Tekton was funny/ Thanks for the laugh!

[Beavis]

Same old same old. Refute all the articles on infidels.
The atheists will do the same, refute all that is in the text books, of course there is some good science in the text books.
Whenever you people see yourselves on the losing side of innerrancy you always resort back to the same template responses, give it rest, we know all your tactics.
Till kicked you and your site where the sun doesn't shine.

"I have no way of knowing how many of these contacts acted on my request and urged Turkel to accept my challenge, but recently there have been indications that Turkel may be feeling the heat and now realizes that his continual rejection of the challenges may be making him look bad, because he finally published on his site the semblance of an acceptance of my challenge. This "acceptance" can be accessed here. Turkel's acceptance had conditions attached to it that were so patently absurd that he has since retreated from most of them. One condition was that I would have to pay 90% of the cost of maintaining his website, which would be 90% of $35 per month or $378 per year ($31.50 x 12), and would have to pay it eight years in advance. In other words, Turkel was saying that he would debate me on my site and his if I would just agree to pay him $3024 before the debate begins. (I guess his plea for money in the article mentioned above isn't bringing in the $80 per day he needs to be a "self- supporting" apologist.)"
http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/024jph.html

"Robert "No Links" Turkel"
"In most instances Turkel does not link to the articles he critiques or to the responses of the debaters he replies to. This has earned him the nickname "No Links." This tactic makes it less likely that readers will see the articles that Turkel attacks and it makes it less likely that readers will see Turkel's "arguments" dissected and dismissed as illogical, false and fallacious. Most people simply will not devote the time needed to hunt down the articles and the other debaters' responses. Furthermore, this particular manuever makes it easier for Turkel to misrepresent what the other people write."

Here is the bottom line,
"We know, if we know anything, that this book was written by savages -- savages who believed in slavery, polygamy and wars of extermination. We know that the story told is impossible, and that the miracles were never performed. This book admits that there are other gods besides Jehovah."
http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...oly_bible.html

Bye Mista tukey!

[jpholding]

Same old same old. Refute all the articles on infidels.

I did refute all the ones that are concerned with my area of specialty. Your point is what, other than that you're behind the times as usual?

I mean, a guy who spells "inerrancy" with two Ns really must have some serious intellectual deficiencies.

Till kicked you and your site where the sun doesn't shine.

HOO BOY. The "pay for 90% of my website" spiel? That was one of Till's most embarrassing gaffes of this century, you moron! We still get laughs out of that one!

http://www.tektonics.org/tsr/tillstill6.html

I quote myself from earlier work:

I pay for this site, so correspondent with the 90% fluff ratio I demand that Skeptic X pay for 90% of the costs of hosting any item he submits -- whether he meets challenge #1 above or not. Obviously the amount would have to be determined based on going rates for server space and the length of the article written. I also want payment for 8 years in advance (about the time I have the tektonics.org name reserved). Based on Skeptic X's behavior I am not so sure he'll be around that long before giving himself a coronary, and I think the security is a good idea.

I gave this as a debate condition before I knew that the critic would soon have his own website, but I'd like to bring it up again. Note the highlighted phrases. Here is what the critic gets out of the above, as he reports it to his readers:

One condition was that I would have to pay 90% of the cost of maintaining his website, which would be 90% of $35 per month or $378 per year...in other words, [Holding] was saying that he would debate me on my site and his if I would just agree to pay him $3024 before the debate begins.

The whole website? Did I say that? I suspect the cost would have been no more than $5 over 8 years for even the longest, fluffiest item he could produce, which would never occupy my entire website. (See the TheologyWeb "Contrived Gospels" thread for the critic's attempt to evade this misreading.)

Kehaar's so far behind he's now making plans to attend the 1986 World Series.

Here is the bottom line,
"We know, if we know anything, that this book was written by savages -- savages who believed in slavery, polygamy and wars of extermination. We know that the story told is impossible, and that the miracles were never performed. This book admits that there are other gods besides Jehovah."
http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...oly_bible.html

Great quote from Ingersoll! Here's one of my faves from that very work:

A few wandering families -- poor, wretched, without education, art or power; descendants of those who had been enslaved for four hundred years; ignorant as the inhabitants of Central Africa, had just escaped from their masters to the desert of Sinai. Their leader was Moses, a man who had been raised in the family of Pharaoh and had been taught the law and mythology of Egypt. For the purpose of controlling his followers he pretended that he was instructed and assisted by Jehovah, the God of these wanderers.

Wasn't he just the most darling racist pig you've ever read? Yep -- one of the heroes of the freethinking world there.

[fm93]

Hey Beavis, how much of a masochist are you? We've eviscerated you without anesthesia about 20 billion times already, and you keep coming back for more pain.

[Beavis]

You'll see how good you did when there is a poll for this thread LOL!

Oh Mista tukey, maybe dat manne bad boye say tings aboat afrika, but hee wright, dat dey savvages.

I know deefend racist, butt u doo misata turky,

"A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession."

23Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us."

24He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."

25The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said.

26He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."
Matthew 15

kall non isreelites doggies knoe goode mista turky! u sai dat tooday in skhool? kow goode mista tukey.

"You shall not eat anything which dies of itself. You may give it to the alien who is in your town, so that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner, for you are a holy people to the LORD your God. Dt. 14:21"

know isrealte kan ate ded annmal, butt hee cell too non isrealte, dat know godde mista tukey, bade rasisit peepole mista tukey, vedy bade.

U bade boye mista tukey, bade boy, mista tille spank u goode.

[jpholding]

I know deefend racist, butt u doo misata turky,

Oh my word. Someone here is about to slap you REALLY hard on that one...there's no racism at all re the incident with Jesus. Zero. Nada. I'll let the expert here slap you on that one though.

""You shall not eat anything which dies of itself. You may give it to the alien who is in your town, so that he may eat it, or you may sell it to a foreigner, for you are a holy people to the LORD your God. You shall not boil a young goat in its mother's milk" Dt. 14:21"

Uh, that's racist? How? Dumbass, people in that day and age ate carrion ALL THE TIME. You're obviously thinking this is "racist" as though the Jews were being told to sell damaged/spoiled goods to outsider. NO, STUPID. This is telling the Jews that though they are forbidden to eat what everyone NORMALLY ate -- and SOLD -- those outside the covenant are not held to the same strictures.

Good night you're a stupid seagull.

[Beavis]

know know.

only dey holey peepole, kan know eate ded annimal
dat bade mista tukey, know xcuse, dey bade raceisits mista tukey!

U bade boye, mista till give u goode spaanking!

u doggie too, thout u tukey, knoe doggie?

[jpholding]

Drunk again?

[Beavis]

longe tyme agoe, darke sckin manne goe too mkdonalds, aul hee wunt iz biggie mak, bade pezon beehind kounter tolde pour inocent manne, i cerve know monnkees, dat bade.
hee ennded upp cerveing mane, B-cauze hee begg four biggie mak, butt bosse ov mkdonalds ctill fyre dat emplowyee, cauze hee bade boye, Y knot jus cerve pour hugry mane biggie mak, Y hee kneed 2 kall dat perzon monkkeee 1st?

bade rasist pezon, dhat badd!

Y he jus Knot heel pour girle of deemon wright ov waye? -Y Hee kneed 2 kall dat laydie dogie 1st???????? perhapps hee tink dogGie waz Jeerman sheapard,>>>>>>DAT BADE MISTA tukey, reel bade.

eye gutt megga gass ,muzt gowe blowe FOT, too muzh tukey sangwich dis aftaknoon!
maa-B dat tukey waz all-reddy ded B-forE dey slize dat fore meet? U thinke dat bade tukey meet eye gut dis aftanoon waz frome bade gew dat cell ded meet 2 jentile marcet?

[jpholding]

I was wrong. It takes something much more narcotic than alcohol for this sort of thing to happen.

[Bill the Cat]

Same old same old. Refute all the articles on infidels.
The atheists will do the same, refute all that is in the text books, of course there is some good science in the text books.
Whenever you people see yourselves on the losing side of innerrancy you always resort back to the same template responses, give it rest, we know all your tactics.
Till kicked you and your site where the sun doesn't shine.

"I have no way of knowing how many of these contacts acted on my request and urged Turkel to accept my challenge, but recently there have been indications that Turkel may be feeling the heat and now realizes that his continual rejection of the challenges may be making him look bad, because he finally published on his site the semblance of an acceptance of my challenge. This "acceptance" can be accessed here. Turkel's acceptance had conditions attached to it that were so patently absurd that he has since retreated from most of them. One condition was that I would have to pay 90% of the cost of maintaining his website, which would be 90% of $35 per month or $378 per year ($31.50 x 12), and would have to pay it eight years in advance. In other words, Turkel was saying that he would debate me on my site and his if I would just agree to pay him $3024 before the debate begins. (I guess his plea for money in the article mentioned above isn't bringing in the $80 per day he needs to be a "self- supporting" apologist.)"
http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/024jph.html

"Robert "No Links" Turkel"
"In most instances Turkel does not link to the articles he critiques or to the responses of the debaters he replies to. This has earned him the nickname "No Links." This tactic makes it less likely that readers will see the articles that Turkel attacks and it makes it less likely that readers will see Turkel's "arguments" dissected and dismissed as illogical, false and fallacious. Most people simply will not devote the time needed to hunt down the articles and the other debaters' responses. Furthermore, this particular manuever makes it easier for Turkel to misrepresent what the other people write."

Here is the bottom line,
"We know, if we know anything, that this book was written by savages -- savages who believed in slavery, polygamy and wars of extermination. We know that the story told is impossible, and that the miracles were never performed. This book admits that there are other gods besides Jehovah."
http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...oly_bible.html

Bye Mista tukey!

Who is this "turkel" you speak of?

[Beavis]

oh mista tukey knowes,
mista tukey,
khemosh ask 4 U.
did knot khemosh kikc yahwah's butt N 2 kinggs 3??????????????????????????

Y yaaweh tell dem 2 gowe- N -dhere & dat dey wood winn, butt dey loze batdle to triaball guard Khemosh.????

Khemosh muzh 2 powafulle 4 yahwayy,
C >>> Yah-waye wanna kille pour litdle lambes , turdules 2, butt, Khemosh moore badder,,, hee kille hiz sun, >>>>woooowe!!

Khemosh scare all Yah-wayes jenocdal bade boyz, Ah, hee kille sun, muzh 2 powafull 4 Yah-waye.

Y - Yah-waye loze to Khemosh?

[jpholding]

Don't mind him. He's got a brain injury.

I think he has this old canard in mind though:

Then he took his firstborn son, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him as a sacrifice on the city wall. The fury against Israel was great; they withdrew and returned to their own land.

The "he" here is the king of Moab, who is taking on the Israelites and was losing pretty badly up to this point. Callahan sees this verse as evidence that Yahweh was at one time a mere tribal deity, not the overall Creator, and "the Israelites believed that Yahweh had no power in Moab" against Chemosh, the Moabite god - for otherwise, what is the "wrath" here, and why would they withdraw in the face of victory?

There is one big thing that speaks against this "wrath" being from Chemosh - in this war against Moab, Israel was not alone: They were accompanied by the Edomites and by the armies of Judah, and there is no indication that either of these armies had to take a break from the field.

However, Herzog and Gichon in Battles of the Bible [171] provide the answer: Child sacrifice was often performed in the ANE because of imminent plague. The Israelites would have interpreted the sacrifice as an indication that plague was already in the city, and therefore would have made haste to leave as soon as possible.

The word for "wrath" means indignation or strife, and "against" is a preposition that can mean among, between, concerning, or through.

He's kind of dumb, so it should take him about a week to figure this out.

[Tinúviel]

Oh, this is going to be good....

You'll see how good you did when there is a poll for this thread LOL!

Oh Mista tukey, maybe dat manne bad boye say tings aboat afrika, but hee wright, dat dey savvages.

I know deefend racist, butt u doo misata turky,

"A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession."

23Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us."

24He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."

25The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said.

26He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."
Matthew 15

kall non isreelites doggies knoe goode mista turky! u sai dat tooday in skhool? kow goode mista tukey.

I just got done with a thesis on this passage, prepare to be hoisted on your own petard.

The context for this passage is that Jesus is retreating from Jewish opposition, and from the crowds which followed him and his disciples. The only way to get away for a rest was to go to Gentile territory where "good Jews" would not go, for fear of becoming ritually unclean while there.

Jesus in Matthew is viewed as the honorable broker of God's favor to the Jews. Read some of the articles on Tektonics on honor-shame society if you didn't understand that last sentence. A broker couldn't just do anything he wanted with the resources he was given; to give resources to someone he wasn't supposed to give to would be considered stealing from the rightful recipients.

Furthermore, we must consider the presence of the disciples at the scene. They consistently presented as dunderheads who proceed to ever higher and more glorious levels of misunderstanding of Jesus' mission. If Jesus starts healing bunches of Gentiles, in Gentile-land, after a series of disputes with the Jewish leaders, someone less prone to misinterpretation would conclude "Hey, Jesus is starting a Gentile mission!" which is precisely not what's happening here. So the dialogue serves to clarify to the disciples, the woman, and whoever may hear about the incident that this is an exception, not a new rule.

Goodness, I wish commentaries would stop repeating the old canard that Jews went around calling Gentiles dogs all the time. It's not true, and it borders on anti-Semitic. In my thesis, I did the most in-depth study of kyon/kynarion that I'm aware of, and proved that it is not a racial insult. In fact, I argue that the background for Jesus' use of the metaphor is a standard Jewish one for Gentiles as beneficiaries, in a secondary sense, from the Messianic blessings. That said, a metaphor has only one point of comparison, and in this metaphor the point is one of priority; the Jews must recieve their blessing first.

So why was Jesus able to help the woman in the end? Because she believed that Jesus was able to help her without taking anything away from the Jewish people. She accepted that Jesus was sent to the Jews, she wasn't asking for anything that belonged to them. Rather, she had faith that God's grace was so abundant that God could give her what she needed without taking anything away from the Jews.

Stuff that in your pipe and smoke it (although for you, that might be more than a figure of speech... I doubt anyone with an unaltered state of consciousness could produce posts which are so mind-numbingly brain-damaged as yours).

[Raphael]

Oh, this is going to be good....



I just got done with a thesis on this passage, prepare to be hoisted on your own petard.

The context for this passage is that Jesus is retreating from Jewish opposition, and from the crowds which followed him and his disciples. The only way to get away for a rest was to go to Gentile territory where "good Jews" would not go, for fear of becoming ritually unclean while there.

Jesus in Matthew is viewed as the honorable broker of God's favor to the Jews. Read some of the articles on Tektonics on honor-shame society if you didn't understand that last sentence. A broker couldn't just do anything he wanted with the resources he was given; to give resources to someone he wasn't supposed to give to would be considered stealing from the rightful recipients.

Furthermore, we must consider the presence of the disciples at the scene. They consistently presented as dunderheads who proceed to ever higher and more glorious levels of misunderstanding of Jesus' mission. If Jesus starts healing bunches of Gentiles, in Gentile-land, after a series of disputes with the Jewish leaders, someone less prone to misinterpretation would conclude "Hey, Jesus is starting a Gentile mission!" which is precisely not what's happening here. So the dialogue serves to clarify to the disciples, the woman, and whoever may hear about the incident that this is an exception, not a new rule.

Goodness, I wish commentaries would stop repeating the old canard that Jews went around calling Gentiles dogs all the time. It's not true, and it borders on anti-Semitic. In my thesis, I did the most in-depth study of kyon/kynarion that I'm aware of, and proved that it is not a racial insult. In fact, I argue that the background for Jesus' use of the metaphor is a standard Jewish one for Gentiles as beneficiaries, in a secondary sense, from the Messianic blessings. That said, a metaphor has only one point of comparison, and in this metaphor the point is one of priority; the Jews must recieve their blessing first.

So why was Jesus able to help the woman in the end? Because she believed that Jesus was able to help her without taking anything away from the Jewish people. She accepted that Jesus was sent to the Jews, she wasn't asking for anything that belonged to them. Rather, she had faith that God's grace was so abundant that God could give her what she needed without taking anything away from the Jews.

Stuff that in your pipe and smoke it (although for you, that might be more than a figure of speech... I doubt anyone with an unaltered state of consciousness could produce posts which are so mind-numbingly brain-damaged as yours).

Hey Tinúviel, if it's not a problem, I wouldn't mind getting to read that thesis. It sounds very interesting .

[Stax]

Hey Tinúviel, if it's not a problem, I wouldn't mind getting to read that thesis. It sounds very interesting .

Yeah; I wouldn't mind reading it too.

Oh, and it looks like Beavis has finished having his mental breakdown. 'twas only a matter of time.