February 2012 Screwballs

[jpholding]

Email:

Dear Mr.Packham,


Thank you very much for your excellent article on legally valid evidence, or otherwise, for the christian case and particularly the resurrection.


What hindered me in your opponent's retort was the snooty tone of it. Yet this shows up a particular difficulty. Apologists for the christian case generally flee to the haughty assumption that their opponent is unfamiliar with the enormous amount of literature composed by christian theologians. In many cases that might be true but does that really matter? An erroneous case does not become more believable by a myriad glosses on it. And who wants to spend ten or twenty years of his life on studying a case that remains basically unsound?


Holding was wrong in asserting that since we do not apply these rules of evidence to Tacitus we shouldn't apply them to the tale of the resurrection. Is there any fact in Tacitus on which a person would base his whole mode of life and world view? If so, one would be quite right in applying these rules of evidence. But of course there isn't. You were quite right in pointing that out.


Holding's reply to your rejoinder was of course quite unconvincing, his main point seemed to be that your reply was short . Well it wasn't but it certainly wasn't any longer than he deserved.

Fundy atheists: Making up special rules so that they can exclude whatever they want since 1735!

[Benson Shays]

Email:



Fundy atheists: Making up special rules so that they can exclude whatever they want since 1735!

Somebody post that pic with the guy yelling "The Stupid! It burns!"

[rogue06]

Somebody post that pic with the guy yelling "The Stupid! It burns!"

stupiditburns.jpg

[Benson Shays]

stupiditburns.jpg

That's going to get a lot of use around here.

[rogue06]

That's going to get a lot of use around here.

These also have their uses

stupidity.gif CircularLogicMascot.JPG

[MWM958]

On Loftus's blog, his new "Quote of the Day" is from...Loftus himself.

-___-

I would say screwball, but I think it's kinda redundant at this point.

[ukchristian28]

I posted J.P's video on the nature of Hell on my Facebook page to start a discussion. A fundy Christian called Alex Brannigan condemned it. Here's a little selection of his silliness:

"I can't say any further how many times the Scriptures talk about hell being forever eternal never-ending and real fire. Jesus warning over and over and over and over and over and over again. You have decided throw that all aside and believe your opinion. Because you do not understand that a holy God commands eternal judgment in fire"

He also seemed to think that we are saying that Hell is temporary:

The new testament never says Hell is temporary. ~ Man - made doctrine says that.

Ever heard a little sugar helps the medicine go down, by marry poppins?

Well I'll say this. ~ A little TRUTH mixed with lies can make deception acceptable to the one with itching ears.

My favourite suggestion of his is that the non-literal Hell fire view came from the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgatory:

The false catholic doctrine of purgatory also teaches, what you said.... that the fire is not real fire.

[Benson Shays]

On Loftus's blog, his new "Quote of the Day" is from...Loftus himself.

-___-

I would say screwball, but I think it's kinda redundant at this point.

Have you see the South Park episode in which all the smug hippies love the smell of their own farts?

[fm93]

Jaecp provides Screwball Gold for these responses to Jason Engwer, who recently started a thread to notify people of Triablogue's e-book rebuttal to Loftus.

*Notes: TEoC=The End of Christianity; TEoI=The End of Infidelity


After Jason pointed out that the foundation of science lies on the bedrock of philosophy:

When you, or Steve or whoever, says something challenging the underpinnings of science I just want to point out that we're talking on a computer.

Obviously something about science works because if it didn't we wouldn't be able to have this conversation. We live in the future.

Jaecp supports Loftus, and then says this disapprovingly to Jason:

I don't really think [TheologyWeb's] admin/owner staff appreciates someone with an account for 9 years logging on solely to plug his other projects

And finally, the "If I Only Had a Brain" Award

What is your goal with making this pdf? Not the "refuting TEoC" reason, but the precursor to that. Why do you want to refute TEoC and who is your target audience for TEoI?

[Teluog]

On Loftus's blog, his new "Quote of the Day" is from...Loftus himself.

-___-

I would say screwball, but I think it's kinda redundant at this point.

Lemme guess what it says: "I am smart, and awesome." John "Smart & Awesome" Loftus

Why do we call him DJ? His nickname should be "Lofty"

[jpholding]

I posted J.P's video on the nature of Hell on my Facebook page to start a discussion. A fundy Christian called Alex Brannigan condemned it.

I take it you were feeling masochistic?

Well, at least there's no spate of comments on that vid on YT this morning.

[Sparko]

I think SarahB has a crush on JPH.

[MaxVel]

I think SarahB has a crush on JPH.

And LPOT.

[fm93]

On the theological issue of the compatibility of Christianity and theistic evolution, Jorge tries to show incompatibility by linking to a YouTube video of a scientist supporting him. Even worse, the scientist he linked to is:

When people like me say that (Christian) Theistic Evolutionists are "screwed up" and "deluded"
about the compatibility between Biblical Christianity and Evolution, I / we are quickly shrugged
off as being "closed-minded, Fundamentalist, anti-science, ignorant" and so on. Okay, fine .........

So what will those people say when one of the top Evo-Promoters in the world says the same thing?

I guess we'll find out in this thread (link below - 1 minute length) ........... enjoy!

http://creation.com/creation-videos?fileID=BAbpfn9QgGA

Jorge just keeps sinking lower and lower.

[KingsGambit]

On the theological issue of the compatibility of Christianity and theistic evolution, Jorge tries to show incompatibility by linking to a YouTube video of a scientist supporting him. Even worse, the scientist he linked to is:



Jorge just keeps sinking lower and lower.

All the Christians in science - deluded compromisers who can be ignored. But Richard Dawkins, instant authority.

I have Jorge on ignore.