October 2006 Screwball Nominations [Archive]

Cynic Sage

September 30th 2006, 04:02 PM

Slactivist (not a screwball) tells a funny story about his days at Timothy Christian School in a footnote in his blog entry titled "The Language of Religion":

http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2006/09/the_language_of.html

* True story from back at Timothy Christian School:

We were studying evangelism and the teacher was going over something called the "Romans Road" -- a series of passages from St. Paul's epistle to the Romans that described humanity's sinfulness and need for salvation. Evangelism, by definition, involves talking with people who do not already share our faith. Such people, I had noticed, also tended not to regard our Bible as their Bible, so I asked the teacher what we should say to someone who tells us they don't believe in the Bible.

"You show them II Timothy 3:16," the teacher said. And then she quoted it, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."

When I suggested that someone who didn't believe in the Bible wasn't likely to believe in II Timothy any more than they believed in Romans, she responded by quoting another passage, II Peter 1:21, and then another from the 119th Psalm.

It went on like that for a bit, like something from Abbot and Costello, with both of us getting more frustrated as she quoted Bible verse after Bible verse about the authority of the Bible and me not doing a very good job of expressing that someone who doesn't believe in Bible verses won't be convinced by a Bible verse that tells them to believe in Bible verses. Until finally she said this:

"Well if they still don't believe in the Bible after you've showed them all those verses, then I guess they just can't read."

David (NAS as well) also tells a simmilar story:

http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2006/09/the_language_of.html#comment-23072476

Another similar experience: when I was young I had a frustrating conversation with a Sunday School teacher of mine, who was saying that people would believe in the Good News if only they would read the Bible.

"But," I said, "even though it's true, it's still just a book. Aren't there lots of people who have read the Bible, and still don't believe it?"

She insisted that there could not be any such person, and that anyone who didn't believe must therefore be lying about having really read the Bible.

An earnest discussion ensued.

A lot of my Sunday School teachers didn't like me very much...

And a screwbie for Evan:

http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2006/09/the_language_of.html#comment-23071853

I confess, I wasn't surprised to find that Christians were more likely than secularists to oppose torture. After all, a lot of Christians believe that God tortures people, and not just for a little while, either, but forever and ever, and for no crime other than "believing the wrong thing."
Belief in Hell should be a heresy. IMHO, no religion that believes in a literal hell can ever be truly moral.

JSDileo

October 1st 2006, 02:26 PM

Please, no nominations for Doubting John as that would be too obvious.
I nominate the anti-Christian doofuses who write the script for the show "The West Wing":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHaVUjjH3EI

The people who write secular television. :doh:

Doubting John

October 1st 2006, 02:37 PM

Please, no nominations for Doubting John as that would be too obvious.

Okay then, I nominate JP "Hold on to your hat" Holding. Why? Why not? Almost every sentence he writes deserves a nomination. :rasberry:

JSDileo

October 1st 2006, 04:16 PM

Okay then, I nominate JP "Hold on to your hat" Holding. Why? Why not? Almost every sentence he writes deserves a nomination. :rasberry:

Including his review of your book that is too obfuscating and stupid for you to lower yourself to reply to, right? :hehe:

lilpixieofterror

October 1st 2006, 06:12 PM

I nominate Jim Eisele for the no-bats-in-the-belfry dialogue which began at post #17 here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=1661938#post1661938) and lasted to post #68.

Awww, got to love Jimmy. :hug: He's so much fun I posted a few comments to him on that thread.

Crystal

Goonerman

October 1st 2006, 07:55 PM

I'd like to nominate author Richard Holland for excerpts of his book "Nero- The Man Behind the Myth" published by Sutton Publishing, who normally produce decent history books. BH Warmington (an expert on Nero) Mr. Holland is not.

"Loyalty to the Emperor would have to be replaced by submission to an evidently fearsome and vengeful deity, who was personified in some mysterious manner by a corpse that got up and walked away after being executed in Rome's name by due process. A strong element of ill-wishing is apparent in the apocalyptic beliefs of both Jews and Christians in the imminent destruction of secular Roman power... Jesus may have taught some of them to love their enemies and turn the other cheek, but hatred, in the guise of righteous indignation, flows in waves out of the apocalyptic literature, including the canonical Revelation of John. These authors cannot wait for the ethical cleansing to begin.... What is beyond doubt is the excitement that supposedly saintly author shows when contemplating the fate of all those sinners about to be trampled on by the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse or plunged into a pit of everlasting fire. Nero's decision, inspired by fear, to apply the laws of his country to tiny, obstinate and deeply misunderstood minority, was by comparison neither malevolent or deranged.... If the Second Coming prophesied by John of the Apocalypse, involving the immolation of almost the entire population of Rome, reflected the true aspirations of his fellow Christians in that city, Nero could quite reasonably claim to be acting in the interests of the vast majority of his subjects. They and their Emperor can hardly be blamed for wanting to go on living."

"Nero was predicted to be about to come back to earth as Antichrist, lose the final battle of Armageddon and be submerged alive in a lake of fire and brimstone... St. John's Gospel is possibly the most sublime work of religious literature ever written. Although it contains a number of beautiful and sublime passages, the Book of Revelation, as a whole, is a radically different work- often shockingly different.... Leaving motives to one side, John of Patmos has been more responsible for the suffering of innocent Christians than Nero was.... There is a prophetic whiff of Auschwitz about the smoke that rises day and night from this sinister Lamb's brimstone incinerators.... In the face of this genocidal ethical cleansing, who would not be tempted to take sides with Nero if forced to choose between him and the Apocalyptic Lamb?"

"To liberate him [Nero] fully will require the patient demolition of those entrenched positions. [The position of the Church and the Bible on Nero as well as that of the Roman writers themselves, such as Tacitus.] That may need to be the work of more than one generation. But in the immensely long perspective of the history of religious ideas, it is certain we have not heard the last word in the supposedly cosmic conflict between the Beast and the Lamb. Nero awaits his apotheosis."

:lolo:

One day I will write a detailed essay on this and other screwball remarks which he made in the book, and show why he is wrong, even if he conveyed all too accurately (and shares many of) the prejudices the Romans had aginst Christians. He says for example that the Christians could easily have avoided martyrdom by offering incense to Caesar and the Roman gods, and that they only had themselves to blame. Apparently Jesus' Resurrection made Him an animated corpse, akin to a vampire. He says that Jesus had divine titles given to Him by others through guesswork.

It obviously escapes his notice that Paul seems to have explained to Nero and Seneca the full Gospel including some eschatological teaching. (Which is probably the real source of inspiration for Nero to stitch-up the Christians as arsonists.) In which case Nero knew fine well that the Christians really meant in their teaching and knew that they had no evil intentions. See 2 Timothy, where Paul indicated that he was released by Nero in AD 62 and so escaped the persecution after the Fire, in referring to escaping the Lion's Mouth. It is clear that this enabled Paul to go to Spain after all (see 1 Clement) and go on a last missionary journey to Illyricum and other places which is not mentioned in Acts before Nero changed his mind, had him hunted down, brought back to Rome in AD 67 and beheaded. (The use of Christians as scapegoats for the Fire of Rome hints at his knowledge of Christian teaching as seen in 2 Peter, and this is why I believe that Paul did face Nero himself in AD 62 and not a representative of the Emperor.)

jpholding

October 2nd 2006, 10:55 AM

Okay then, I nominate JP "Hold on to your hat" Holding. Why? Why not? Almost every sentence he writes deserves a nomination. :rasberry:

Including this one?

That's more of that "Bed Bath and Beyond has massage coupons" logic at work. :hehe:

Doubting John

October 2nd 2006, 02:42 PM

Including this one?

Does the word "almost" mean anything to you?

That's more of that "Bed Bath and Beyond has massage coupons" logic at work

That one! So far with two sentences that's one nomination. :teeth:

jpholding

October 2nd 2006, 03:15 PM

Does the word "almost" mean anything to you?

Yeah, but I'm trying to get a grip on the level of "almost" you're on about. :bonk:

That one! So far with two sentences that's one nomination. :teeth:

I'd advise you to start your own version of Screwballs of the Month over on DC, but it's too late. Every post by your crew there earns one. :hehe:

Doubting John

October 2nd 2006, 04:22 PM

I'd advise you to start your own version of Screwballs of the Month over on DC, but it's too late. Every post by your crew there earns one. :hehe:

You mean this post?: http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/09/flat-earth-assumptions-of-biblical.html

I don't think so at all.

jpholding

October 2nd 2006, 04:34 PM

You mean this post?: http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/09/flat-earth-assumptions-of-biblical.html

ESPECIALLY that one. I've corrected Edski more times on that than Franky has fleas.

But really, Edski is just repetitively droning and stupid. The Curry brothers are excessively stupid.

Doubting John

October 2nd 2006, 05:26 PM

ESPECIALLY that one. I've corrected Edski more times on that than Franky has fleas.

But really, Edski is just repetitively droning and stupid. The Curry brothers are excessively stupid.

Stupid, eh? Then maybe you mean this one: http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/08/its-not-about-intelligence-or.html

jpholding

October 3rd 2006, 05:24 AM

Stupid, eh? Then maybe you mean this one: http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/08/its-not-about-intelligence-or.html

In their case, I mean ALL their posts are stupid.

Speaking of stupid, here's someone who actually exceeds the Curry Bros. by email:

I am writing in response to your article entitled Shattering the Christ-Myth. Unfortunately, your article is a bit light on facts, and I would like more clarification.

You simply focus on a single quote from Justin's Dialogue with Trypho, then copy and paste a few quotes against G.A. Wells and declare victory. Huh? It made me smile reading it, since the implication is that those are the only pieces of evidence needing refutation.

You kind of hobbled together a final argument on why no one noticed Jesus while he was alive. Most of it didn't even make sense, as it was simply the same argument repeated six times. The crux of which is:

"Jesus was not considered to be historically significant by historians of his time. He did not address the Roman Senate, or write extensive Greek philosophical treatises"

Well, I'm sure performing feats of magic, coming back to life and stopping the sun would have been a bit significant!!!

After reading about you on Wikipedia and other various places on the web, I expected a much more academic argument, systematically countering each point the jesus-myth movement put forward. What I got, unfortunately, was an 7th grade level.

J. P. I want to help. I want to push you, to challenge you to do better. Right now there are many "lost souls" like myself who believe, simply, that Jesus was a myth - a synthesis of other mystery religions that were very prominent during the first century AD.

So here is my question to you. What firm evidence do you have that Jesus was an actual historical figure? Your "highly reliable sources" - Tacitus and Josephus are laughable. The Tacitus quote is disputed and was written 60 years after JC died, a thousand miles away. The Josephus passage you are referring to is also highly disputed, and definitely not contemporary with the life of JC.

Now try to understand it from my perspective. I see a mountain of evidence indicating that the legend of Jesus was an synthesis of existing gods during the same time - many of which parallel exactly the life of "christ", and you give me two tired old dubious quotes from decades after this guy was supposed to have lived? The only people who would follow that logic are people who already believe anyway. If you want to convince non-believers, you need a bit more fact on your side.

So please JC, answer my call. I'll post this letter to the forum at jesusneverexisted.org, as an open letter awaiting your reply.

I invited the nutcase here for some public humiliation. :hehe:

jpholding

October 3rd 2006, 11:17 AM

Hey, DJ, you still hanging from your toes here? Any chance we can get one of the Curry Bros (either Beef or Goat) over here for to put some public humiliation on them? You can't have all the fun. :thumbd:

All three of you are getting Gold Screwballs for September.

jpholding

October 3rd 2006, 11:23 AM

And also, Joe Holman from DJ's place just won the "Pistis in the Wind" Award for this:

By faith, radical Muslims fly plains into buildings, killing thousands. By faith, suicide bombers explode themselves on sidewalks full of people and on school buses full of children. By faith, large groups senselessly riot over the publishing of stupid Muhammed cartoons and call for the life of the artists that produced them. By faith, Jewish and Arab teens throw rocks at each other, stab each other, and get together in mobs to beat their enemies to death with makeshift blunt objects, in the absence of a handy gun or sword. By faith, dedicated Muslim families place their own babies and young children in front of U.S. tanks as they roll through town, trying to clear out terrorist cells. By faith, reporter Nick Berg had his head sawed off by extremist Muslims while videotape rolled and caught his silenced screams and gasps for breath as he died. His severed head was placed upon his body. By faith, Muslims, Jews, and Christians gather in large numbers, to assemble at the Wailing Wall, nodding and praying, rocking back and forth, in adoration of a god who sits by and lets the never-ending holy land dispute go unresolved, allowing the respective religions to remain bitter enemies for centuries, even amidst the desperate cries of some of their own representatives for the senseless violence to stop. By faith, a Muslim man is moved to throw acid in his sister’s face, grossly disfiguring her, because she was raped and is no longer a virgin. By faith, a Somalian Muslim man brings his young daughter to the village elders so she can undergo cliterodectomy before she reaches sexual maturity to help ensure that she will never be tempted to know sexual pleasure, and therefore, be tempted to cheat on her future husband....

And so on ad infinitum.

jpholding

October 3rd 2006, 12:42 PM

Leonhard

October 3rd 2006, 01:31 PM

The nutcase I invited is apparently here and registered as "holding_jp". :hehe:

Mods care to give him a little reminder?

He's making a thread in the theology section now. I'll be sure and chew him to pieces.

I think the mods must have deleted that thread, there is no sign of it or any person named holding_jp. I've seen low, but this is ridiculus, I consider him crap and I havn't even read anything from him yet!

Weee 666 posts *que scary music* Wickedness, hihihi...

jpholding

October 3rd 2006, 02:23 PM

He's worse than you think and deserves a Gold Screwball for not only that letter, but what he says further at

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=200.0

He signs in to this forum as "Jesus". Has some real identity problems. :hehe:

My post at TheologyWeb

Hello,

I am writing this by invitation of JP Holding. I had written Mr. Holding on the evidence of a historical jesus. It seems odd that our only historical knowledge of Jesus comes for a few anonymous letters written decades after he supposedly died.

For this question, Mr. Holding called me a screwball and told me to come here where he would publicly humiliate me.

Here is his exact email to me:
Congratulations! You win a Screwball Award!
Come see me at theologyweb.com and I'll be glad to heap some public humiliation on you.

I wasn't exactly looking for public humiliation, instead I was just looking for an answer to my question. What other historical evidence do we have? As a non-believer, how can I start my path to faith without some reasonable explaination for the basis of this faith?

I hope you people here will be more patient then Mr. Holding in explaining the historical roots and basis of your faith.

Lots of nutcases at that forum, too.

One Bad Pig

October 3rd 2006, 06:29 PM

I think the mods must have deleted that thread, there is no sign of it or any person named holding_jp. I've seen low, but this is ridiculus, I consider him crap and I havn't even read anything from him yet!

Weee 666 posts *que scary music* Wickedness, hihihi...
His name was changed to "Member11491" and he was given the option to change it.

member11491

October 3rd 2006, 08:00 PM

I invited the nutcase here for some public humiliation. :hehe:

Hi JP, thanks for the invitation. I've tried to get a question a few times so perhaps someone else can answer the question here. I know to you my question may seem "screwy", but if you were a novice to christianity, you would probably want to know the same thing.

During the life of Jesus, not a single person made note of his existence, even though he did very public things (resurrected dead people, healed the sick, overturned tables in the temple of Jeruselem, etc). Decades later, these stories started circulating by anonymous authors, in a time when pius, allegorical fiction such as this was very popular.

So what I would like to know is do we have ANY evidence that demonstrates Jesus was a concrete, living person.

And why is it so screwy to ask this question? If it is simple, a simple answer should suffice. I'm very willing to listen. I'm also concerned about the tone of this board, I definitely do not note the christian spirit here. With all the "stupid" and insulting remarks I've read on this thread, you people seem a bit...dangerous.

JP has repeatedly thrown harsh insults at me for simply asking a question, so I've given up on his ability to answer. So if anyone else has an historically based response, I'm willing to listen.

Also, if you have no evidence, just say so. If your evidence is simply "we believe it", then say it. I am simply trying to get the christian response to this question.

Stay cool!

Darth Executor

October 3rd 2006, 09:36 PM

Hi JP, thanks for the invitation. I've tried to get a question a few times so perhaps someone else can answer the question here. I know to you my question may seem "screwy", but if you were a novice to christianity, you would probably want to know the same thing.

I highly doubt it. Your criteria for determining whether somebody existed (a question which is extremely rare given the near impossibility of conjuring up a fictional character and claiming he existed without people finding out and roasting you) is borderline retarded.

During the life of Jesus, not a single person made note of his existence, even though he did very public things (resurrected dead people, healed the sick, overturned tables in the temple of Jeruselem, etc).

This is unknown actually. Very little survives from that time.

Decades later, these stories started circulating by anonymous authors,

They weren't "anonymous". Do you have any evidence that the claims made by the early church in regard to their authorship was ever challenged in that time?

in a time when pius, allegorical fiction such as this was very popular.

What does this (if it's correct, I don't know and don't really care) have to do with the subject?

So what I would like to know is do we have ANY evidence that demonstrates Jesus was a concrete, living person.

Yes. The bible.

And why is it so screwy to ask this question?

Because it often requires the mindset of a fundamentalist atheist: hellbent on destroying christianity and dumb as a brick. The question only makes sense to people who convince themselves that they are the avatar of logic and obsess so much over it that they've turned reality into a mathematical equation and now live in a fantasy world where everything (that inconveniences the fundy atheist) must fit his outrageous criteria.

If it is simple, a simple answer should suffice. I'm very willing to listen. I'm also concerned about the tone of this board, I definitely do not note the christian spirit here. With all the "stupid" and insulting remarks I've read on this thread, you people seem a bit...dangerous.

A number of people, in the past, have tried to challenge the idea that Christians are not allowed to insult people. They have all failed miserably. God insults people in the bible. Jesus insults people in the bible. Paul insults people in the bible. The entire Christian church from Jesus to modern times has been using insults. The "Christian spirit" requires action and self-sacrifice. It does not require us to be nice to or like anybody.

JP has repeatedly thrown harsh insults at me for simply asking a question, so I've given up on his ability to answer. So if anyone else has an historically based response, I'm willing to listen.

I somehow doubted you "simply asked a question". In fact, your question was already rendered irrelevant in his writings. If you want an actual answer you should explain why you think there must be writing about Jesus from his time without appealing to "it's obvious" or "it would make sense to me". Nobody here cares.

NJon

October 3rd 2006, 09:51 PM

I nominate Jim Eisele for the no-bats-in-the-belfry dialogue which began at post #17 here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=1661938#post1661938) and lasted to post #68.

Here's an evidentiary add-on to my original nomination for Jim:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=1670616#post1670616

Interestingly, this was his 666th post.

NJon

October 3rd 2006, 10:05 PM

So what I would like to know is do we have ANY evidence that demonstrates Jesus was a concrete, living person.

There is far less evidence that that Macedonian king Alexander the Great lived in the B.C. 300s than there is for the life of Jesus Christ as recorded in the Bible, yet nobody has made www.AlexanderTheNonExistant.org

And why is it so screwy to ask this question? If it is simple, a simple answer should suffice. I'm very willing to listen. I'm also concerned about the tone of this board, I definitely do not note the christian spirit here. With all the "stupid" and insulting remarks I've read on this thread, you people seem a bit...dangerous.
JP has repeatedly thrown harsh insults at me for simply asking a question, so I've given up on his ability to answer. So if anyone else has an historically based response, I'm willing to listen.

J.P. was probably harsh with you because you were condescending with him. "7th grade level?" You'd probably have received a more civil response if you initially asked in a more civil manner.
Furthermore, after many years of debunking the Christ myth, apologists get tired when they have to re-invent the wheel every time somebody asks them questions that scholarship has already answered over and over again. Try reading some of Josh McDowell's work. You may also be interested in this (http://www.christian-thinktank.com/jrthal.html), this (http://www.leaderu.com/menus/apologetics.html) and this (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/answers.html).

P-Dunn

October 3rd 2006, 10:53 PM

http://atheism.awardspace.com/index.php

This is a good place to nominate for a Website Award. I first discovered it when it wrote a rebuttal to my contra-GodIsImaginary blog, and as I began to read through some of the other articles, I realized that practically every one of the pages is dripping with Screwball Award material.

For example:

If you wanted to convert me you’d have to demonstrate the following:
1. That the majority of Christians are intelligent on the topic of religion.
2. That the Bible offers intelligent explanations.
3. That the Christian concept of God is that of an intelligent being.

Here's a Gem...He's got an article called "Christian are stupid." :lol: In it, he states:

Saying that "Christians are delusional" is probably more accurate than saying "Christians are stupid", however the latter statement is more satisfying when you've got all that pent up frustration from debating with a Christian. They think that atheists are going to hell after we die, so we might as well poke fun of them in this life.

Say I told you I saw a man come back from the dead - you'd ask for evidence of it right? However say it was written in a book 2000 years old that claimed to be the Word of God, and all of a sudden 95% of the population would believe its true. Is it just stupidity? I'd like to say so though perhaps not in anyone's face since they'd probably be offended.

I did a search on Google for "Christians are stupid" and came up with a hilarious article titled "Christians are stupid".

And watch the hypocrit rear his head here:

It's things like this that make me angry. Rather than trying to rationalise their beliefs, the Christians resort to saying things like "I pity them". As an Ex-Christian I view such statements as a means of making them feel superior to others.

Christians are so stupid that they believe that anyone who doesn't believe in their mythology is being controlled by the devil or evil. It's such a childish belief but it is shared by so many. Never do they consider the possibility that the Bible is not actually true and that is the reason why we have rejected it. I've not read one post on that forum that considered that possibility.

The Ex-Christians have had their say about that Christian post on the Ex-Christian Forums. Perhaps when someone pities you for being intelligent, the best response to is to laugh back. I guess there's always a funny side to everything.

Here's his swift refutation of the concept of God:

Even though God is all-powerful, he is restricted to do things within his nature. But God is nothing more than a black box. If God's actions are bound by something, then pretty much everything that happens could be explained without resorting to the black box of God. And by Occam's razor there's no need to assume God.

And here's his fictional account (http://atheism.awardspace.com/articles/story.php) of God talking to an atheist that was so ridiculous and sappy that it almost made me vomit.

jpholding

October 4th 2006, 09:33 AM

During the life of Jesus, not a single person made note of his existence, even though he did very public things (resurrected dead people, healed the sick, overturned tables in the temple of Jeruselem, etc).

I answered this nonsense in the other thread, where it belongs.

And why is it so screwy to ask this question? If it is simple, a simple answer should suffice.... So if anyone else has an historically based response, I'm willing to listen.

When you are finished with the passive-aggressive manipulations, try reading my articles again. They answer all this crap you keep posting.

jpholding

October 4th 2006, 11:03 AM

Almost forgot this email today:

Reading your 'Critical Look' at Tom Harpurs 'Pagan Christ', I am not at all surprised that TH does not wish to correspond with you.

Your aggressive, insulting language, highlights your position as bigoted & intransigent. I guess he feels, as I would in his position, that he would be wasting his precious time talking with you!

Words such as 'Let his cowardice speak for itself.' indicate to me hurt & fear on your part. Perhaps he has created some doubts in the back of your mind that you find hard to handle?!

As a neutral on the subject, your (as I said earlier) aggressive & defensive stance tell your reader a lot!

The article also reads like a desperate statistician grasping at ways of presenting poor figures in a favourable light.

If you are not as bigoted as you appear, try reviewing the book looking for things that could be true or useful or interesting...please let me know how far you get with this.

OK, I found something useful. Harpur's book makes a good paperweight! :rofl:

I invited this dum dum here too.

OldManZangetsu

October 4th 2006, 11:06 AM

OK, I found something useful. Harpur's book makes a good paperweight! :rofl:

I invited this dum dum here too.

Let us know when he gets here :thumb: (mmm, fresh meat)

Darth Executor

October 4th 2006, 06:06 PM

Hi Taoist,

I read this sentence a few times trying to make sure I understood what you are saying. You can't understand why people are interested in the origins of the only person in history who apparently did an array of supernatural feats? That's odd.

:lmbo:

Darth Executor

October 4th 2006, 08:13 PM

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1671761&postcount=7

Sir-Think-A-Lot

October 5th 2006, 12:47 AM

And here's his fictional account (http://atheism.awardspace.com/articles/story.php) of God talking to an atheist that was so ridiculous and sappy that it almost made me vomit.

I love how athiests presume to know exactly how God 'should' be. Perhaps they's also like to tell Hideo Kojima how Solid Snake 'should' be?

Spheniscine

October 5th 2006, 01:46 AM

http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/reporter/index.html?ID=5043

DNA's simple and elegant structure — the “twisted ladder,” with sugar-phosphate chains making up the “rails” and oxygen- and nitrogen-containing chemical “rungs” tenuously uniting the two halves — seems to be the work of an accomplished sculptor.

Yet the graceful, sinuous profile of the DNA double helix is the result of random chemical reactions in a simmering, primordial stew.
Say what?! Care for some evidence?

“These molecules are the result of evolution,” said Egli, professor of Biochemistry. “Somehow they have been shaped and optimized for a particular purpose.”
Apparently he can't decide between evolution and ID.

jpholding

October 5th 2006, 12:14 PM

freethinker wins the Disco Boogie Award for this dodgeball. He cited a 3rd-4th century source listing cities that didn't list Nazareth as proof Nazareth didn't exist. I said:

Uh, before you said that Nazareth existed in 135 AD, so I dunno what the heck you think you're helping yourself with here.

His reply:

In the interest of brevity I shortly mentioned this as the earliest possible record of habitation without qualification. The settlers were probably fugitives of the latest revolt and did not stay. They probably did not name the place.

:lolo:

jpholding

October 5th 2006, 12:32 PM

September Screwballs are up --

http://www.tektoonics.com/parody/sep06scr.html

Top heavy on email for some reason.

October 5th 2006, 05:53 PM

Granted, it may not be quite as bad as some of the other absurdities featured already in this thread, but surely my old pal atheistthoughts deserves some level of recognition for this:

If you think about it, you could use a Pascal's Wager type argument against christianity, showing that Atheism has a 50% chance of being the "correct" choice, even assuming that Christianity is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. The only difference between this argument and Pascal's Wager is that, as far as I can see, there is nothing wrong with it (Which I hope will be rectified, since I have a strange feeling there's something wrong with this argument). For the sake of argument, I will asme it's a discussion between me and a Christian. I could replace Christian with any religious organization, but Christians have the majority, so they're the targets.

Let's assume that there are three and only three arguments that prove the Christian God's existence (there could be any number of arguments and my reasoning would not be affected). Let's use a Cosmological argument, an argument for the Christian God specificly (let's say prophecy), and an argument from personal experience, say you grew another arm after you prayed for it. Let's asume that I'm having a debate with a Christian, where I'm taking the possition that, yes, a god exists, but he sends atheists into heaven instead of Christians. Not only that, but he also tests our "faith" by giving these proofs of his existence. Now, when you look at the arguments for a Christian god, thew first is no trouble for me to explain, since my god solves the cosmological problems the same way the Christian god does. The second two can be explained by my god testing our "faith".

Now, consider this. All arguments for the Christian god work for this tricky god, but not all arguments against the Christian god work against this god. Like the problem of evil, since this god might not be omnibenevolent. Occam's Razor, surprisingly, supports my god over the Christian god. Many questions are far more clear cut with mine than with a Christian god. For example, the problem of where babies go when they die. The bible doesn't say, so there are several possibilities. But with the tricky god, babies go straight to heaven, since they are atheist.

This is why I'm always asking why God does stuff. Why did he want to create humans? Why did he create us the way we are? Questions like these, if left unanswered, leave open more posibilities, and give the Christian god no more evidence than the god who rewards atheists. Until Christians can answer these seemingly pointless and picky questions, Pascal's Wager can be used to show that being an atheist increases your chances of getting into heaven.

Take note that I don't believe in this god, but it shows how Christianity cannot be justified.

Source. (http://www.xanga.com/atheistthoughts/535170061/item.html) (emphasis added)

Carrier on LSD? You decide. :lolo:

As to the precise level of screwiness here found, I'll leave that to the experts.

P-Dunn

October 5th 2006, 07:05 PM

I love how athiests presume to know exactly how God 'should' be. Perhaps they's also like to tell Hideo Kojima how Solid Snake 'should' be?
Dude, Hideo Kojima is God.

Cynic Sage

October 5th 2006, 09:53 PM

I love how athiests presume to know exactly how God 'should' be. Perhaps they's also like to tell Hideo Kojima how Solid Snake 'should' be?

I believe when that happens it stops being "freethought" and becomes "Mary-Sue fanfiction".

Cynic Sage

October 5th 2006, 10:02 PM

GOD HATES THE AMISH!:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200610/NAT20061004a.html
(http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200610/NAT20061004a.html)
(CNSNews.com) - A Kansas-based group that says "God hates fags" plans to picket the funerals of the Amish girls killed by a disturbed man in Lancaster County, Pa.

The Westboro Baptist Church -- described as a hate group by the Anti-Defamation League -- has made a name for itself by picketing the funerals of U.S. troops killed in Iraq. The troops are dying as punishment for America's tolerance of homosexuality, the group says.

The Westboro group says the Amish school girls were "killed by a madman in punishment for Gov. Ed Rendell's blasphemous sins against Westboro Baptist Church.

"Gov. Ed Rendell -- speaking and acting in his official capacity to bind the State of Pennsylvania -- slandered and mocked and ridiculed and condemned Westboro Baptist Church on national Fox TV," the group says on its website.

"Rendell also revealed a conspiracy to employ the State's police powers to destroy WBC in order to silence WBC's Gospel message. Co-conspirators identified by Rendell included state officials, citizens, lawyers, legislators and media," the website says.

Westboro Baptist Church said it is "continuing to pray for even worse punishment upon Pennsylvania."

If their's one thing the Amish are known for, it's their extreme tolerance and approval of homosexuality.

jpholding

October 6th 2006, 10:02 AM

"freethinker" helps me believe that he's just a frustrated 15 year old:

The gospels were written between 70 AD and 1563 AD

:hrm:

JSDileo

October 6th 2006, 10:03 AM

"freethinker" helps me believe that he's just a frustrated 15 year old:

:hrm:

:lmbo:

lilpixieofterror

October 6th 2006, 11:09 AM

"freethinker" helps me believe that he's just a frustrated 15 year old:

:hrm:

Intresting... :ahem:

JSDileo

October 6th 2006, 12:07 PM

"freethinker" helps me believe that he's just a frustrated 15 year old:

:hrm:

Oh, also, JP, I take that fifteen year old comment to offense. :teeth: I'm a fifteen year old, remember. :poke: But yeah, this guy probably is a teenager...

jpholding

October 6th 2006, 01:01 PM

Oh, also, JP, I take that fifteen year old comment to offense. :teeth:

You're not a FRUSTRATED 15 year old. :poke:

Darth Executor

October 6th 2006, 02:35 PM

You're not a FRUSTRATED 15 year old. :poke:

Until you get to the topic of dating. :teeth:

OldManZangetsu

October 6th 2006, 03:44 PM

Until you get to the topic of dating. :teeth:

:lol:

jpholding

October 6th 2006, 04:09 PM

Reader nominates Carpe again, for:

Carpedm9587

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1672575&postcount=230

Coherent core? Gay, the collection of people who claim the title "Christian" can't even agree on a theological foundation. You expect them to agree on a moral one? Every subsect of Christianity has a theologically nuanced belief system and most of them think all of the others "aren't Christian." And they will argue vehemently that THEY are Christian and have THE Christian core tenets and the others don't. They will all site historical precedence, teaching of the bible, and so forth to defend their claim.

The idea of arriving at objective truth is beyond his comprehension.

JSDileo

October 6th 2006, 05:47 PM

Until you get to the topic of dating. :teeth:

You're not exactly doing very well with the ladies yourself, Mr. Executor. :wink:

JSDileo

October 6th 2006, 05:48 PM

You're not a FRUSTRATED 15 year old. :poke:

Actually, bashing your head against the wall trying to get a fundamentalist atheist to agree with the truth can be pretty frustrating. :argh:

One Bad Pig

October 7th 2006, 01:54 AM

We encountered this yahoo on Paltalk:

ICB4_GGI: I'M A RABBI, WHO DEBATES EVOLUTIONISTS... & GENTILE PASTORS ON UNDERSTANDING OUR HEBREW RELIGION, NOW CALLED 'Christianity...
ICB4_GGI: the holy scriptures say ~ 10 are 'lost', or unknown to themselves as a tribe...
ICB4_GGI: HE named Himself ^YESHUA^... the pope re:named him jesus... *Whose Report Will You Believe!?!*
ICB4_GGI: Yeshua means 'Salvation'... jesus means 'horse'... but, i'm not trying to make issues 4U
ICB4_GGI: christ means 'highest-spiritual-office'.... Messiah means 'God in the Flesh....
ICB4_GGI: Holy Scriptures were Only`0riginally written in HEBREW... greek is 0nly 1`of~many translations of our Language...
ICB4_GGI: Shaul (paul) was a tellite maker, you believe he was a tent`maker... lol
ICB4_GGI: New Testament WAS only written in hebrew, not a foriegn pagan-language... but, you'll believe 'whatever-your-pastors-senimary' taught you....
ICB4_GGI: insteed of Consulting THe People whose religion IT`Is...
ICB4_GGI: Matthew- Mark-Luke & John, fisherman, wrote in a forreign pagan language????? that's crazy...
ICB4_GGI: Complete Jewish Bible `ONLY...
ICB4_GGI: it's all 77`books
ICB4_GGI: www.lionlamb.net
ICB4_GGI: look, even in the scripture yuz`all have, there are many 'books' that are referred`to as scripture, by the writers themselves... yet, they're not in 'the-gentile' veriosns...
ICB4_GGI: the book of jasher, for instance
ICB4_GGI: the book of enoch... ect
:lolo: Note that he gave us a website as well. He wouldn't tell us what 77 books he was talking about, or link to an on-line bible he approved.

Cynic Sage

October 7th 2006, 03:31 PM

http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/reporter/index.html?ID=5043

Say what?! Care for some evidence?

Apparently he can't decide between evolution and ID.

I think he was just using an expression when he said "designed", I don't think it necessarilly deserves a screwball.

Darth Executor

October 7th 2006, 03:37 PM

http://www.news.com.au/sundaymail/story/0,,20542442-5007200,00.html

For the school (or whoever came up with the stupid assignment). What the heck does living in a gay colony on the moon have to do with physical education anyway? And since when do they do "diversity training" in phys ed? Back in my day the teacher made us run laps around the field and if we complained about being tired, or needing water, or having a heart attack, he'd stomp our face into the ground. Darn PC crowd. :thumbd:

Oh, and a honorable mention for Minnie who thinks that complaining about it is "whacky".

Cynic Sage

October 7th 2006, 03:50 PM

Jnthn

October 7th 2006, 04:02 PM

Cynic Sage

October 7th 2006, 04:06 PM

That has bizarre resonances with parts of the graphic novel "Give Me Liberty" by Frank Miller...

J

The Aryan Thrust?

Spheniscine

October 7th 2006, 10:24 PM

I think he was just using an expression when he said "designed", I don't think it necessarilly deserves a screwball.
He did not merely say 'designed' (though I think that's a bad metaphor, I wouldn't nominate that for a screwball; there'd be too many), he said it was 'shaped and optimized for a particular purpose', and then somehow uses that as evidence for the evolution of DNA. Contrast "This spark plug is the result of evolution; somehow it has been shaped and optimized for a particular purpose," and the non-sequitur is apparent.

Kelp

October 7th 2006, 10:46 PM

GAYS IN SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE!
No, they didn't ley Lance Bass go up with the Russians.

Jnthn

October 8th 2006, 04:59 AM

The Aryan Thrust?
The very same, and their (ahem) interestingly shaped space station/gun platform (memory hazy)

J

P-Dunn

October 8th 2006, 07:03 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxA8_NIxQZc

You guessed it: Marshall Brain has another YouTube video. This time, it's a video version of his "Proving that Christians are delusional" segments on GII and WWGHA. I especially love the intro:

If you are a Christian, you are about to begin a fascinating journey. In the next ten minutes it will become clear to you that your belief in God is delusional.

The problem is that your delusion, combined with the delusion of billions of other religious people like you, is hurting us as a species. It does not matter if you are a fundamentalist Christian, a moderate Christian or a casual Christian. Your delusion is hurting us.

The goal of this short video is to help you look in a mirror and understand the delusion of Christianity. Once you can see what is going on, the hope is that you will be able to start healing your delusion. With each healing, we make our world a better place.
See, he complains that Christians are ego stroking in one of his GII "proofs." I find this to be nothing but.

1) He thinks this video will deconvert somebody
2) He thinks we're "delusional" people who are "hurting us as a species"

I really wish he'd just give up eventually. This seems to be the case of someone who's incompetent and doesn't know it.

EDIT: Oh, here are some other lovely quotes from the video.

Why do you need to heal your delusion? Because all these religious bubbles harm us as a species. A planet full of delusionary people is not healthy. Just look at how Christianity skews your thinking.

Problem #1

The delusion of Christianity makes you outrageosly supersitious. Chances are that you believe in "the power of prayer", even though every valid scientific study shows that prayer has absolutely no effect. The belief in prayer is complete supersition.
Thanks for begging the question. He's wrong, too: See here. (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prayer.html)

Problem #2

The delusion of Christianity radically devalues human life. We routinely send soldiers into battle with the message that it's okay to die, because once you die you get to go to heaven. In reality, Heaven is a fairy tale fantasy.
Right, as if atheism somehow gives any value to life? :lol:

Problem #3

The delusion of Christianity replaces rational thought with dangerous mythology. For example, 60% of adults in America believe that Jesus will return and destroy the planet. Myths like this grossly skew your thinking about the future of our species. They also slow scientific progress.
I don't know any Christian who thinks Jesus is going to "return and destroy the planet." I wonder what Brain would think of preterism...Again, thanks for begging the question.

Thanks for begging the question.

Kelp

October 8th 2006, 07:13 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxA8_NIxQZc

You guessed it: Marshall Brain has another YouTube video. This time, it's a video version of his "Proving that Christians are delusional" segments on GII and WWGHA. I especially love the intro:

See, he complains that Christians are ego stroking in one of his GII "proofs." I find this to be nothing but.

1) He thinks this video will deconvert somebody
2) He thinks we're "delusional" people who are "hurting us as a species"

I really wish he'd just give up eventually. This seems to be the case of someone who's incompetent and doesn't know it.The only thing that I'm afraid of is that someone will just take Brain's word for it and apostasize without even looking at the Christian side of things. P-Dunn, you do go on youtibe and put down comments asking people to read the material that you and JP are writing on this, right?

P-Dunn

October 8th 2006, 07:19 PM

The only thing that I'm afraid of is that someone will just take Brain's word for it and apostasize without even looking at the Christian side of things. P-Dunn, you do go on youtibe and put down comments asking people to read the material that you and JP are writing on this, right?
That's my fear as well.

I do, yes. Most of the atheists there aren't the most intelligent people, and in fact, one person was so irritated by my comments that he's creating a website (www.jesusisimaginary.com) over them. But it seems Marshall is cowardly, because whenever I post a link to my blog which aims to refute Marshall Brain on one of the videos, Marshall deletes the post. He's even disabled posting links at all on his videos now.

Awesome.

Kelp

October 8th 2006, 07:44 PM

That's my fear as well.

I do, yes. Most of the atheists there aren't the most intelligent people, and in fact, one person was so irritated by my comments that he's creating a website (www.jesusisimaginary.com) over them. But it seems Marshall is cowardly, because whenever I post a link to my blog which aims to refute Marshall Brain on one of the videos, Marshall deletes the post. He's even disabled posting links at all on his videos now.

Awesome.
That's sad. We should pray for all of them.

jpholding

October 9th 2006, 10:42 AM

Email...this guy sent me a PDF file and said:

All I am talking about is the ideas of "innovation".
My theory is that Francesco Petrarch wrote the
New Testament. This is a -none- threating item;
unless you are afraid to hear information like this.

I have presented it in a VERY logical and reasonable
fashion using common sense. I am NOT a "religious" person.
Have never gone to any church. Have no opinion one way or other.

I am just showing you here I have found a "secret code"
in the New Testament, very similar to the Da Vinci Code.
It is just a code mystery I have solved that I am showing.
Look up in Wikipedia or Google the "Biblical Names" meanings.
This is The Petrarch Code main "keys". Just put in the meanings.

Besides I do NOT know you. You are just one in hundreds
I am communicatiing with on The Petrarch Code "keys".
Look up in Wikipedia "Petrarch". He is the Father of the
Renaissance". Renaissance means "rebirth" or "born again".
Petrarch used the term "Jesus" to mean "innovation" (new ideas).
Being "born again" in -Jesus- is just having a renewal or rebirth
of new ideas; which we sometimes call now "innovation".....

FYI: I have solved the mystery of the "Jesus Genealogies"!
Interested........ (I'll send you -answer- in simple text).

:lolo:

jpholding

October 9th 2006, 01:50 PM

lilpixieofterror

October 9th 2006, 02:05 PM

Where do you guys dig up these people? I did think this was funny:

If you are a Christian that doesn’t accept the cultural misogyny of the Bible and Christianity (I’m talking to you, Christian Women of the world), then post a notice at your church stating your intention to refuse to attend church (and thus taking away offeratory money) until your church publicly apologizes for it’s misogynistic history.

Yep, that's why all but 2 of the 10 sunday school teachers at my church are women, that's also why the base chapel single's group is letting me design and teach a Bible Study. Gosh, where do these people come from? :lol:

Crystal

The Curtmudgeon

October 9th 2006, 02:19 PM

http://doubtingthefish.wordpress.com/2006/08/28/scriptural-disobedience/

Fundy atheist nominated by a reader...

If you are a Christian that doesn’t accept the cultural misogyny of the Bible and Christianity (I’m talking to you, Christian Women of the world), then post a notice at your church stating your intention to refuse to attend church (and thus taking away offeratory money) until your church publicly apologizes for it’s misogynistic history.

If you are a Christian who abhors the biblical stance on homosexuality, then take a stand: invite as many of your Gay friends as possible to speak at your church about their experiences: and be willing to shout down the first bigot in the pews!

And if you are a Christian who doesn’t accept the Bible as literal, then please, be willing to stand up and argue from the pews, so that church becomes a dialogue, not a sermon.

Does this sound radical? I hope so!! That’s the point! If you are truly a ‘liberal Christian’ then start practicing what you preach, all pun’s intended. Because no matter what you accept personally, unless you are willing to stand up and shout it in a crowd, if you are ashamed of it, then you are a hypocrite. And remember, a hypocrite is basically a liar, and your God hates liars (he says so in the Babble).

:lolo:

Actually, as scary as this might seem, I can even agree with this guy. I mean, if there are any liberal "Christians" who agree with these points, then it would be a positive help for them to stand up and admit it so that they can receive true Christian guidance. It's the liberal "Christians" who just mouth the correct words and hide their unChristian beliefs behind subterfuge who are beyond our help.

Having said that, of course I don't accept this idiot's misleading terminology, such as "cultural misogyny of the Bible and Christianity". That's just his own proof of his glaring cluelessness. But his basic point is, frighteningly, sound.

The (so, do I get my own nomination for that?) Curtmudgeon

jpholding

October 9th 2006, 03:48 PM

Mr Nutsy of the prior email keeps sending me stuff. I told him we were laughing at it. Here's more.

Since you could NOT come up with -anything- SPECIFIC,
just like the other several hundred "scholars" that I am in
communication with, THEN you have confirmed my theories.

Only IF you could have come up with something SPECIFIC
would there be any debate. Just all you had was very vague
comments and only general comments, THEN you could
not -disprove- what I am saying. You needed to -use- logic,
reasoning, and the most important item of common sense.

By the way, I have communicated with over 10,000 clergy
on this subject of "the Holy Spirit". I have come to the final
conclusion that it is nothing other than just plain -everyday-
common sense (a.k.a."horse sense"). Good sound judgement.

I am thinking you are lazy and will not fill in the Biblical
word meanings to see the real message, so I have done it:

Example placing "Gospel of Luke" to year 1361:
Luke 3:1 "In the FIFTEENTH year of the reign of Tiberius the Emperor, Pontius Pilate being lieutenant of Jewry, and Herod being Tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip Tetrarch in Iturea, and in the region of Traconitis, and Lysanias the Tetrarch of Abyline:
Luke 3:2 When Anna and Cayphas were the high priests: Word of God was published to John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness."

Using Petrarch Codes and the Biblical meanings behind the names:
Luke 3:1 "In the FIFTEENTH year of the reign of good vision the
ruler of tradition, of a formal contract of belonging to the sea,
being lieutenant of the praise of self-subsisting traditional customs
and the hero of the time being Petrarch of revolution, and his brother
Philip, Petrarch in guarded and in the region of stony, and that
drives away sorrow, the Petrarch of the father that is in mourning."
Luke 3:2 "When gracious and he that seeks with diligence were
the high priests: The word of a moral lifestyle and good honest
living was published and attributed unto Giovanni (John), the son
of the memory of the normal practiced traditions in deep thought."
Tiberias, good vision
Emperor = I say is "ruler of tradition" or of the local customs.
Pontius, belonging to the sea
Pilate, armed with a dart (written or formal contract/agreement)
Jewry, Judaea, Judah, the praise of Jehovah ("self-subsisting")
Herod = I say is "hero of the day" (hero + d) or "hero of the time"
Tetrarch = Petrarch
Galilee, revolution
Iturea, guarded
Traconitis, stony
Lysanias, that drives away sorrow
Abyline, Abilene, the father of mourning
Anna, gracious
Cayphas, Caiphas, he that seeks with diligence
God = I say is a derivative from Old English of "god", off "good".
God = I say "good" honest moral lifestyle or "good" moral living.
John = Giovanni
Zacharias, memory of the Lord (of the normal practiced traditions)
In wilderness or mountains or desert = deep thought/contemplation.
In the Fourteenth Century it was "good vision" and the traditional
customs to have prearranged marriages ("self-subsisting") for the
sake of combining royalty, land acquisitions, and political power.
This was customary tradition then for Philip I, "Duke of Burgundy".
Search in Wikipedia or Google: "Philip I, Duke of Burgundy".
The most important feature is death age of Philip I, being "15".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_I%2C_Duke_of_Burgundy

If you can -SPECIFICALLY- with logic, reasoning, and plain
"common sense" explain where any of my DATING methods
are wrong --> I will assume then they are correct and on track.
For example, explain away the above death deaths of "1361"
for BOTH Petrarch's son (John) and that of Philip I; if you can.
Also explain your debate then for the "temple" of -46- yrears.
This then -DATES- the Gospels to the -exact- year of "1362".
Also explain your theory of the word "Tetrarch" for "Petrarch".

Apparently I stumped you, since I didn't hear back from you
on these very simple -DATING- methods that I am using....
I have decoded "Acts of the Apostles" -> would you want any
chapters? I stumped you on the Straight Street = Appian Way.
http://bible.cc/acts/9-11.htm (ref: "Parallel Verses")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taras_%28town%29 ("Tarsus")

:lolo:

lilpixieofterror

October 9th 2006, 06:53 PM

Mr Nutsy of the prior email keeps sending me stuff. I told him we were laughing at it. Here's more.:lolo:

Wikipedia counts as 'several hundred scholars that I am in
communication with' hummm :ahem:. Gosh, where do you find these screwballs?

OldManZangetsu

October 9th 2006, 07:36 PM

Wikipedia counts as 'several hundred scholars that I am in
communication with' hummm :ahem:. Gosh, where do you find these screwballs?

Be sure and thank those who take your tax money and put it to "good use" in the public education system :wink:

jpholding

October 9th 2006, 08:39 PM

Wikipedia counts as 'several hundred scholars that I am in
communication with' hummm :ahem:. Gosh, where do you find these screwballs?

They write to me for no reason I can discern. :lolo:

lilpixieofterror

October 10th 2006, 07:23 AM

Be sure and thank those who take your tax money and put it to "good use" in the public education system :wink:

Hey! I went to public school, :glare: But unlike much of these people, I actualy paied attention and read the materal. I do know where you are comming from though, it is quite sad when many high school grads can't tell you what the 1st amendment says. :sigh:

They write to me for no reason I can discern.

I'm sorry. :blush:

Crystal

MightDog234

October 10th 2006, 11:31 AM

http://doubtingthefish.wordpress.com/2006/08/28/scriptural-disobedience/

Fundy atheist nominated by a reader...

:lolo:

What is that, burning bras for Christ or something? :lol:

Teallaura

October 10th 2006, 12:00 PM

Actually, as scary as this might seem, I can even agree with this guy. I mean, if there are any liberal "Christians" who agree with these points, then it would be a positive help for them to stand up and admit it so that they can receive true Christian guidance. It's the liberal "Christians" who just mouth the correct words and hide their unChristian beliefs behind subterfuge who are beyond our help.

Having said that, of course I don't accept this idiot's misleading terminology, such as "cultural misogyny of the Bible and Christianity". That's just his own proof of his glaring cluelessness. But his basic point is, frighteningly, sound.

The (so, do I get my own nomination for that?) CurtmudgeonNaw, the point's valid - his application needs some work. An engaged brain cell or two would be nice.

Y'all should attend a HIV prevention meeting - you'll find plenty of liberal (and clueless) Christians there.

Cynic Sage

October 10th 2006, 02:55 PM

That's sad. We should pray for all of them.

I say JP should get somebody who knows his video-software to make youtube vids of JP's work parody-refuting Brian's.

jpholding

October 10th 2006, 03:20 PM

I say JP should get somebody who knows his video-software to make youtube vids of JP's work parody-refuting Brian's.

That's a possibility soon.

Dee Dee Warren

October 10th 2006, 03:27 PM

What is that, burning bras for Christ or something? :lol:

Another Yeshua Marine sockpuppet

:woohoo:

ApologiaPhoenix

October 10th 2006, 05:40 PM

Sevivon1913 started a thread on astrology located here.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85194

First post he has this gem:

Given the unique position of Jewish monotheism, as having no history of associating deity with 'the heavens' (like platonism, Christianity's forerunner), has Judaism ever associated particular stars and constellations - or the zodiac - with angels/other? Is this in the Kabbalah?

My response of:

Geez Sev. If you want to start another thread on this, that's fine, but I'm just so anxious to know which Platonic dialogues you've read.

Rayado's right. He goes out of the frying pan and into the fire with this next post.

THAT was an error...I meant another word, which eludes me right now. However, Platonism was the forerunner of many Christian doctrines AND the cults of Attis, Bacchus and mithraism - which did associate stars with deity - were forerunners of Christianity (so there!)

Naturally, I ask for his source:

Source: "The Jesus Mysteries: Was the original Jesus a Pagan god?" by Peter Gandy and Timothy Frekes (which is full of footnotes with primary sources).

Philo: A *Hellenized* Jew who was also forerunner of Christian doctrine.

Nuff said.

Teallaura

October 11th 2006, 03:59 AM

jpholding][/i]

So is Clint Eastwood in the Dirty Harry movies. :doh:

Those Zoroastrian texts all date well past the Christian era. Don't even try it.

Jp,
Just as there are virtually no original pre Christian era scriptures, so too, there are virtually no Zoroastrian ones. However, there can be no doubt that the "Good Ahura Mazda vs bad Ahriman Dragon" story was already well known because Persian wall reliefs at Persipolis, prior to the conquest of Alexander the Great clearly depict this story.

Also, Satan does not become the opponent of God in Jewish theology until the Babylonian captivity and exposure to Zoroastrian dualism. The Enochian literature was a direct result of this trend towards dualism, but then Judaism reappraised these ideas and largely dispensed with them. No so Christianity.

It should be understood that John of Patmos' plagiarism of Zoroastrian mythology does not negate the authenticity of Jesus. Revelation is obviously not inspired for the book is very clear in its stating that those events were supposed to take place "very soon".

Jesus' mission was to save the Pagan world, and to do this he disdained his prophesized role as the Jewish Messiah. This was the real reason Satan came to Jesus, to fullfill the OT prophesies which Jesus refused to do.

His birth was ochestrated at the moment of a heavenly conjunction to woo the pagans intended to flock to the new religion, certainly not the Jews who considered such things a pagan abominaton.

The similarity of his birth to that of Alexander the Great was also no coincidence.

All of these pagan abominations were necessary if Jesus was to save the pagan classical world. This is why John of Patmos imitated Zoroastrian mythology. It was all far more palatable to the pagan target audience. But the Jews could not stomach any of this abomination and rejected it.

But what was more important? Accepting Satan's offer to make Jesus the Jewish master of a world pagans would not accept and which would result in millions upon millions of deaths, or betraying the relatively small Jewish population, but in doing so insured virtually the entire "pagan", population of the former Roman empire and surrounding areas would flock to Christianity because it was filled with pagan ideas familiar and acceptable to the pagan world.

The final consensus is that Jesus did the right thing in rejecting his role as the Jewish Messiah and courting the pagans instead with a mythos filled with pagan beliefs, lifted verbatim from hellenistic and persian mythology, He essentially saved the otherwise doomed mass of pagan humanity that populated the classical world. Nor could God fault the Jews for rejecting Jesus as their Messiah, for he clearly chose to the the "Pagan Messiah" instead, for we gentiles. So everybody wins, except the authentic Satan, who would have dealy loved to be loosed upon the world as Jesus command to destroy the pagan world as Jesus should have permitted if Jesus chose in fact, the true Jewish Messiah of Biblical prophecy.

:twitch: That's so wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to begin....

:gack:

drachronicler

October 11th 2006, 07:41 AM

:twitch: That's so wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to begin....

:gack:

Sometimes "the truth" will seem "wrong" to those who have never heard it before. Or were you referring to JP being the "screwball" for claiming that the dragon binding and incarceration account in Revelation could possibly predate the far more ancient account of the identical episode in Zoroastrian mythology. Like they used to say in Dragnet, "Only the names were changed to protect the Inno -er- plagiarist."

Teallaura

October 11th 2006, 11:37 AM

Sometimes "the truth" will seem "wrong" to those who have never heard it before. Or were you referring to JP being the "screwball" for claiming that the dragon binding and incarceration account in Revelation could possibly predate the far more ancient account of the identical episode in Zoroastrian mythology. Like they used to say in Dragnet, "Only the names were changed to protect the Inno -er- plagiarist."And sometimes a crackpot really is a crackpot, Freud. Nope, you clearly deserved your nomination - hope you win! :smile:

:gack:

The Curtmudgeon

October 11th 2006, 11:39 AM

Mr Nutsy of the prior email keeps sending me stuff. I told him we were laughing at it. Here's more.

....
Example placing "Gospel of Luke" to year 1361:
Luke 3:1 "In the FIFTEENTH year of the reign of Tiberius the Emperor, ...

Using Petrarch Codes and the Biblical meanings behind the names:
Luke 3:1 "In the FIFTEENTH year of the reign of good vision the
ruler of tradition, of a formal contract of belonging to the sea,
being lieutenant of the praise of self-subsisting traditional customs
and the hero of the time being Petrarch of revolution, and his brother
Philip, Petrarch in guarded and in the region of stony, and that
drives away sorrow, the Petrarch of the father that is in mourning."
...

If you can -SPECIFICALLY- with logic, reasoning, and plain
"common sense" explain where any of my DATING methods
are wrong ....

:lolo:

JP, you're going to have to invent a whole new category just for this guy -- he's gone waaaaay beyond Platinum Screwball level. Anyone for whom "15th year of Tiberius" = 1361 is logical, reasoned or common sense just is not a member of our common planet, nor (I suspect) a rational member of our species. He desperately needs a "PLEASE start taking your meds!!!" award.

The (and he wonders why none of the scholars ever get back to him....) Curtmudgeon

lilpixieofterror

October 11th 2006, 12:32 PM

Sometimes "the truth" will seem "wrong" to those who have never heard it before. Or were you referring to JP being the "screwball" for claiming that the dragon binding and incarceration account in Revelation could possibly predate the far more ancient account of the identical episode in Zoroastrian mythology. Like they used to say in Dragnet, "Only the names were changed to protect the Inno -er- plagiarist."

Do the doctors know you are out of your straight jacket? Might want to go back to that padded cell and get that Throzine drip and shock therapy started.

Crystal

anewlife

October 11th 2006, 03:36 PM

Mr. Nutsy quote:
....
Example placing "Gospel of Luke" to year 1361:
Luke 3:1 "In the FIFTEENTH year of the reign of Tiberius the Emperor, ...

Using Petrarch Codes and the Biblical meanings behind the names:
Luke 3:1 "In the FIFTEENTH year of the reign of good vision the
ruler of tradition, of a formal contract of belonging to the sea,
being lieutenant of the praise of self-subsisting traditional customs
and the hero of the time being Petrarch of revolution, and his brother
Philip, Petrarch in guarded and in the region of stony, and that
drives away sorrow, the Petrarch of the father that is in mourning."
...

If you can -SPECIFICALLY- with logic, reasoning, and plain
"common sense" explain where any of my DATING methods
are wrong ....

I am waiting for Mr. Nutsy to specifically--with logic, reasoning, and plain common sense to explain where he is correct in his DATING methods. I wonder if he uses this same matrix to predict when his sanity will return? Hmmm I hope this isn't how he performs RC dating methodology... LOL

Alex, I will take half-baked, purblind prognostications for $1000

The answer is... Audio daily double

Cynic Sage

October 12th 2006, 04:37 AM

Cmui:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1679581&postcount=10

I want a serious reply from the theists on this one.

HOW DID THE WORD OF GOD say that the Earth is FLAT.

“Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;” Matthew 4:8

" Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him:" Revelation 1:7

" The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth: " Daniel 4:11

Although the fact that the Earth is the centre of the universe is not specifically mentioned in the Bible, the Catholic church BURNED repeat BURNED GIORDANO BRUNO alive for his views on the geocentric teachings of the church. If Galileo had not recanted he would also probably have been burnt alive!!

spl_cadet

October 12th 2006, 01:33 PM

I know it's a bit late, but can I nominate this thread Darth Vader vs Jesus (http://forum.spacebattles.com/showthread.php?t=107349)? There's too many quotes for me to choose from.

The Plain Jane

October 12th 2006, 09:00 PM

How about RanRan who claims that everyone is forgiven AND that the church fathers believed it too!

Yes, even those suffering in Hell are forgiven!

JSDileo

October 14th 2006, 07:32 PM

I nominate rickyroma for this post:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85239

"With the childish egocentric sting of "your life isn't perfect" changed to "the world isn't perfect" then yes I would consider the briefest and mildist discomfort of the smallest insect an utterly devastating argument against the existence of a loving creator deity."

My neighbor had an itch on his butt this morning. Therefore God either doesn't exist or is a hateful sadist. :bawl:

JSDileo

October 14th 2006, 10:37 PM

Whoah.

Hey JP, I know that this doesn't have anything to do with this month's screwballs, but I just saw "The Exodus Decoded" on the History Channel. Yeah, I know that the History Channel's material is normally abysmal, but this was incredible. It had some incredibly strong evidence for the Biblical story of the Exodus. They even supposedly found a monument written in Egyptian hieroglyphics that has the story of the Exodus from the viewpoint of Pharoah, along with a lot of other amazing material. Anyway, I just wanted to tell you that because I thought it might interest you. Maybe you could write an article on Tektonics detailing the stuff discovered in the documentary or something?

JSDileo

Darth Executor

October 14th 2006, 11:59 PM

I'd like to nominate myself:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=1684079

Well, not really, I'm just plugging my questionnaire since I need people to fill it out and most Tekton sycophants usually stay ot of PolSci. :teeth:

jpholding

October 15th 2006, 08:15 AM

Anyway, I just wanted to tell you that because I thought it might interest you. Maybe you could write an article on Tektonics detailing the stuff discovered in the documentary or something?

I'd do so if I felt more comfortable with my level of knowledge about archaeology and the Exodus period.

********

Award to Jon "Goat" Curry for his comments on Triablogue:

http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/10/more-curried-chicken.html#comments

In which he plagiarizes Bart Ehrman and uses a host of the same old canards.

Also an award to the fundy atheist who sent me this postcard from Gainesville:

You are an idiot! Ha ha ha ha! You are an idiot! Ha ha ha ha! pwd by B. Holtz -- how's that Trilemma Debate going? PS: When you die worms eat you

It smells like Daniel Morgan to me. I dunno for sure -- they didn't sign it. :hehe:

Spheniscine

October 15th 2006, 11:21 AM

The Plain Jane

October 15th 2006, 05:05 PM

OldManZangetsu

October 15th 2006, 06:29 PM

The History Channel? You must have been on something else. :tongue:

:lol:

Cynic Sage

October 16th 2006, 03:38 AM

:lol:

Tonight on the History Channel:

Nazis: a History.

Nazis: The Third Reich.

The Secret History of the Bible.

The Secret History of Nazis.

NAZIS NAZIS NAZIS.

Nazis Gone Wild.

Nazis in the Bible.

Nazis Gone Wild 2: Fun with the Feuhrer.

Spheniscine

October 16th 2006, 06:34 AM

Now where was that "Godwin's Law" card again?

jpholding

October 16th 2006, 12:04 PM

Reader (NOT a screwball) sends me this note describing a screwball:

Dear Mr. Holding:

I thought you might like to use the nebulous text below as an item in the October "Screwballs of the Month" issue. If not, it'll make for good entertainment anyway. I was corresponding with a "Christian" who denied all the miracles in the Bible and tried comparing Christianity to Hinduism.

First, our man bashes "rapturism" (I'm guessing that's referring to dispensationalism). I know that you're a preterist, so this won't interest you as much, but I find it rather humorous as to what he says next:

Bring in a rapturist and basically you have a person who is brainwashed and believes in jesus walking over a lake and snakes talking, Moses parting an ocean....CRAP like that.

He went on to explain his point:

True Christianity is much like Hinduism, in their myth figures stories. But those who wait patiently with faith, not convinced about these will be able to hear the Truth when the seals are opened and the mysteries are revealled.

At this point, it was clear I was talking with a screwball, so I figured it would be fun to continue correspondence. I told him that Christianity was nothing like Hinduism because, first of all, Christianity is monotheistic and Hinduism is polytheistic. Also, I told him that Vrshnu did not die on a cross like some people like to claim. He responded by saying:

christianity is similar to Hinduism, in that they make a mythology out of mans records of other men.
The gods of hinduism, started out being ordinary men and the literal use of words caused many to sound like they had supernatural powers. When using symbolism to portray the characteristics of men then suddenly ordinary men can become beasts and instead of walking into the horizon, the walk upon clouds, or in the specific case of Hanuman a former hindu hero who 'jumped from one island to the next', became pictures of a man who could fly in the air over miles of air space, called 'jumping from one island to the next' to deliver a message.

Taking words out of context and using then literally as opposed to understanding how to apply them to the Text with common sense, is rampant in the minds of men who want to control others with concepts of MYTH GODS.

And no Moses did not part and ocean and thousands of people could watch as waves 50 feet high danced over by the sides of a desert.

DON'T BE FOOLISH, OR FOOLED BY THE MYTH STORIES..................SORRY.

:lolo:

OldManZangetsu

October 16th 2006, 02:40 PM

Nazis Gone Wild 2: Fun with the Feuhrer.

:no: So wrong on so many levels... but still hilarious

Teallaura

October 16th 2006, 04:10 PM

jpholding

October 16th 2006, 05:35 PM

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1686243&postcount=1

I love the list - none of the ones I recognized off hand were virgins! :lmbo: Half the Greek ones were fathered by Zeus! Guess the old guy didn't get around as much as Hera thought! :rofl:

Reason #327,868 why I'm taking a sabbatical.... :hehe:

Added: More gold for "Humility Man" Doubting John, who says on his blog, "Duh! Bunk and Christianity":

I'm just tired of pompous [edited] on the internet who go around claiming they are superior to me in terms of intelligence and faith. Such arrogance makes me vomit. I'm an easy target, because they simply didn't know me. People like [Catholic apologist] Dave [Armstromg] would've looked up to me back then, but he has the audacity to go around claiming he is superior to me in both intelligence and with a deeper faith. I seriously doubt that he is, given what I've read from him. I was a much better apologist than he is now. And there probably are people smarter and with a deeper faith than I had too, so that doesn't bother me. It the self-assured arrogant idiots out there, like Dave, who prefer to proclaim off of my personal experience that they are better than I. The fact is they do not know this! I'll say it again. They do not know this!

I tink poor woogums need an icepack for hims ego. :hehe:

Darth Executor

October 16th 2006, 06:14 PM

Hey JP,

I was reading your debate with John Powell and... Till CALLED YOUR HOUSE? Did you get a restraining order against him? I think that would put the final nail (quite literally given how decrepid he is :teeth:) in his coffin. :hehe:

jpholding

October 16th 2006, 06:27 PM

I was reading your debate with John Powell and... Till CALLED YOUR HOUSE? Did you get a restraining order against him?

Didn't have to. After the earful Mrs. H gave him, he's too scared to call again. Better than any restraining order. :hehe:

I think that would put the final nail (quite literally given how decrepid he is :teeth:) in his coffin. :hehe:

Funny guy. I buried him first, his coffin comes later....

October 16th 2006, 07:17 PM

Didn't have to. After the earful Mrs. H gave him, he's too scared to call again. Better than any restraining order. :hehe:

:lmbo:

Oh dear... I would love to have heard that exchange. I'm surprised Till didn't go into cardiac arrest on the spot.

Darth Executor

October 16th 2006, 07:29 PM

I'm surprised Till didn't go into cardiac arrest on the spot.

:rofl:

OldManZangetsu

October 16th 2006, 09:29 PM

:lmbo:

Oh dear... I would love to have heard that exchange. I'm surprised Till didn't go into cardiac arrest on the spot.

Same here.

aikidoka

October 16th 2006, 11:45 PM

I got a couple nominations tonight from myspace.

Let's start with brad from detroit (http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=36771638)

A bit of the exchange:

brad from detroit said:

like i said to fran, you know as much as i do about "truth".

I said:

Oh really? You can read my mind? You know everything I've studied? Or are you saying truth cannot be known? Because if you are, then your claiming at least that statement is true and to have knowledge of it. In other words, you cannot say truth is unknowable without also claiming to know a truth.

brad from detroit said:

i don't know or care really what you've studied. because someone else may have studied the exact opposite. i'm saying (and please, don't think too hard on this) in this particular subject (religion) no one knows who is right. that's why i quoted "truth".

I said:

How can you say that without even looking at arguments or data? You're only talking out of thin air.

brad from detroit said:

you realize that you sound like an atheist, right?

I said:

No, I'm a rational Christian, one who has studied enough of the claims against Christianity to know they are not sound and that there is sufficient evidence in favor of the faith.

All your doing is making an unsupported assertion about knowledge and not even engaging the arguments or data for anything.

----

and for good measure, apparently a Christian - archangel (http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=33553096)

For replying to my last comment above to brad, with this:

you sound like a freaken scientist or something... which is completely the opposite of christianity.

---

It got worse, apparently some Christians think arguing is a horrible thing to do. :eek:

lilpixieofterror

October 17th 2006, 06:41 AM

I tink poor woogums need an icepack for hims ego. :hehe:

Think he's going to need an ice pack for this?

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=57180&page=6&pp=16

It seems like everyone is laughing at him this month...

Crystal

jpholding

October 17th 2006, 06:47 AM

Basic email....

Your bigotry is beyond belief! Your venom is vicious. Yet you have
the audacity to call yourself a "Christian"?

Jnthn

October 17th 2006, 08:37 AM

Basic email....
I think you should put on your site the right to publish all contact details, including email addresses.

It would be tragic if, for example, you published their email addresses and, for example, the addresses were harvested by some unscrupulous mass-mailer...:wink:

J

Teallaura

October 17th 2006, 09:02 AM

Think he's going to need an ice pack for this?

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=57180&page=6&pp=16

It seems like everyone is laughing at him this month...

Crystal
How's that different from every other month? :shrug:

lilpixieofterror

October 17th 2006, 02:06 PM

How's that different from every other month? :shrug:

It isn't, but I'm trying to help him win the screwball of the year award. It's quite an honor for a man such as himself. :teeth:

Speaking of screwballs, I think LGM needs one. I first asked him (after he said the Bible allowed rape):

Oooo, do you want to give what verses you are refering to?? I dare you to, I'd enjoy watching you avoid me again...

He responded with:

Sorry...You see the bible states that women should remain silent about such matters, and submit to the will of their husbands. If an ignorant women such as yourself has a question about the scriptures or theology, she should ask her husband at home in private.

If your husband wants to discuss something with me, I would be happy to do so. Now go do the laundry or clean your house woman, stop interrupting the men while they are talking about things you don't understand.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85409&page=10

Is it just me or is he trying to avoid what happened last time? :blush:

Crystal

Teallaura

October 17th 2006, 03:35 PM

jpholding

October 17th 2006, 03:45 PM

Speaking of screwballs, I think LGM needs one. I first asked him (after he said the Bible allowed rape):

Is it just me or is he trying to avoid what happened last time? :blush:

Meh. I told him one bajillion times how to read 1 Cor. 14 properly. :hehe:

Added: Website nomination from a reader:

http://uptoknowgood.wordpress.com/2006/07/02/homosexuality-is-the-result-of-christian-conditioning/

Goonerman

October 17th 2006, 04:18 PM

I'd like to nominate bbc.co.uk news for this screwball article about the future evolution of the human race:

[URL=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6057734.stm[/URL]

Apparently we are going into split into two separate species, with predictable descriptions of what they are going to be like.

Darth Executor

October 17th 2006, 06:41 PM

That thing is so stupid.

Cynic Sage

October 17th 2006, 10:41 PM

I'd like to nominate bbc.co.uk news for this screwball article about the future evolution of the human race:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6057734.stm

Apparently we are going into split into two separate species, with predictable descriptions of what they are going to be like.

Wow.

I'd expect to hear something like that less as news but more as a joke on The Colbert Report :twitch:

Speaking of which (not a nomination)... Tonight I hear Colbert's guest will be Richard Dawkins and he'll be talking about his book "The God Delusion". I'm gonna see how that turns out considering I hear he's Catholic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert#Personal_life).

JSDileo

October 17th 2006, 11:11 PM

Spheniscine

October 18th 2006, 12:45 AM

jpholding

October 18th 2006, 02:06 PM

Reader nominates John Powell for:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=84804&page=6

POWELL:
I dismiss Acts as far as Paul goes because it's the conversion story of some Saul of Tarsus, not Paul. The story in Acts 9 appears to be an exaggerated retelling of Paul's conversion of Gal 1. Acts 9 is obviously related to Gal 1 since so many elements match, but the story in Acts is significantly different in the direction of the fabulous.

Paul received the Gospel through some unspecified "revelation of Jesus Christ." That could refer to a hallucination, a dream, or merely an inspired change of view while reading Old Testament passages. There's no indication it was accompanied by a miracle like Paul being blinded and later healed.

Saul is blinded and hears Jesus speak to him.

Paul didn't confer with any mortal, but immediately went to Arabia, perhaps to avoid both the Jews and Christians in Damascus until he could figure out what to do with his life.

Saul doesn't immediately go to Arabia, but is guided to Damascus where a Christian mortal comes to heal him and, apparently, confer with him.

Paul returned to Damascus from Arabia where he spent 3 years, perhaps studying the Old Testament to learn more about Jesus.

Saul spends mere days with the saints in Damascus, apparently conferring with them about preaching and such things, and then begins to preach a powerful message in the Jewish synagogues, proving that Jesus is the Christ.

Paul, after the 3 years in Damascus, went to Jerusalem to visit a couple of weeks with Peter, perhaps to get to know him and others there, to compare notes on Jesus, and to get a recommendation to begin preaching. There's no indication in Gal 1 that Paul went to Jerusalem to avoid an assassination attempt in Damascus or to relocate to Jerusalem. Apparently, Paul's problems with the ruler of Damascus occurred later, after Paul began to preach.

After preaching in Damascus for many days (but not 3 years), Saul flees to Jerusalem to avoid an assassination. He goes to Jerusalem to relocate there.

Of the apostles, Paul only sees Peter and James during his 15-day stay in Jerusalem.

Saul is formally presented before the apostles (presumably more than just two) with the apostle Barnabas defending him.

Paul then leaves Judea and goes to Syria and Cilicia perhaps on foot to begin preaching in Damascus, Syria and from there northward to Cilicia.

Saul preaches in Jerusalem for a while but the Greeks in Jerusalem want to kill him so the Christian leadership send him to Caesarea, perhaps to put him on a boat to sail to his home area of Tarsus, Cilicia where he will be safer in the early stages of his career.

In Paul's story, the Christians of Judea (where Paul hadn't preached) were amazed by his conversion.

In Saul's story, it's the Jews in the synagogues who are amazed. I guess the Christians of Acts aren't amazed by such things.

Darth Executor

October 18th 2006, 04:34 PM

Dawkins clip available here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqLSCqeYkrA

I'd love to nominate Dawkins but Colbert was just being a clown and Dawkins didn't get a chance to say anything particularly stupid.

Abykale

October 18th 2006, 05:53 PM

lilpixieofterror

October 18th 2006, 06:26 PM

LGM can't stand his ground worth a darn - never could. He'll (try) to pull the Socratic thing by confronting questions with questions, but he never addresses actual evidence or forwards a real argument. Once in a while he actually is insightful or even thoughtful, but mostly he's comic relief.

True, I am having alot of fun with him. It's not often I get a chance to use a little bit of my wit and humor on somebody. Such as below:

Can you cook?

I respond with:

Sure, today on the Menu is:

LGM being roasted slowly over an open fire.

The meat maybe a little burned and sour, but that shouldn't make it too bad to eat. :lol:

I wonder if he understood my joke... :blush:

Meh. I told him one bajillion times how to read 1 Cor. 14 properly.

I think I gave him the link to your article on that and a few other links. Still haven't heard an answer back.

Crystal

JSDileo

October 18th 2006, 09:04 PM

I would like to nominate Richard Carrier for his essay on Pascal's Wager, which is up on Infidels.org:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/heaven.html

It is a common belief that only the morally good should populate heaven, and this is a reasonable belief, widely defended by theists of many varieties. Suppose there is a god who is watching us and choosing which souls of the deceased to bring to heaven, and this god really does want only the morally good to populate heaven. He will probably select from only those who made a significant and responsible effort to discover the truth. For all others are untrustworthy, being cognitively or morally inferior, or both. They will also be less likely ever to discover and commit to true beliefs about right and wrong. That is, if they have a significant and trustworthy concern for doing right and avoiding wrong, it follows necessarily that they must have a significant and trustworthy concern for knowing right and wrong. Since this knowledge requires knowledge about many fundamental facts of the universe (such as whether there is a god), it follows necessarily that such people must have a significant and trustworthy concern for always seeking out, testing, and confirming that their beliefs about such things are probably correct. Therefore, only such people can be sufficiently moral and trustworthy to deserve a place in heaven--unless god wishes to fill heaven with the morally lazy, irresponsible, or untrustworthy.

But only two groups fit this description: intellectually committed but critical theists, and intellectually committed but critical nontheists (which means both atheists and agnostics, though more specifically secular humanists, in the most basic sense). Both groups have a significant and trustworthy concern for always seeking out, testing, and confirming that their beliefs about god (for example) are probably correct, so that their beliefs about right and wrong will probably be correct. No other groups can claim this. If anyone is sincerely interested in doing right and wrong, they must be sincerely interested in whether certain claims are true, including "God exists," and must treat this matter with as much responsibility and concern as any other moral question. And the only two kinds of people who do this are those theists and nontheists who devote their lives to examining the facts and determining whether they are right.

...

For example, in the bible Abraham discards humanity and morality upon God's command to kill his son Isaac, and God rewards him for placing loyalty above morality. That is probably evil--a good god would expect Abraham to forego fear and loyalty and place compassion first and refuse to commit an evil act, and would reward him for that, not for compliance.

Translations:

Statement One: "People who are mentally retarded, but help out the poor and are humble, caring people won't go to heaven because they aren't smart enough. Oh, and I don't have a clue as to what the actual stance is that Christianity takes on sin and heaven.

Statement Two: "Those stupid theists never, ever test their beliefs; they're just dolts who consistently believe everything that the Bible tells them without ever having a dissenting thought and searching for the right answers on morality or any other intellectual matter. Atheists pwn teh stupid theists. 'Cause, you know, I, Richard Carrier, am looking for truth and teh stupid theists aren't."

Statement Three: "Hmm. God, being the only infinite, intelligent being that exists, sets the standard for morality? I don't understand that either. Morality in the Biblical world stems not from the infinite, Almighty God, but from humanity's previous evolution. Why should the will of God be higher than human evolution in the moral realm?"

:duh:

Spheniscine

October 18th 2006, 09:35 PM

Re: Colbert & Dawkins

What's sad is that they think this is the pinnacle of theist/atheist debating, I mean, seriously! Colbert's a comedian, not an apologist, and Dawkins spouts some of those old tired fundy atheist canards. 'Who did God' indeed. *rolls eyes*

Darth Executor

October 18th 2006, 09:37 PM

I only wish I could say what their behaviour resembles within tweb decorum... :teeth:

One Bad Pig

October 18th 2006, 09:40 PM

Reader nominates John Powell for:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=84804&page=6
He's STILL waxing pedantic about that? :twitch:

In other news, I nominate Mickiel for his post here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1688568&postcount=86):

I was looking at 2Tim.3: 1-5, which is really a list of the Fruits of the Flesh. It kind of struck me that most of the fruits on this List, are used in Conversations by People. They have been incorporated into our everyday speaking in life, espically on discussion Boards. People love the way they Talk ( Lovers of Self) they brag about how they Speak ( Boastful) They get upset if you disagree with them, or show them the carnality that exist in their ways of Speaking ( Arrogant) Of Course you cam mix ungratefulness with that one too.

We Speak very unloving to each other and use our Mouths to Gossip with. We get irritated at times when talking, and loose control ( Without Self-Control). Some even get Brutal with someone if the conversation does not give us our way. And even when the few who try to talk Good, do so, they are often ridiculed for trying that ( Haters of Good).

The Fruits of the Flesh have Jumped all in our conversations. We strat talking Conceited and Reckless, we even get to read our own Writting online at these Discussion Boards, reveiwing what we have written, we become Lovers of ourselves, our Writting ( Lovers of Pleasures rather than Lovers of God).

Yes, a very interesting Scripture, and a very profound influence these fruits of the Flesh have had on our Speaking and Thinking.

jpholding

October 19th 2006, 01:06 PM

Sparko

October 19th 2006, 01:16 PM

But also a special prop for the National Center for Science Education, whose appeal said they really needed money for the times "when creationism threatens".

As one of my friends in that group said, "Yeah, you never know when one of those YECs will hijack a jumbo jet or instigate a school shooting." :lol:

You laugh, but just take a look at OKCityKid who thinks that Bush, the evil genius that he is, planned and executed the whole 9/11 thing.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85607

The Curtmudgeon

October 19th 2006, 01:23 PM

I'd like to nominate whoever it was that signed me up for the (snail) mail lists for certain atheist-humanist orgs like the James Randi Education Foundation. Only someone stupid would think that that was a way to affect me. :hehe:

But also a special prop for the National Center for Science Education, whose appeal said they really needed money for the times "when creationism threatens".

As one of my friends in that group said, "Yeah, you never know when one of those YECs will hijack a jumbo jet or instigate a school shooting." :lol:

I think these were simply mass mailings, JP, as I got both the same in my POBox recently, and I doubt that there are very many people who know both of our addresses (I know of only one who might, and since I'm pretty sure I've never given you my POBox and I know I don't have yours, neither of us is in that group). I was actually thinking about keeping the NCSE one around until I could afford to buy them some of AIG's merchandise and/or books, but I decided yesterday to go ahead and deep-six the envelope anyway.

The (of course, the stuff I'm desperately awaiting in my POBox never shows up) Curtmudgeon

jpholding

October 19th 2006, 02:02 PM

I think these were simply mass mailings, JP, as I got both the same in my POBox recently, and I doubt that there are very many people who know both of our addresses

They send only to PO boxes and not homes? :huh:

Cynic Sage

October 19th 2006, 02:28 PM

I nominate Headheart for a Wonka's Tasty Fudge award for posting this in Apologetics:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85677

Just say for a moment you believed in God.

Just say that moment was the same as waking up from a dream and as you sat on there on the edge of you bed you remembered three words.

You had heard those words spoken by your mother and then your father, by your sister and perhaps your brother, or incase you were an orphan by your friends, and intimately once or twice by a lover.

Just say for a moment you believed in God.

And inside that moment you heard the three words that were spoken by many throughout your life, and sometimes they carried a lasting commitment to faithfulness and trust, but mostly they ended up being hardly reliable.

But inside that fleeting moment, a dream but not a dream, you heard as if in a dream but not a dream, for it was as if you had been dreaming and in your morning misty state heard three words that conveyed an otherworldly sense to the meaning you had associated with these three words, a sense that they could never be anything else but completely what they were in terms of complete faithfulness.

How quickly a lover changes or a friend may change, when stubborn pride or things just get in the way, but no in the words you heard out of your moment, there was a complete awareness that what you had heard you had believed as a child when your mother or father or close friend spoke to you, and bond, a trust, a lifetime pact.

There was something otherworldly in the phrase, so emphatically definite and assuredly full proof. It was like the combination of all the genuine trusts, almost a giant source from which your truest friendship had flown to start off with, but yet the dimension to the words was greater more sublime more emphatic, as if you had heard them for the first time and the conviction that fell upon you that whoever had spoken this phrase had been more aware of you by far than you were aware of the speaker.

You sat there wondering, and thinking and then tucked it away in the recesses of your mind, until now.

This is an argument for xtianity how? :twitch:

Cynic Sage

October 19th 2006, 03:34 PM

jpholding

October 19th 2006, 04:16 PM

I can't find the thread, can you link to it?

I think it was deleted because of what he signed in as.

Cynic Sage

October 19th 2006, 04:59 PM

Sam Harris in an interview on youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTNbuj5NKsk&mode=related&search= (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTNbuj5NKsk&mode=related&search=)

He seems to think that Hal Lindsey is the apex of Xtian eschatological thought and that xtianity discourages people from building a better tommorrow.

And some clips from the "Jesus Camp" film:

Harry Potter is an enemy of God:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOIYsGVyg8M&mode=related&search= (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOIYsGVyg8M&mode=related&search=)

Rev. Becky Fischer, when thinking on how to run the camp, asked herself "What Would Osama Do?":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWhT2PtaD0w&mode=related&search= (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWhT2PtaD0w&mode=related&search=)

And am I the only one that finds it weird that an Ultra-Fundamentalist Church has a woman-pastor? :huh:

rickyroma

October 19th 2006, 05:17 PM

Darth Executor

October 19th 2006, 05:21 PM

Well called. Only a total screwball would raise the problem of suffering on a monotheist forum.

Precisely. :thumb:

Cynic Sage

October 19th 2006, 05:42 PM

Netwriter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0XXEd1W0pw&mode=related&search= (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0XXEd1W0pw&mode=related&search=)

Oy!

themuzicman

October 20th 2006, 09:55 AM

okcitykid: http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1690960&postcount=1

One day Jesus returned to the earth and he saw an Atheist in the street and he said, "Come, I have a place for you." The Atheist said, "Me - I never even believed in you." Jesus said, "when you fought for peace and helped the poor you believed in me."

Just then an SUV pulled up and a man stepped out and said, "Jesus, I've been waiting for you." Jesus said, "And you are?"

:lmbo:

Talk about clueless...

The Curtmudgeon

October 20th 2006, 01:28 PM

They send only to PO boxes and not homes? :huh:

Could be. I'm not sure how else they would have hit on both of us.

The (or is James Randi using his ESP talent?) Curtmudgeon

jpholding

October 20th 2006, 03:13 PM

Email from the Nation of Idiots who let computers do their work for them:

Hello,

I was wondering if you would be interested in placing an ad on your website www.tektonics.org. The specific page I am interested in is: http://www.tektonics.org/qt/spaninq.html
I'll give you $30 to place a small text ad on that page. The advertising would be for a company that sells Spanish real estate. Would something like this interest you?

For those who don't recognize it, that's my article on the Spanish Inquisition. :doh:

LilPunkishOfTerror

October 20th 2006, 03:53 PM

Email from the Nation of Idiots who let computers do their work for them:

For those who don't recognize it, that's my article on the Spanish Inquisition. :doh:

:lmbo:

jpholding

October 21st 2006, 08:35 AM

Email from the Frustrated People Department:

Good evening. I've just read your review of Ehrman's "Lost Christianities." My hope is two fold. Firstly, I hope that you've since stopped doing drugs since they are occluding your ability to think, write, and assess clearly. My second hope is that you don't accidentally breed.

Cynic Sage

October 21st 2006, 05:08 PM

Cavegirl, on the salvation of repentant sinners:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85754&page=1

Actually this is one of the main reasons why I reject Christianity. You can steal and kill all your life, but if in the end you truly repent you'll stand a good chance of going to heaven. On the other hand, you can live all your life according to God's moral code -whatever that may be- but if it's not done with Jesus in heart & mind it's no heaven for you. To me, such a god is not just, let alone infinitely just.

Cynic Sage

October 21st 2006, 05:31 PM

The Last Toke-tation of Christ:

http://www.cannabisculture.com/backissues/cc11/christ.html (http://www.cannabisculture.com/backissues/cc11/christ.html)

As doubtful as the following hypothesis might first seem to the reader, I might as well boldly state my case right from the start: either Jesus used marijuana or he was not the Christ. The very word "Christ", by the implication of its linguistic origins and true meaning, gives us the most profound evidence that Jesus did in fact use the same herb as his ancient semitic ancestors, and which is still used by people around the world for its enlightening and healing properties.

...

After the fall of the Jewish kingdoms, and the bloody purges following the forged discovery of the Book of theLaw (1 Kings 23), the cannabis holy oil was prohibited as associated with pagan worship. Yet it seems that certain sects retained the topical entheogen, and continued to practice the older religion, silently awaiting the return of a Messiah-king in the line of David.

The ministry of Jesus marked the return of the Jewish Messiah-kings, and thus the re-emergence of the holy oil. Jesus was called the Christ because he violated the Old Testament taboo on the cannabis oil and distributed it freely for initiation rites and to heal the sick and wounded.
...

Apparently he had to feed the 5000 after they got "the munchies". :lol:

Cynic Sage

October 21st 2006, 11:50 PM

Cynic Sage

October 21st 2006, 11:58 PM

Cynic Sage

October 22nd 2006, 12:16 AM

jpholding

October 22nd 2006, 07:49 AM

Email:

You are such a fraud. Instead of refuting and debating points. You seem to cover your non answers with sarcasim. A true man of god would have real answers. You just show yourself to be one of the false witnesses you seem to cry about. You are only proving the opposite of that which you claim Please don't reply with such

JSDileo

October 22nd 2006, 02:16 PM

Do we give out Anti-Screwball awards, because John Blake should win one for this article (that even cites Bible-scholars, not just pastors) on the Prosperity Gospel movement:

http://www.ajc.com/living/content/living/faithandvalues/stories/2006/10/18/1022SLJESUS.html

:thumb:

Am I the only one who finds it funny that the last name of the pastor cited who was preaching the prosperity gospel is "Dollar"?

lilpixieofterror

October 22nd 2006, 05:52 PM

I like to Nominate Minny on this post:

Teachers are involved in the enterprise, big No No.

"Although teachers at Neil Armstrong Elementary do not teach the class, they are involved because they collect parental permission slips to attend the program,"

Apparently involvement of teachers for Minny means collecting permission slips. I'm kind of new at this whole law thing, but how is teachers collecting permission slips for a Bible study a violation of 'seperation of church and state?' :eh:

Here is familyof5 on the response I wrote to Minny:

Yes sweetie, you are getting 'dumber and dumber' with every post. It isn't 'separation of football and state', it's separation of church and state. What do sports and other non-religious clubs have to do with anything?

Does anyone have any idea of:

1. How a volintary program for students can run without permission slips?
2. How teachers or the school can avoid being in some way, involved with this Bible study?
3. How this at all violates the 'seperation of church and state'?

Is it just me, or are they being absured on this point? :eh:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=85618&page=5

Crystal

aikidoka

October 22nd 2006, 10:14 PM

How about the (ir)rational responders for saying this on their website:

World Renowned Historian and Philosopher Richard Carrier

Cynic Sage

October 23rd 2006, 01:14 AM

How about the (ir)rational responders for saying this on their website:
Linky Linky

October 23rd 2006, 09:03 AM

Linky Linky

It's presently on their front page (http://www.rationalresponders.com/) if you scroll down, under the heading "Autographed RRS Picture".

World Renowned Historian and Philosopher Richard Carrier recently joined the Squad in his first recording session with us. He'll be back for more in the future. To commemorate this special event we autographed and numbered 15 5x7 images (picture above). $15 all money generated helps to end theism through enlightenment. Click the picture to purchase.

OldManZangetsu

October 23rd 2006, 11:40 AM

Ladies and Gentleman, I present to you the worst Christian T-shirt ever made, To which I say "Cursed be the Loom that Fruited you!" :twitch::

http://secondcomingclothing.com/product_info.php?cPath=29_61&products_id=117

[attachment]

Because nothing is a grater witness for Christ than causing others to get an instant mental image of Cowboy man-on-man backdoor action.

:no: Say it ain't so...

I have a nomination for the "Help I'm the Holy Spirit stuck in a charismatic's body!" award for bill78,

Is singleness a gift of God? 1 Corinthians 7:7, to me, indicates how singleness is a gift and also marriage is a gift...of the Holy Spirit. It is in God's love, though...each is a gift of LOVE...how God's love is.

So it's in God's love where you get the benefit of being single, and in God's love where you get the benefit of being married.

Jesus says, "'Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.'" (Matthew 11:29) So, with Jesus, you learn how to deal with your gift. AND He uses other Christians to help you to learn...YES.

But God does personally share with you, in companionship with us...very intimately > helping you to know and deal with your gifts included...personally guiding each of us, using others to help with this, of course, but along with Him >

in v-e-r-y intimate companionship > "but he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him." (1 Corinthians 6:17) > so, each of us is actually ONE SPIRIT WITH God Himself...quite intimate, I'd say > ALSO > this being in God's very own love >

"Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us." (Romans 5:5) so we have God's very own love in us...right in our hearts, this clearly shares > again, very intimate and personal with God Himself...and this ministering through other Christians, of course.

"for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure." (Philippians 2:13) So God is personally working in each of us to get us to WILL to do what He desires, AND works us to do what He knows He wants...at each moment. So-o-o-o > I'm offering that whatsoever God really desires of you, He will IN you personally work and guide you to do this...in such close companionship with each of us...YES!!!!!!!

So...for what He wants of you...His love will fill and satisfy you to go the way He desires. He's our Father. He does NOT leave us on our own. And the guiding feelings and emotions of His love are gentle and humble, nicely quiet...like how Jesus in us is "gentle and lowly in heart". So God's drives and instinct, I offer, are NOT dominating and demanding attention, and distracting and degrading our attention away from God.

And we have "And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body, and be thankful." (Colossians 3:15) So, yes, God wants to personally rule us with His very own peace, at every single moment...or every MARRIED moment...in your hearts, it says; so this is VERY personal of God, and INTIMATE.

So singleness as a gift has much more to do with being single-hearted and of a single MIND, than it has to do with just whether you can handle having no sex or not. I'd say people gifted to be single can have problems about wanting sex...WHY? Because there is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience", Paul shares in Ephesians 2:2 > this spirit works people to do what is not right for them. Those dominating and tyrannical passions of Satan work VERY hard. They can make us argue and hurt each other, even though we don't really want to. That explosive temper, and my nasty criticizing are NOT in God's love. There are things that are NOT of God's love and His creation, including certain drives that MIMICK what is natural, but are Satan pushing our buttons in a confusing and distorting and frustrating way. Only God can take care of us right; we need Him every moment.

So, we ALL need to learn better to stay "with God" (in 1 Corinthians 7:24) in His nicely quiet love having Heaven's own pleasantness of sweet rest. As we learn this and GROW better in this, "you will find rest for your souls." (in Matthew 11:29) Kissing the LORD with thanksgiving, God bless you, too. Thanks for that very helpful stuff to provoke me to be more pure and honest.

and then a nomination again for bill78 for the "Out of context and out of mind" award where he speaks about himself in third person and uses smilies in the oddest way I've ever seen in a non-spam thread here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=1687619&postcount=43)

jpholding

October 23rd 2006, 01:46 PM

Anyone seen this variation on the Nigerian dictator scam yet?

SUPPLY OF COW MEDICINE

COW MEDICINE SUPPLY

I know that this letter may not come to you as a surprise since your Organisation is well advertised. However, I am writing based on the Prevailing information I gathered concerning your esteem company in your Country’s chamber of commerce.
I have full confidence that you can execute this business to our mutual benefit and I believe that you will not let down the trust and confidence I am about to repose on you.

I work with an ivoirien based public relations firm "AMIC". I work as the corporate affairs manager, between the 12 - 19 of January 2005, a seminar was held at BOUAKE, COTE D'IVOIRE of which I attended. In this seminar I was lucky to meet ALHAJI.A.U. BOSTRA, The president of MACDOWELS ETS.

ALHAJI.A.U. BOSTRA is an accomplished businessman. He is a
multi-millionaire farmer with cattle farms in Mali, Niger, Kenya, Burkina Faso and Chad Republic. Moreso, he is the Greatest supplier of cattle And diary products to the whole of West Africa. On knowing my profession,he told me about the huge amount of money he spends on the purchase of a
particular but very important cattle medicine.

Precisely, he buys at $5,000 a carton, sometimes he buys up to 1500 Cartons. He asked me if my organisation can source for a cheaper supplier. Back to my office, I discussed the business with my boss, he decided to handle the supplies by himself. We did market research and discovered that we can buy these medicines in EUROPE for $2,000 per carton. We moved a proposal to Macdowels to supply him at $ 4,500 per carton which he accepted. I agreed with my boss that he will give me 15 % of the profit.

On the 21 of February 2005, we made our first supplies of 420 cartons to Macdowels. My boss never gave me a dime. Instead he bought an old model and second handed 504 Peugeot car for me. Since then, my relationships with my boss have seized to be cordial. He never talked to me about Macdowels again.

Recently,I intercepted some letters from Macdowels to my boss. I was surprised to learn that my boss had made five more supplies to Macdowels which I knew nothing about. Moreseo, Macdowels is requesting for more supplies of 800 Cartons before the end of next month, these letters never got to my boss, instead I called ALHAJI A.U. BOSTRA, The President of Macdowels and convinced him that I can arrange for an international supplier who can supply him at the price $ 4,000 per carton, but that he (A.U. BOSTRA) will pay cash before lifting the goods.

ALHAJI A.U. BOSTRA is presently waiting for my foreign contact and me. For the moment he has stopped all contact with my boss. If you can handle this project please contact me immediately for details and negotiations as regards my commission.

Note : We buy 800 cartons at $ 1,600,000.00. We sell at $3,200,000.00 & our client pays cash before lifting of goods, and he ( ALHAJI)must not know our purchase point at EUROPE.

Thank you and best regards.

Kamah Suleiman.

It's nice to know that the US Chamber of Commerce recommends Tekton as a reliable broker for cow medicine. :hrm:

OldManZangetsu

October 23rd 2006, 02:35 PM

Am I the only one who finds it funny that the last name of the pastor cited who was preaching the prosperity gospel is "Dollar"?

I found it pretty funny, but then again you and I are still fairly young :teeth:

Sparko

October 23rd 2006, 02:58 PM

He changed his name to "Dollar" because he teaches "prosperity"

OldManZangetsu

October 23rd 2006, 07:20 PM

He changed his name to "Dollar" because he teaches "prosperity"

Dude, really? I was thinking that as I read the article, how do you know?

Sparko

October 23rd 2006, 08:43 PM

Dude, really? I was thinking that as I read the article, how do you know?

I don't know for sure, but it makes more sense than he was born with the name. I could be wrong.

Edited to add: Just found this:

to those of you who don’t watch paid programming on Sunday mornings, Creflo Dollar is a televangelist. Born Michael Smith,
http://www.nypress.com/14/32/nyc/nyc4.cfm

jpholding

October 24th 2006, 06:50 AM

Email:

If you really want to tackle an important argument against Christianity, why not review Nietzsche's "The AntiChrist"? Seeing the product of such an undertaking would, no doubt, be so amusing, that I am willing even to mail you a copy of it myself.

If you could produce a decent critique of his argument in that book, surely you would elevate yourself from hack internet apologetic to serious religious thinker.

Oops. I just found your Nietzsche essay. Looks like you already wrote one and thus confirmed, once again, that you are only a hack wanna-be theologian.

I will be writing a response to your Nietzsche article soon -- if it can even be called a response, you ignorant twerp.

:lolo:

Darth Executor

October 24th 2006, 11:24 AM

Howie:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=1696176

This thread belongs in Politics. Put it where it belongs.

For some to claim the right or authority to judge who is or is not living a Christian life is more clearly antithetical to the teachings of Jesus than abortion itself.

All the best.

So much for Jesus and Paul.

Cynic Sage

October 24th 2006, 03:29 PM

It's presently on their front page (http://www.rationalresponders.com/) if you scroll down, under the heading "Autographed RRS Picture".

If Richard Carrier's a historian, then Kent Hovind is a scientist. :lol:

Cynic Sage

October 24th 2006, 04:06 PM

Dude, you guys should check out some of the stuff on the "Jesus of the Week" site (NAS):

http://www.jesusoftheweek.com

:twitch:

Christy

October 24th 2006, 05:43 PM

Steven Carr said this in his blog about using religion to justify genocide:

There are a small minority of religious people who feel that genocides committed in the name of their religion are justifed, and justifiable.

An example of such a group is the Christian Cadre. Here is where they justify the genocidal killings in the Bible.

They genuinely believe that if they think that some people are enemies of their religion, then those people should be killed, men, women and children.

Basically his whole blog deserves a nomination: http://stevencarrwork.blogspot.com

JSDileo

October 24th 2006, 08:02 PM

JSDileo

October 24th 2006, 08:16 PM

I would like to nominate Marshall Brian for this video, in which he, among other things, thinks that Jesus saying that people should "eat my body and drink my blood" is literal:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMdV6vCCyqU

:hrm:
Another screwball for this person who uploaded a video just for Acharya S onto youtube:

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

And another video uploaded by the same person and also for Acharya S:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjrJSgMkL68

Christy

October 25th 2006, 12:59 AM

Here's the website that Steve Carr was talking about: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/10/focusing-on-trees-while-ignoring.html

aikidoka

October 25th 2006, 07:59 AM

Here's the website that Steve Carr was talking about: http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2006/10/focusing-on-trees-while-ignoring.html

I like the Christiancadre site. That challenge (ie dont care about context) and Steve Carr's responses :ahem:

jpholding

October 26th 2006, 07:18 AM

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/10/dont-judge-book-by-its-cover.html

Award to dagoodS, one of Doubting John's useful idiots, for complaining that Proverbs is not the Magic Happy Fun Bible.

Cynic Sage

October 26th 2006, 08:14 PM

More xtian t-shirts, these ones form Kerruso clothing co.:

http://www.kerusso.com/

[attachment=1][attachment=2][attachment=3][attachment=4]

Guy in marketing: Hey! I know how we can make T-shirts that bring Glory to God. Let's compare the Saving Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ with soft-drink logos.

[attachment=5][attachment=6]

AMERICA! **** YEAH!

[attachment=7]

"Jesus" is the name of her mexican gardener.

[attachment=8]

What? You'd expect someone to actually buy these sober?

[attachment=9]

Get exploited by the love of Christ.

[attachment=10]

:thumbd: Wow, that'll make folks wanna convert.

JSDileo

October 26th 2006, 08:15 PM

I want to give an anti-screwball award to the people who translated the Amplified Bible, for their consistently credible translations. I think their translation of 2 Kings 2:23-24 illustrates this perfectly, mainly because they 1). Understood that these boys were accountable and 2). Understood that they were challenging Elisha's honor and insulting him based off of his grief for Elijah's leaving the Earth:

2 Kings 2:23-24 (Amplified Bible)
Amplified Bible (AMP)

23He went up from Jericho to Bethel. On the way, [a]young [maturing and accountable] boys came out of the city and mocked him and said to him, Go up [in a whirlwind], you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!

24And he turned around and looked at them and called a curse down on them in the name of the Lord. And two she-bears came out of the woods and ripped up forty-two of the boys.

Footnotes:

1. 2 Kings 2:23 This incident has long been misunderstood because the Hebrew word "naar" was translated "little boys." That these characteristic juvenile delinquents were old enough to be fully accountable is obvious from the use of the word elsewhere. For example, it was used by David of his son Solomon and translated "young and inexperienced," when Solomon was a father (I Chron. 22:5; cf. I Kings 14:21 and II Chron. 9:30 ). It was used of Joseph when he was seventeen (Gen. 37:2). In fact, not less than seventy times in the King James Version this word "naar" is translated "young man" or "young men." (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Kings%202:23-24;&version=45;)

Meanwhile, I'm tempted to give one to the guy who paraphrased the Message Bible:

Kings 2:23-24 (The Message)
The Message (MSG)

23 Another time, Elisha was on his way to Bethel and some little kids came out from the town and taunted him, "What's up, old baldhead! Out of our way, skinhead!"

24 Elisha turned, took one look at them, and cursed them in the name of God. Two bears charged out of the underbrush and knocked them about, ripping them limb from limb—forty-two children in all! (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Kings%202:23-24;&version=65;)

Cynic Sage

October 26th 2006, 08:26 PM

Heroisreeal:

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=86068 (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=86068)

Jhn 6:70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

first 12 = 3 X God
second 12 = 3 X Jesus
12 X Jesus = 888 ( 3 infinitys turned 90 degrees.)
88 X 8 = 704 (God )

Rev 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them
to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered,
for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent,
called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world:
he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
I = 9 (beginning)
N = 14 (last)
I + N = 23,end, I AM
3 X I AM = Jehovah

I X N (first & last ) = AZ ( 126) Alpha & omega, God between God

Exd 25:22 And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above
the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which [are] upon the ark of the
testimony, of all [things] which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.
AZ X 180 (AZ + love ) = Love x G x O X D John 1:1
Man's best friend is God turned backward.
Rev 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

The third 12 + 12 = three I AMs

Zero

:huh:

Gideon Brown

October 26th 2006, 09:30 PM

Spheniscine

October 26th 2006, 09:39 PM

I think some of the more 'shocking' ones (heavy drinker? brainwashed?) definitely deserve it though. Sure it draws attention, but not the right kind. :ahem:

P-Dunn

October 26th 2006, 11:09 PM

[attachment=7]

"Jesus" is the name of her mexican gardener.
That shirt reminds me of a story I once heard about a girl who sang a song, "My boyfriend has a first name, it's J-E-S-U-S!"

jpholding

October 27th 2006, 06:36 AM

Email proving that critical thinking is at an all time low:

I just read your article on Jesus - Destroying the Christ
Myth. In it, you take the position that Gamaliel never
existed, while your position was to be taken as sarcasm,
why do you think that he did exist? And what bearing would
that have one way or the other on the existence of Jesus?

Just wondering. I was hoping to get something conclusive
from your thesis but I did not read much that would drive me to think one way or the other and that is the perplexing
situation facing everyone - believe based on tradition and
faith or wonder based on the lack of credible evidence?

A soon to be adherent of the Roman Piso theory. :lolo:

Rayado

October 27th 2006, 05:11 PM

Two Screwball nominations for a website: www.soul-winners.org

The first one is a Gold Screwball for New Lows in Web Design, as a quick perousal will prove; the second, a Bronze, is for the actual content:

Stupid, ill-thought-out tracts with an obscene number of exclamation marks? Check.

Extremely shallow theology that results in heresy? Check. According to them, TrueChrisitans(tm) do not sin. At all. Which is really funny, because in their tracts they frequently mention 1 John 1:5-7, while completely ignoring vv. 8-10. :ahem:

To top it all off, they're going around to college campuses, holding signs that say "no homos in heaven" and "all homos go to hell," and generally being enfant provocateurs, making actual Christians look terrible in the process.

Sparko

October 27th 2006, 05:43 PM

You owe me a new set of eyeballs. I went and looked at that site and the afterimages are still floating in front of my vision.

Jnthn

October 27th 2006, 05:50 PM

You owe me a new set of eyeballs. I went and looked at that site and the afterimages are still floating in front of my vision.
Say it with me:

"Word art is EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL!!

J

spl_cadet

October 28th 2006, 10:25 AM

jpholding

October 28th 2006, 11:16 AM

Uh, you do realize most Christians do take that literally, right?

Brain would likely never view it in terms of transubstantiation. He's not that bright. He more likely thinks Jesus expects people to bite into his walking-around-now body.

OldManZangetsu

October 29th 2006, 12:19 AM

Two Screwball nominations for a website: www.soul-winners.org

The first one is a Gold Screwball for New Lows in Web Design, as a quick perousal will prove; the second, a Bronze, is for the actual content:

Stupid, ill-thought-out tracts with an obscene number of exclamation marks? Check.

Extremely shallow theology that results in heresy? Check. According to them, TrueChrisitans™ do not sin. At all. Which is really funny, because in their tracts they frequently mention 1 John 1:5-7, while completely ignoring vv. 8-10. :ahem:

To top it all off, they're going around to college campuses, holding signs that say "no homos in heaven" and "all homos go to hell," and generally being enfant provocateurs, making actual Christians look terrible in the process.

:eww:

Please pray they don't come to my campus. I may have to shoot one.
(just kidding)

Spheniscine

October 29th 2006, 07:05 AM

When he's not leadin' mass, he's out kickin' ass! After the Rapture the sole protector of the sinning masses is Battle Pope, and his trusty sidekick, Jesus. They're the last line of defense in a world overrun with demons and depravity. Reprinting ROBERT KIRKMAN's first published work, now in stunning full color, with a brand new cover by original artist TONY MOORE and original cover colorist VAL STAPLES. Just in time for the book's Fifth Anniversary!

http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/BattlePope.html (info page, not affiliated with author)

ShadowLands

October 29th 2006, 01:20 PM