Did Jesus rise from the dead? (tehknologick vs. Kabane52)

[antieverything]

Spoken like the ignoramus that you are. All Screwballs have a link to the offending content for all to see. There's no imaginations involved, dear one.

Spoken like the irrational that you are. Send me a link, and watch my tears come pouring, dear.

That's called sarcasm, just to fill you in. ;)

Making a point against your false view of what a "good" Christian can and can not do, yes. Your tantrums prove just how good a fundy you are.

I espoused no such view. I plainly said he'd be proud, being the good little Christian he is.

Yep, fundy. Hey, ya gonna nominate me for that too, and make me cry some more?

[Manwë Súlimo]

Spoken like the irrational that you are.

Irrational? How so?

Yep, fundy. Hey, ya gonna nominate me for that too, and make me cry some more?

Nah, you're trying to hard but not hard enough. True Screwball material is like the one guy that said God can't exist because He doesn't have a Facebook account.

[antieverything]

Irrational? How so?

• Edited by a Moderator • you people need everything spelled out for you. You're irrational because you think that sending someone such a link will hurt their feelings, as if it were as logical as

a -> b.

Moderated By: Mountain Man

Please do not use God's name in vain.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[Manwë Súlimo]

*moderated post*

Please quote where I said it was my goal to hurt your feelings

[Knowing Thomas]

What a loon.

That's because I don't typically engage with people who I think are playing stupid, but since you apparently aren't just putting on a show, I'll take you from A, to B, to C... etc...

You began by insulting me over the views I espoused, particularly, as evident in your own words, that I "believe that religion is just a mind virus," thus labeling me a "Dawkinsian troll" and unoriginal.

Yes

The implication here is that I should just be dismissed and swept beneath your contempt not because I hold demonstrably invalid views, but because I'm just a fanboy who can't think for himself.

Actually, it's both, baby boy. You are to be dismissed as you both hold invalid views about religion being a mind virus AND that you are a fanboy who takes arguments from said outdated polemics.

My counterpoint (i.e. argument against you) hinges on the truth of evolution which is precisely what I presumed you would agree with (otherwise, what point is there in bringing it up), by saying that "I'm also a Darwinian troll." It demonstrates that I'm unoriginal in that department too, and thus, originality has nothing to do with whether my views are valid. GET IT? • Edited by a Moderator •, you're stupid.

I honestly shouldn't even bother with such a dumb NA as you, but I might as well, lest you actually think you have a point. I NEVER SAID THAT ORIGINALITY HAD ANY BEARING ON TRUTHFULNESS. Only you think this, antieverything, only you. Dawkinsian logic and arguments are not used by any of the rational atheists on these boards anymore and are heavily frowned upon. Just the incredibly dumb ones think he's any use, like you. GET IT?! My statement merely said that you used the mindset of a vitrolic British zoologist with a chip on his shoulder who has been refuted on this forum to formulate your objection to Kabane and that you had nothing new to add, as Richard Dawkins created a whole new generation of deadbeat sophists who thrive on biblical, philisophical and scientific illiterates. This is evident as you call yourself "Uninfected" and that you used canards typical of a fundie skeptic at richarddawkins.net. My statement was one of exhaustion, as yet again I would have to talk with another dumb New Atheist on this subject. YOU.

Outrage? Get over yourself. I felt but the purest of pity for you, and it has nothing to do with who gets your pathetic little nominations. It's really laughable how a group can consistently engage in something so infantile. • Edited by a Moderator •

And I'll huff and puff and blow your house down!

[antieverything]

Actually, it's both, baby boy. You are to be dismissed as you both hold invalid views about religion being a mind virus AND that you are a fanboy who takes arguments from said outdated polemics.

The latter is all you made known to me via your insult, which I (rightfully, according to you) understood as an assault on the validity of my views, and so you can't expect me to have inferred the prior (i.e. these "refutations" you allude to).

Having said that, if there's something wrong with anything that I said, you should have pointed it out. I could just as easily proclaim that you hold invalid views, and that all of your arguments for the existence of god, from ontological to kalam to jesus, are flawed, improper, and/or incomplete. But that would just be lazy, and I wouldn't expect anyone to take me seriously.

[disciple100]

Wow, things are getting kinda heated in the spectator's seats.

[Chaotic Void]

Wow, things are getting kinda heated in the spectator's seats.

Meh, it's not heated enough. It will be when Jerry Springer refuses to go near it.

[Knowing Thomas]

*Sniffs armpit odor*
*Flexes muscles*

Oh yeah...

[Pumbelo]

The last post is quite amusing. "Yes, it's a wacky conspiracy-theory, but that does not weaken my case!"

[disciple100]

So, there are supposed to be 3 more rounds of this?

[no_knot]

Kabane's application (and Paul's) of Deut. 21:23 seems dubious. It wasn't the method of execution that made the person cursed by God, but rather that he had committed a "sin worthy of death". (Besides, even if it were the method, it's hangings, not crucifixions, that would result in the curse.)

1 Cor. 1:26-27 seems to imply that most early believers were not rich.

tehk's point about John the Baptist still stands especially in light of the misapplication of Deut. 21:23 noted earlier.

[mig_killer2]

Kabane's application (and Paul's) of Deut. 21:23 seems dubious. It wasn't the method of execution that made the person cursed by God, but rather that he had committed a "sin worthy of death". (Besides, even if it were the method, it's hangings, not crucifixions, that would result in the curse.)

1 Cor. 1:26-27 seems to imply that most early believers were not rich.

tehk's point about John the Baptist still stands especially in light of the misapplication of Deut. 21:23 noted earlier.

Deut 21:23 doesn't really connect the whole "dying on a tree" with the actual offense. so no, I dont think Kabane was misapplying those verses.

with regard to the verse in 1 Corinthians, Paul was an elite pharisee.

[no_knot]

Deut 21:23 doesn't really connect the whole "dying on a tree" with the actual offense. so no, I dont think Kabane was misapplying those verses.

See Deut. 21:22. It wasn't the method that caused the curse. And if it were, try to avoid being hung, not being crucified.

with regard to the verse in 1 Corinthians, Paul was an elite pharisee.

The issue is the general makeup of the Christian community.

[Kelp]

Just bumping this since Kabane posted in the debate.