]

So you're a scientist now? AMAZING! Let's see you explain something simple... explain the first law of motion.



Aw that's easy. "Anything you poke with a cue stick will move." There, that was simple.

[Chaotic Void]

.....this coming from someone who thinks I know nothing about science is priceless! :duh: You have no right whatsoever to nominate someone besides yourself as a screwball.

Where's it say that "we can not nominate anyone for a Screwball award" in the Constitution? or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms [I'm Canadian, eh] ?



I thought I'd stop back in. I never left in a huff nor did I say I was gone forever, you idiots!

You whine about insults, yet you call us idiots... No wonder they call you a hypocrite!



Most of you are just plain ignorant...about more than just the Bible and theology. You are also ignorant about what it means to think and what science is all about.

This is coming from someone who failed to tell me where he got the notion that the "Scientific-Method-Did-It".
And I've also refuted the "summary" of your case against Christianity... Refuting your case was much like doing my Calculus Assignments... It was easy, but it was absurdly long.



Holding is fleecing this flock, and it looks easy to do, just so long as he feigns the same beliefs.
What do you call those Drones over there at Debunking Christianity?

[Truth be Told]

.....this coming from someone who thinks I know nothing about science is priceless! :duh: You have no right whatsoever to nominate someone besides yourself as a screwball.

What science are you familiar with John? "Debunking Christianity"?


I thought I'd stop back in. I never left in a huff nor did I say I was gone forever, you idiots!

You're the idiot, idiot. You choose to keep on coming back here and you change your signature on occasions that involves some sort of "look, I'm a hypersensitive emo" ranting about this very discussion board. You're also an idiot for failing to realize that no sensible person is frightened or intimidated by your arguments. Instead you have a whole crowd laughing at your stupidity.


Most of you are just plain ignorant...about more than just the Bible and theology. You are also ignorant about what it means to think and what science is all about.

John, do you even have a REAL PhD, or just a "PhD equivalent"?

What is science all about? Well it follows as:

Observation
Hypothesis
Testing/Gathering Data
Conclusion (rejecting or supporting your hypothesis).

I can't think very well? Tisk...tisk.....at least I realize that the fact "we know how babies are made, why people get ill and why it rains" has nothing to do with theology and certaintly doesn't contradict God's existence, moron. :duh:


Holding is fleecing this flock, and it looks easy to do, just so long as he feigns the same beliefs.

Holding doesn't parrot people about his book and for donations like you do. And, last time I read, Holding is still going at it with his marriage since 1990. So, how are you doing there, John?

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

We're still waiting for verification that DJ works at Kellogg's college. :hehe:

[jpholding]

Email from Paul Jacobsen of caseagainstfaith.com:


I’ve read your astonishingly lame response to my Strobel piece. I really don’t think you are stupid enough to think that your response was adequate. I’m reminded of some lines in an old Dr. Who episode: “I don’t think he’s as stupid as he appears. Nobody could be.” I’m thinking maybe you’re an atheist, and your apologetics schtick is a J.O.B. Or, maybe you’re one of those people that thinks religion is really good for people regardless of whether it is true or not. Or, maybe you’ve had a lobotomy. Hmmm… Hard to tell….

The baloney filter letter comes in handy again! :lol:

[AngelDragon]

I nominate myself, for this stupid post (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2178541&postcount=193). A bit of a blond moment I had.

[Chaotic Void]

More Gold from SteveC....
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=100046&page=62



God has no brain, so how does he think??




Where do you get the notion that God has no Brain?




Quite simple really, a brain is a complex set of tissues made up of living matter. God is not alive in a physical sense, so a brain as we know it does not exist for him. What would it be housed in, a head??
And would that head be attached to a body?? And would that body have arms and legs and a mouth and stomach and internal organs to boot?? Void, you need to look at the BIG picture. If we are to be the product of his image, he needs to have an image to begin with.


This guy needs to learn an important lesson...
Before you shoot your mouth off, make sure that your brains are loaded...

He also has to make sure he even has a brain to load.:lol:

[AngelDragon]

.....this coming from someone who thinks I know nothing about science is priceless! :duh: You have no right whatsoever to nominate someone besides yourself as a screwball.

You don't know anything about science. I'd bet you're one of those atheist dingbats who thinks atheism is synonymous with science.:ahem:


I thought I'd stop back in. I never left in a huff nor did I say I was gone forever, you idiots!

Well, you sure came back in a huff, you braying jackass.:blush:


Most of you are just plain ignorant...about more than just the Bible and theology. You are also ignorant about what it means to think and what science is all about.

"What it means to think"? Are you a psychologist all of a sudden? Are you going to lecture us on cognition? You don't even know what science is about. You act like you know more about the Bible than people who base their lives around it? :lol: Go eat some carrots.


Holding is fleecing this flock, and it looks easy to do, just so long as he feigns the same beliefs.

I'd rather be in Holding's flock than in your slaughterhouse.:wink:

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

WoundedEgo writes:


Mt 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the

moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the

heavens shall be shaken:

Immediately after the 70AD conquest of Jerusalem the stars will fall to the middle east?Really?

That occured in 70 CE. I must have missed that. Stars have much greater mass, and thus much

greater gravity. The Earth would be SUCKED INTO a nearby star (ie: 40 light years away) rather

than it "falling" to us! Yeesh! Get a 6th grade textbook!
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/immediately.html

No, it refers to falling political powers. Get an exegetical education!

[jpholding]

Email:


Mr. Turk-- err, I mean, "Holding"

I discovered your site because someone who normally
shows quite sound judgement referred me to your
article on the authorship of the Gospel of John. As
usual, I made it a point to research his source, which
led me to the-anointed-one.com (aka "tektonics.org
EXPOSED.") There, I found Brian Holtz's rebuttals to
your article, "The Impossible Faith."

I then returned to your site to read your responses.

Thank you for living up to the standards I have come
to expect from apologetics:

- distorting your opponent's position to an easily
defeated facsimile (i.e., straw-man)
- projection of one's own perceived shortcomings on to
the opponent
- refusal to acknowledge key points

and of course, the old stand-by:

- ad hominem attacks!
- ad hominem attacks!
- ad hominem attacks!

Anyone with more than three working neurons can see
right through you, even if you don't mention his name.

In his rebuttals, he has sent your argument down in
flames. All you can do is hurl insults.

That, and roast marshmallows.



:lol: Let's see.....six months behind on the name change....use of jimbo's "Holding Hate Site" and "Daffy Duck" Holtz as sources....unlimited sound bites...

Yep. Baloney Filter fodder. :thumb:

[Chaotic Void]

We're still waiting for verification that DJ works at Kellogg's college. :hehe:

Aren't we still waiting for verification that he exists?

[Sevivon1913]

Deleted

[Truth be Told]

I would like Holding to compare and contrast the statistics as alluded too here:


The amount of deaths and sufferings caused by religion is far far greater than the man-made deaths caused by a few atheist tyrants in the 20th century. Hitler, Stalin and Mao might have killed up to one hundred million people. But that's puny compared to the sorry and blood-soaked record of religion: the Arab conquests, the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the pogroms, the burning of "heretics" throughout history killed hundreds of millions more. The Thirty Years' War alone wiped out one-third of Germany's population. What's more, religion held back scientific progress for centuries. Copernicus and Galileo lived and died in fear for their astronomy discoveries, thanks to religion. Bruno burned at the stake for his. How many more scientists could have done their work in peace without religion's constantly getting in the way? Even Newton wasted huge amounts of time studying the Bible when he could have done more for physics. Religion is nonsense. And if we do have such genetic predisposition, science ought someday to rid us of this barbaric and primitive heritage for good by means of genetic engineering. Our morality is based on our capacity for altruism, and altruism is due solely and truly to our genes, shaped by evolution. Ants in the soldier class do not hesitate to fight and die for their colony without, I believe, any need for hope of reward or fear of punishment after death, or any other religious notions. Humans are lower than ants in this sense.


http://www.amazon.com/review/product/0385500580/ref=cm_cr_dp_hist_1?%5Fencoding=UTF8&filterBy=addOneStar

[jpholding]

Gee, I wonder why they don't give any contrasting numbers.... :ahem: Hundreds of millions? I don't think so....

[lilpixieofterror]

Amnouy wins gold for this rant... here is a sample:


When one reads the New Testament in the order in which these books were written, a fascinating progression is revealed. Paul, for example, writing between the years 50 and 64 or some 20 to 34 years after the earthly life of Jesus came to an end, never describes the resurrection of Jesus as a physical body resuscitated after death. There is no hint in the Pauline corpus that one, who had died, later walked out of his grave clothes, emerged from the tomb and was seen by his disciples.

What Paul does suggest is that the resurrection meant that God had acted by raising Jesus directly from death into God. It was, therefore, out of God in a transforming kind of heavenly vision that this Jesus then appeared to certain chosen witnesses. Paul enumerates these witnesses and, in a telling detail, says that this was the same Jesus that Paul himself had seen. No one suggests that Paul ever saw a resuscitated body. The Pauline corpus later says, "If you then have been raised with Christ, seek the things which are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God." Please note that the story of the Ascension had not been written when these Pauline words were formed. Paul did not envision the Resurrection as Jesus being restored to life in this world but as Jesus being raised into God. It was not an event in time but a transcendent and transforming truth.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=2181148#post2181148

Is this gold or a platinum runner up?

[Jnthn]

Gee, I wonder why they don't give any contrasting numbers.... :ahem: Hundreds of millions? I don't think so....I can't lay my hands on the supporting data, but I believe the result of a historian's research showed that 90% of all conflict in recorded history was non-religious in origin.

J

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Gee, I wonder why they don't give any contrasting numbers.... :ahem: Hundreds of millions? I don't think so....

Indeed. We're finding the numbers are less and less. It's simply historical revisionism. Write out the Crusades and Inquisitions as the worst events in history and a natural outworking of Christianity being the dominant worldview. (All the while, let it be noted that they are ignoring that Islam spread by the sword from the very beginning and still does today, but we'd better not say that because Islam is "A religion of peace.") The more I hear about the past, the more I see that our moderns today have done historical revisionism, such as calling them the Dark Ages or the Middle Ages. (I have an article on chronological snobbery at Tektonics and how the term "Middle Ages" is an example of that.) Consider how they say the ancients believed the Earth was flat when in fact, they had known it was a sphere for ages.

Why is it that non-Christians say history is always written by winners and yet, consider themselves a superior worldview and never examine the history they are spouting off?

[Mountain Man]

You just fail to see that what convinces people to change their minds is largely personal and not necessarily intellectual, although there is a component of each involved.
And as JP has pointed out time and time again, you're more than welcome to all the non-intellectuals. :thumb:

[lilpixieofterror]

Found a new chew toy for us to play with...

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=106212

Anyone want to take him on in a formal debate?

[Mountain Man]

I have provided a defense of my control beliefs here:

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/12/summary-of-my-case-against-christianity.html
I notice you never posted a follow-up stating how you get from your control belief that science is "the best (and probably the only) reliable guide we have for gaining the truth" to the existence of logic.

Simply, if you accept the existence of logic without being able to prove its existence with the scientific method then you admit that the scientific method is not the only reliable guide we have for gaining the truth and that some things you believe, you accept as true based on something other than the scientific method. More to the point, your control belief is false.

[Mountain Man]

Found a new chew toy for us to play with...

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=106212

Anyone want to take him on in a formal debate?
I like how he declares that the entire burden of proof will rest on whoever takes up his challenge, as if "Jesus Christ did not exist as a man of history" is not itself a claim to positive knowledge. :ahem:

[lilpixieofterror]

I like how he declares that the entire burden of proof will rest on whoever takes up his challenge, as if "Jesus Christ did not exist as a man of history" is not itself a claim to positive knowledge.:ahem:

We can take turns frying him up. I can use that cool T on my profile and I bet you would like that too. :teeth:

[AngelDragon]

I would like Holding to compare and contrast the statistics as alluded too here:




http://www.amazon.com/review/product/0385500580/ref=cm_cr_dp_hist_1?%5Fencoding=UTF8&filterBy=addOneStar

False. Entirely false.

Hitler wasn't an atheist, for one thing. He believed in some aryan deity.

Stalin, however, was an atheist.

Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao Tse-tung were all atheists, and they all specifically preched atheism in their regimes. Pot killed about 1.7 million people. Stalin killed hundreds of thousands of priests, baptists, and other church-goers, and that was only religion; There is no telling how many people he killed before and after that. Those two men alone killed more than the Crusades and the Inquisitions combined. Add Mao into the equation, and those three atheists have killed more people than any and every religious conflict in the history of the world. And what seperates these people, is that those three actually killed in the name of atheism; they preached atheism, they killed any non-atheist. But atheists chop that up to communism, yet accuse Christianity of the Crusades when they cannot give one Bible verse that supports the Crusades (I know; I've challenged hundreds of atheists to do so, at the stake of my faith in God, and nobody met the challenge with more than whining).

[Jnthn]

Valid points, Angel, but we Christians need to change our plan of response when we are faced with the canard "Religion is responsible for X", where X=A Bad Thing.

Christians are under no obligation to defend religion, just the orthodox part of our faith.

Critics who are willing co conflate Islam, Bhuddism, Hinduism or whatever with Christianity under the umbrella term "religion" just doesn't work. Equally, if said skeptic is unwilling to be educated on the historic and doctrinal points that differentiate those who claim the name Christian, they are attacking straw men and can be comfortably accused of bigotry.

J

[AngelDragon]

Valid points, Angel, but we Christians need to change our plan of response when we are faced with the canard "Religion is responsible for X", where X=A Bad Thing.

Christians are under no obligation to defend religion, just the orthodox part of our faith.

Critics who are willing co conflate Islam, Bhuddism, Hinduism or whatever with Christianity under the umbrella term "religion" just doesn't work. Equally, if said skeptic is unwilling to be educated on the historic and doctrinal points that differentiate those who claim the name Christian, they are attacking straw men and can be comfortably accused of bigotry.

J

True, but religion isn't always responsible for what it is being accused of.

[Jnthn]

True, but religion isn't always responsible for what it is being accused of.Another good point, Angel.

The way I see it, rightly or wrongly, that the big brush issues need to be handled by Historians, where as defending the faith is for the Apologists. The main reason I think this is that high level criticisms are often exercises in skeptical Elephant hurling. It is good to force skeptics and critics to deal with specifics as this does help demythologise some of the urban myths about particular "evils" of religion.

J

[jpholding]

Found a new chew toy for us to play with...

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=106212

Anyone want to take him on in a formal debate?

Kabane pointed him out to me and I see my response has been posted. We'll see if he bites.

Awmay will get Gold for that but not Platinum because he's jusy copying Doherty and others.


On the side, Bill Ross' last blog entry has been removed by DJ. I can't imagine why. It was so brilliant. :lol:

[jpholding]

Holding doesn't parrot people about his book and for donations like you do. And, last time I read, Holding is still going at it with his marriage since 1990.

Heck yeah! Just celebrated anniversary #17 this past week and still can't get off the honeymoon. :hehe:

[JB]

Heck yeah! Just celebrated anniversary #17 this past week and still can't get off the honeymoon. :hehe:

:thumb:

[Meta Knight]

On the side, Bill Ross' last blog entry has been removed by DJ. I can't imagine why. It was so brilliant. :lol:
Oh fudge. Now I'll have to come up with something original.

[One Bad Pig]

See if Google cached it.

[Mr Minder]

Do you think that the red-underlined comment deserves a Screwball award of some sort?:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=2178352#post2178352 (originally posted by Jon_Day)

Post #337:

Originally posted by MikO von Mirtos
How does a rock's particles continue beyond its visible edge? The particles of the stone mixes up with the air in form of dust and smell, but then, the particles has become air particles, and are no longer part of the rock. It is a form of transition, but that des not rule out the fact that there still exists borders between things in existence in the material realm.!

This is true...however, the borders we create by observation are not the same as the one's that actualy exist. It wasn't until we made scientific advancements that we were able to determine this to be the case. We require additional tools to observe in a way which is closer to actuality. Our senses and minds alone cannot acheive this...at least not right now. Once we evolve into pure energy we will be all the way there.
[/QUOTE]

[jpholding]

Do you think that the red-underlined comment deserves a Screwball award of some sort?:


It would make Bronze or Silver under the old system. :thumb:

[jpholding]

More Gold for Paul Jacobsen, whose response to me on CFRJ is too pornographic to link to, but contains such wondrous, detailed responses as this, when I pointed to Miller's treatment of 1 Cor. 14 and 1 Tim. 2:11-14:



In his link, Miller himself admits, "Due to the intense nature of the current debate about this subject, this section will simply NOT be able to deal with the manifold objections to my view." So, basically, from Holding's point of view, he has a link to an article that does some usual Christian b**l*** hand-waving, and pronounces, "case closed, nothing to see here, move along." What a j*****.

And that's it. :twitch:

Wow. Impressive. Someone's in over their head and knows it, ya think?

I'll post the response later and start a thread on it so we can have some fun.

[Chaotic Void]

Found a new chew toy for us to play with...

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=106212

Anyone want to take him on in a formal debate?

Ooh, New guy to munch on. Then again the Christ-Myth isn't I'm good at, so I had Better leave him for JPHolding... Then again junk food, especially Christ-Mythers, isn't necessarily something a guy losing weight should be eating, am I right? :wink:

Speaking of which,
I also nominate John Armstrong's Challenge for a Screwball.... Mostly for this line...



"The burden of proof, as always, should be on the believer. It will not be up to me as a skeptic to prove a negative. "

:lolo: I wonder if this guy realizes that the Burden of proof is upon whomever makes the assertion.
For instance, if I were to make a claim that Macbeth's alibi for the night Duncan was Murdered was "I was getting funky with the Missus" I would need to back that assertion up, would I not?
[very good play, by the by. I love reading Shakespeare. I've even written Shakespearan Sonnets that landed me excellent marks on ELA-20A Assignments. Not really relevant, just a bit of trivia]

We're in a Debate Forum, not in a Court of Law, Dangit! :rant:

[historic salve]

Nomination for LGM.



The following verse can't be what you're asking for:
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.
:hrm:
How odd then, that Christians keep perishing at an alarming rate.
Are you aware of any immortal Christians? That would certainly bolster your case. All the ones I know keep getting buried in the ground after they die.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=106156&page=24

[energyman]

Q: How do you know that a wiki is going to be screwbish?
A: When the title is based on a stale fundy atheist canard! (http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Main_Page) I was not disappointed.

[AngelDragon]

Nomination for LGM.



http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=106156&page=24

LGM is the single dumbest atheist I have ever seen online. And that is as pathetic as it can get.

[Chaotic Void]

LGM is the single dumbest atheist I have ever seen online. And that is as pathetic as it can get.
Personally, I think Jimbo, SteveC, and everyone at DJ's Blog are dumber. But that's just my opinion.

[I've also heard that LGM's been banned numerous times, and not just "Caught in the Matrix" either. But that's another story]

[AngelDragon]

Personally, I think Jimbo, SteveC, and everyone at DJ's Blog are dumber. But that's just my opinion.

They're bad, but at least they can actually make a point every two-thousand rants or so. LGM? Nuh-uh.


[I've also heard that LGM's been banned numerous times, and not just "Caught in the Matrix" either. But that's another story]

Makes sense. People try to get rid of stupidity, but with stupidity like that, it will either come back or infect somebody else.

[Chaotic Void]

They're bad, but at least they can actually make a point every two-thousand rants or so. LGM? Nuh-uh.

Good point. Little Green Man should stick to poetry...



Makes sense. People try to get rid of stupidity, but with stupidity like that, it will either come back or infect somebody else.
Stupidity isn't really a crime on Tweb... I think... but If it was, can you imagine how many users would be banned?!

[AngelDragon]

Stupidity isn't really a crime on Tweb... I think... but If it was, can you imagine how many users would be banned?!

It may not be a crime, but it certainly is a disease. . .without the proper medicine, you will be infected with Atheistis stupidious or the "LGM virus", and it is definitely fatal.:hehe:

[Chaotic Void]

It may not be a crime, but it certainly is a disease. . .without the proper medicine, you will be infected with Atheistis stupidious or the "LGM virus", and it is definitely fatal.:hehe:

I hear that the Symptoms often include Loftusizing....

[Truth be Told]

Raelians hit the spot with their wonderful website all to do with atheism!

http://thereisnogod.info/English/english.html

Here's more:

http://www.apostasie.org/english/index.php

There is no reason to suppose that this is not the atheist equivalent of "God Hates Fags" (minus the threats).

[Chaotic Void]

Raelians hit the spot with their wonderful website all to do with atheism!

http://thereisnogod.info/English/english.html

*Sniff, Sniff*

Yep... smells like Fundie Atheism.



Some Islamic countries are even considering to request the UN to vote for laws forbidding any texts of drawings lacking religious respect.


Actually, that law wouldn't be such a bad idea. If implemented properly, it could drastically reduce religious intolerance.

[AngelDragon]

*Sniff, Sniff*

Yep... smells like Fundie Atheism.

I have been seriously debating on whether or not I should make an alternate account, then go on trolling sprees against atheism, just to see how they react when I give them a taste of their own medicine.

[Chaotic Void]

I have been seriously debating on whether or not I should make an alternate account, then go on trolling sprees against atheism, just to see how they react when I give them a taste of their own medicine.

Well, you just blew whatever cover you would have had...:hehe: At least on Tweb, anyhoo.

Actually, JB and I were at one point discussing the notion of Tailing Graeme Jones 2 over to his forum and tangling with him on his home turf. We never really got around to it though.

[Truth be Told]

I have been seriously debating on whether or not I should make an alternate account, then go on trolling sprees against atheism, just to see how they react when I give them a taste of their own medicine.

Make a site on Tripod, that always comes handy. :thumb:

[JB]

Actually, JB and I were at one point discussing the notion of Tailing Graeme Jones 2 over to his forum and tangling with him on his home turf. We never really got around to it though.

:hehe: Just say the word, and I'm still in for that.

[Chaotic Void]

:hehe: Just say the word, and I'm still in for that.
You, me and AngelDragon [if he wants] doesn't sound like a bad idea...

"The word, and I'm still in for that" (http://richarddawkins.net/forum/).

Couple of Questions, though... [Good to have a battle plan even though it'll be like swatting a fly with a buick]
1)Should we have the same usernames on there as we do here? [so that we know who is who]
2)Should we start a thread with a name to go along with "Zeitgeist" and "Aliens in the Bible"? [so he knows who we are]
3)Want the Honors of Starting the thread, JB?[:hehe:]

[JB]

You, me and AngelDragon [if he wants] doesn't sound like a bad idea...

"The word, and I'm still in for that" (http://richarddawkins.net/forum/).

Couple of Questions, though... [Good to have a battle plan even though it'll be like swatting a fly with a buick]
1)Should we have the same usernames on there as we do here? [so that we know who is who]
2)Should we start a thread with a name to go along with "Zeitgeist" and "Aliens in the Bible"? [so he knows who we are]
3)Want the Honors of Starting the thread, JB?[:hehe:]

:hehe: Sweet. Let's just wait for confirmation that AngelDragon's in too, and then we'll begin. To the planning:

1) Nah, let's switch things up. I figure we can just mention our alternate identities here. Make Graeme work a bit harder if he wants to figure things out.
2) Hmm, I say we first see what Graeme's been up to and see if he mentioned his time here anywhere over there.
3) see (2)

[Chaotic Void]

:hehe: Sweet. Let's just wait for confirmation that AngelDragon's in too, and then we'll begin. To the planning:

1) Nah, let's switch things up. I figure we can just mention our alternate identities here. Make Graeme work a bit harder if he wants to figure things out.
2) Hmm, I say we first see what Graeme's been up to and see if he mentioned his time here anywhere over there.
3) see (2)

Goody Goody. I hope he responds soon.:joy:

1)Excellent Idea, especially in regards to making him think for a change.
2)Agreed. No point in starting a thread about it if he's already got one going.
3) See (2)

[AngelDragon]

Well, you just blew whatever cover you would have had...:hehe: At least on Tweb, anyhoo.

Actually, JB and I were at one point discussing the notion of Tailing Graeme Jones 2 over to his forum and tangling with him on his home turf. We never really got around to it though.

Ahh, but I haven't mentioned what screen name I would use.:hehe:

Anyway, I haven't decided yet. I might do it just to vent some bottled up stereotypical garbage that runs through me whenever I read something like LGM.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Heck yeah! Just celebrated anniversary #17 this past week and still can't get off the honeymoon. :hehe:

I'll add in some personal testimony here. (Yeah. I know JPH doesn't really care for testimonies, but I think this will be an exception.)

For any who wonder, this is indeed a happily married couple and I saw nothing to make me think otherwise the time I spent at their home. JPH even took me one evening at the advice of his wife through the wedding album and other pictures related to their marriage. It was indeed a beautiful gesture and one I remember most of all.

While they stand together, I also saw that they both fend for their own. You would not want to mess with JPH's wife. I was quite surprised with a conversation I had with her one afternoon. JPH was there also and I'm sure he remembers it as well. It was only later on here that I learned that they did devotions every night, but considering what I know of them, it makes sense.

By the way guys, JPH's wife is awesome. I've told him that if I marry a girl with just half of her qualities, I'll consider myself eternally blessed.

On a side note JPH, Rayado and I are still looking and can't find those two guys from Charlotte who asked you to review Zeitgeist, but we will not rest for a moment until we find the real askers!

[AngelDragon]

You, me and AngelDragon [if he wants] doesn't sound like a bad idea...

"The word, and I'm still in for that" (http://richarddawkins.net/forum/).

Couple of Questions, though... [Good to have a battle plan even though it'll be like swatting a fly with a buick]
1)Should we have the same usernames on there as we do here? [so that we know who is who]
2)Should we start a thread with a name to go along with "Zeitgeist" and "Aliens in the Bible"? [so he knows who we are]
3)Want the Honors of Starting the thread, JB?[:hehe:]

Richarddawkins.net, eh? Won't we just be modded for having intelligence?

[Chaotic Void]

Richarddawkins.net, eh? Won't we just be modded for having intelligence?

Meh, it's the only scent we can track him with... and a pretty rancid one too...

[AngelDragon]

:hehe: Sweet. Let's just wait for confirmation that AngelDragon's in too, and then we'll begin. To the planning:

1) Nah, let's switch things up. I figure we can just mention our alternate identities here. Make Graeme work a bit harder if he wants to figure things out.
2) Hmm, I say we first see what Graeme's been up to and see if he mentioned his time here anywhere over there.
3) see (2)

You guys can go ahead without me. I'll be watching, though. Post a link to your topic!:thumb:

[Chaotic Void]

Sadly, You Gotta have a Username to view the threads over there... maybe someone here on Tweb would be nice enough to start an individual Thread in the Tektonics Section so JB and I can Post what goes on?

[AngelDragon]

Sadly, You Gotta have a Username to view the threads over there... maybe someone here on Tweb would be nice enough to start an individual Thread in the Tektonics Section so JB and I can Post what goes on?

What do you mean? I was just over there, and I viewed every message in a Zeitgeist thread.

[Chaotic Void]

What do you mean? I was just over there, and I viewed every message in a Zeitgeist thread.

:blush: my bad. Must have misread something. Even so it wouldn't hurt to have a commentary thread in the Tektonics Section...

[JB]

CV, I dare you to sign up as Graeme Jones. :hehe:

[AngelDragon]

:blush: my bad. Must have misread something.

Either way, it wouldn't hurt to have a commentary thread in the Tektonics Section...
A commentary thread would be good, because God knows you will be ambushed by Dawkinists until you're sneezing Non-sequiturs. . .

[Chaotic Void]

CV, I dare you to sign up as Graeme Jones. :hehe:

Psssh... I thought we were supposed to make GJ Think. I might go with "Black Knight" or Something

[Chaotic Void]

A commentary thread would be good, because God knows you will be ambushed by Dawkinists until you're sneezing Non-sequiturs. . .
More than likely...

What the heck is a Non-sequitur anyhoo??!

[ApologiaPhoenix]

More than likely...

What the heck is a Non-sequitur anyhoo??!

It means "It does not follow." The conclusion does not follow from the premises necessarily.

[JB]

What the heck is a Non-sequitur anyhoo??!

A category that covers just about everything Graeme Jones ever said here. :hehe:

[AngelDragon]

More than likely...

What the heck is a Non-sequitur anyhoo??!

From Wikipedia:

Non sequitur (IPA: /nɒnˈsɛkwɪtər/) is Latin for "It does not follow," coming from the deponent verb sequor. The term may refer to:

Non sequitur (logic), logical fallacy
Non sequitur (humor), a comment which has no relation to the comment it follows
Its (mis)use may also be inadvertent, as in the case of a (poor) rebuttal that does not address the original claims.

[Chaotic Void]

Ah... Thanks guys.

[AngelDragon]

Slightly off-topic, but why can't we commoners post any topics here? Ratnat got to post one. . .

[JB]

I've created an account; now I just need to wait for the account activation e-mail to show up.

[AngelDragon]

I've created an account; now I just need to wait for the account activation e-mail to show up.

What's the account name?

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Slightly off-topic, but why can't we commoners post any topics here? Ratnat got to post one. . .

Nope. RatNat's got moved over.

If you wish to start a topic, talk to me and/or JPH.

[Chaotic Void]

I've created an account; now I just need to wait for the account activation e-mail to show up.

I've also got an Account, and I'm just activating it now... The_Black_Knight is the username

[AngelDragon]

Nope. RatNat's got moved over.

If you wish to start a topic, talk to me and/or JPH.

I don't have anything (anymore), but thanks for letting me know.:thumb:

[JB]

Why... the heck... do forums... never... send me... the confirmation e-mail???? :argh::argh:

[Chaotic Void]

Why... the heck... do forums... never... send me... the confirmation e-mail???? :argh::argh:

Oi... you're still waiting? Mine was sent to me instantly....

[JB]

Oi... you're still waiting? Mine was sent to me instantly....

For some reason it always takes eons and eons for me to get it. Fer cryin' aut laud, by the time it gets here, I'll be half Mossy's age!

[AngelDragon]

I have to go, guys, but I'll be back tomorrow to see how it's going.

Here's some. . .inspirational. . .music.: (http://youtube.com/watch?v=akrlHIgH5mw&feature=user):hehe:

[Chaotic Void]

For some reason it always takes eons and eons for me to get it. Fer cryin' aut laud, by the time it gets here, I'll be half Mossy's age!

Are we talking YEC or OEC Time?

[JB]

Are we talking YEC or OEC Time?

:hehe: OEC

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

*Edit*

That's it, I blasted give up! I've tried three accounts with two different e-mail addresses, I've requested time and again for confirmation e-mails to be sent to the accounts... I GIVE UP!!!!!!

:argh: :rant: :argh: :argh: :rant: :argh: :argh: :rant: :argh:

[Truth be Told]

I have to go, guys, but I'll be back tomorrow to see how it's going.

Here's some. . .inspirational. . .music.: (http://youtube.com/watch?v=akrlHIgH5mw&feature=user):hehe:

Pfffffft.

Nothing quite compares with the disturbedness of Disturbed. (http://youtube.com/watch?v=9KW8DRSvEoQ)

Hooyah!

[One Bad Pig]

Website nomination:

http://johan777.tripod.com