Author Topic: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"  (Read 13013 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Larissa238

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Darwins +12/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #87 on: December 26, 2010, 04:59:00 PM »
There's no speculation if the event actually happened...stop dodging the proof. And (lol) it doesn't say zombies rose from the grave.

Look up the scripture. Matt 27:52 "The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life"

Sure sounds like zombies to me.
On why Christians and non-Christians have the same rate of divorce:

He would rather it that they worship Him, instead of spending their time on family.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1984
  • Darwins +187/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #88 on: December 26, 2010, 05:27:09 PM »
Ok. I will...but my point is "(a) the very basis of a prayer - any prayer (as framed) - that is directed towards 'self' will fail, and (b) any prayer that lacks the principal foundation of 'faith in the existence of Yah (to even hear the prayer)' will fail, and (c) any prayer to Yah from someone who's not first "right" with Yah (i.e. obedient to his instructions & in his presence) will fail. These qualifications disqualify both the [cafeteria] xian (and most xians - like 90% - are such) and the atheist (100%).

This is simply untrue.  I don't know how you can say this with a straight face. 

How do you explain it then, when a baby eating, ill-hearted atheist like me says a completely sarcastic prayer about something I want... and it comes true?  I mean, if I said "Fuck you God, I don't believe in you.  Oh, and please, please, please God I pray you let X happen", and it happens, how do you explain it?  I've done that type of thing plenty of times.  That's a directed prayer at myself, from an atheist who is obviously not "right" with God. 

Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Online Graybeard

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 6432
  • Darwins +460/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #89 on: December 26, 2010, 05:49:55 PM »
Re:  "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"

[...] I have been a teacher, a manager, an administrator, a government employee, a business owner, an account rep, an executive, a person working in the financial sector and in human resources, and a software developer.  I am currently the CEO of a moderately large (about 3,000 members) nonprofit entity.
Why do you think you can't hold down a steady job? For "nonprofit" may we substitute, "religious"?

Quote
"Why won't God heal amputees?"

I don't know that He doesn't; and neither do you.  I have heard of instances where individuals have had short or partial limbs and those limbs made whole instantly following prayer. 
Pics or it never happened.
RELIGION, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable. Ambrose Bierce

Offline Joshua

Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #90 on: December 26, 2010, 06:16:13 PM »
There's no speculation if the event actually happened...stop dodging the proof. And (lol) it doesn't say zombies rose from the grave.

Look up the scripture. Matt 27:52 "The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life"

Sure sounds like zombies to me.

But does it say "zombies rose from the grave"?

Offline Joshua

Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #91 on: December 26, 2010, 06:18:26 PM »
Ok. I will...but my point is "(a) the very basis of a prayer - any prayer (as framed) - that is directed towards 'self' will fail, and (b) any prayer that lacks the principal foundation of 'faith in the existence of Yah (to even hear the prayer)' will fail, and (c) any prayer to Yah from someone who's not first "right" with Yah (i.e. obedient to his instructions & in his presence) will fail. These qualifications disqualify both the [cafeteria] xian (and most xians - like 90% - are such) and the atheist (100%).

This is simply untrue.  I don't know how you can say this with a straight face. 

How do you explain it then, when a baby eating, ill-hearted atheist like me says a completely sarcastic prayer about something I want... and it comes true?  I mean, if I said "Fuck you God, I don't believe in you.  Oh, and please, please, please God I pray you let X happen", and it happens, how do you explain it?  I've done that type of thing plenty of times.  That's a directed prayer at myself, from an atheist who is obviously not "right" with God.

((this is a little wierd...a believer saying "prayer fails" and an atheist saying "prayer works"  :o))

Trust me it didn't and would never work if directed towards Yah (outside of the conditions I stipulated). Now...whomever else you pray to who answers your prayer positively is between you and them.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 06:21:51 PM by Joshua »

Offline Larissa238

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Darwins +12/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #92 on: December 26, 2010, 06:31:38 PM »
Quote from: modbreak
removed unnecessary nested quotes
But does it say "zombies rose from the grave"?

It says dead people rose from their graves. To your point, the word "zombie" is not used, but the (un)dead did rise from their graves according to Matthew.

« Last Edit: December 27, 2010, 09:51:24 AM by Moderator_020 »
On why Christians and non-Christians have the same rate of divorce:

He would rather it that they worship Him, instead of spending their time on family.

Offline Joshua

Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #93 on: December 26, 2010, 06:35:51 PM »
Quote from: modbreak
removed unnecessary nested quotes

It says dead people rose from their graves. To your point, the word "zombie" is not used, but the (un)dead did rise from their graves according to Matthew.

But does it even say "the 'undead' rose from their graves"?  :) (I know I'm fighting against modern cinema and the image it projects).
« Last Edit: December 27, 2010, 09:52:07 AM by Moderator_020 »

Offline pianodwarf

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4350
  • Darwins +206/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappĂ©
Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #94 on: December 26, 2010, 06:43:51 PM »
But does it even say "the 'undead' rose from their graves"?  :) (I know I'm fighting against modern cinema and the image it projects).

On the off chance that you truly don't know this and aren't just trolling: by definition, corpses that rise from their graves and walk around and so on are undead.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Offline Larissa238

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 880
  • Darwins +12/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #95 on: December 26, 2010, 06:46:51 PM »

But does it even say "the 'undead' rose from their graves"?  :) (I know I'm fighting against modern cinema and the image it projects).

If you were dead and buried and then came back to life, what else could you be but "undead"?
On why Christians and non-Christians have the same rate of divorce:

He would rather it that they worship Him, instead of spending their time on family.

Offline Joshua

Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #96 on: December 26, 2010, 06:54:22 PM »

But does it even say "the 'undead' rose from their graves"?  :) (I know I'm fighting against modern cinema and the image it projects).

If you were dead and buried and then came back to life, what else could you be but "undead"?

...you would be alive. I think you guys' point is "any form of resurrection would result in undead (i.e. ruined body walking around between a state of life and death)". Am I correct?
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 06:57:31 PM by Joshua »

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #97 on: December 26, 2010, 06:57:05 PM »
But does it even say "the 'undead' rose from their graves"?  :) (I know I'm fighting against modern cinema and the image it projects).

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/undead

Quote
1. Pertaining to a corpse, though having qualities of life.
2. (horror fiction) Being animate, though non-living.


The word describes them perfectly.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #98 on: December 26, 2010, 07:06:04 PM »
Funny, if it were anything but the bible, Joshua would probably be happy to call them "zombies" or "undead" but because it's the BIBLE we CAN'T call them those names... If it were Harry Potter or Edgar Allen Poe they would be "undead" or "zombies" but we can't call them that if they are bible zombies.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline Joshua

Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #99 on: December 26, 2010, 07:17:53 PM »
Funny, if it were anything but the bible, Joshua would probably be happy to call them "zombies" or "undead" but because it's the BIBLE we CAN'T call them those names... If it were Harry Potter or Edgar Allen Poe they would be "undead" or "zombies" but we can't call them that if they are bible zombies.

I would if it actually used those names, Ag...but it doesn't.

But does it even say "the 'undead' rose from their graves"?  :) (I know I'm fighting against modern cinema and the image it projects).

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/undead

Quote
1. Pertaining to a corpse, though having qualities of life.
2. (horror fiction) Being animate, though non-living.


The word describes them perfectly.

No...not perfectly.

Notice the above definition (and even others if you venture a search like I just did)...

Undead is "Corpses, though have qualities of life"
"Undead is...beings that are deceased yet behave as if alive"
Undead "Those creatures which are dead yet still moving"

An "undead" is a corpse that is animated as though it were alive;

The most specific understanding from several different sources for the idea of "undead" is that it is a "imitation of life"; a simulacrum of life; pretense of being alive though dead.

Now, regardless of your belief that Matthew 27:52 is fact or fiction, does the record say "corpses exited their graves and behaved; had qualities; still moved as though they were still alive"? Or does it say "bodies who had died (past tense), were raised to life?

...and just to show that even the writer knew the difference between a corpse and a [living] body, please compare Matthew 24:28 with 27:52...

Matthew 24:28 "For wheresoever the carcase (ptoma) is, there will the eagles be gathered together"

Matthew 27:52 "The tombs broke open and the bodies (sotoma) of many holy people who had died were raised to life"

ptoma (Greek) means "ruin; corpse"
sotoma (Greek) means "living flesh; body"
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 07:19:40 PM by Joshua »

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10545
  • Darwins +263/-33
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #100 on: December 26, 2010, 07:34:12 PM »
I'm going to side with Joshua on the "undead" thing but with everyone else on the "zombie" thing because of this:
Quote from: thefreedictionary.com
2. a supernatural spirit that reanimates a dead body
3. a corpse brought to life in this manner

By definition, dead brought to life are zombies but not all zombies are undead

EDIT#1: Added some information and removed pointless quoting

EDIT#2: Joshua, just because someone doesn't use a word doesn't mean it can't be used in that context. If two words mean the same in the same context, they can both be used in the same context. As an example, I'm going to rewrite the previous sentence.
Poster above me, just because a person doesn't use a certain term doesn't mean it cannot be used in that situation. If two words have equal meaning in the same situation, both can be used in it.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 07:42:39 PM by Blaziken_rjcf »
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Joshua

Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #101 on: December 26, 2010, 07:44:58 PM »
I'm going to side with Joshua on the "undead" thing but with everyone else on the "zombie" thing because of this:
Quote from: thefreedictionary.com
2. a supernatural spirit that reanimates a dead body
3. a corpse brought to life in this manner

By definition, dead brought to life are zombies but not all zombies are undead

hmph... :? You may have a point there...let me visit thefreedictionary.com and read it (one sec)...

Offline William

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3564
  • Darwins +92/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #102 on: December 26, 2010, 07:46:24 PM »
I would like to know what these "undead/zombies" (whatever who cares?)  actually look like.   Are they physiologically restored i.e. become unrotten again. 
One must assume that for them to stand up and behave with any purpose they would require intact nerves, muscles, etc

I would expect them to pong a fair bit - unless they had a bath and change of clothes - but otherwise be quite hard to tell apart from people who had never been dead.
Git mit uns

Offline Joshua

Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #103 on: December 26, 2010, 07:47:39 PM »
I'm going to side with Joshua on the "undead" thing but with everyone else on the "zombie" thing because of this:
Quote from: thefreedictionary.com
2. a supernatural spirit that reanimates a dead body
3. a corpse brought to life in this manner

By definition, dead brought to life are zombies but not all zombies are undead

EDIT#1: Added some information and removed pointless quoting

EDIT#2: Joshua, just because someone doesn't use a word doesn't mean it can't be used in that context. If two words mean the same in the same context, they can both be used in the same context. As an example, I'm going to rewrite the previous sentence.
Poster above me, just because a person doesn't use a certain term doesn't mean it cannot be used in that situation. If two words have equal meaning in the same situation, both can be used in it.

...which words are we talking about? "Zombie" & "undead" or (mine) "ptoma" & "sotoma"?

Offline Joshua

Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #104 on: December 26, 2010, 07:51:26 PM »
I would like to know what these "undead/zombies" (whatever who cares?)  actually look like.   Are they physiologically restored i.e. become unrotten again. 
One must assume that for them to stand up and behave with any purpose they would require intact nerves, muscles, etc

I would expect them to pong a fair bit - unless they had a bath and change of clothes - but otherwise be quite hard to tell apart from people who had never been dead.

The following is a verse from a longer passage explaining how a similar future resurrection will occur for believers (like the one in matt 27:52):

1 Cor 15:51-53 "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality."
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 07:54:16 PM by Joshua »

Offline William

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3564
  • Darwins +92/-2
  • Gender: Male
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #105 on: December 26, 2010, 07:54:03 PM »
^^ all shampooed and clean undies too?
Git mit uns

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 11990
  • Darwins +618/-23
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #106 on: December 26, 2010, 07:54:17 PM »
Well if you consider it "magic" then you limit yourself, as one can pick any form of modern medicine or technology and use a time machine (hypothetically) to show it to earlier man and they will most definitely call it magic or sorcery for no other logical reason than the fact that they can't explain how it works, right? Absent of explanation doesn't lend itself to absent of existence (of particular knowledge)...and that's not to say that if they are educated in it they can't eventually understand, correct?

So you are saying yhwh's powers are not magic, but actually advanced technology?  I have heard the quote[1] that sufficiently advanced technology will appear to be magic to a less advanced culture.  But I have never heard yhwh's powers characterized that way.  If it is not magic, what is it?


Ok. I will...but my point is "(a) the very basis of a prayer - any prayer (as framed) - that is directed towards 'self' will fail, and (b) any prayer that lacks the principal foundation of 'faith in the existence of Yah (to even hear the prayer)' will fail, and (c) any prayer to Yah from someone who's not first "right" with Yah (i.e. obedient to his instructions & in his presence) will fail. These qualifications disqualify both the [cafeteria] xian (and most xians - like 90% - are such) and the atheist (100%).

I fail to see what this has to do with our conversation at all.

From the responses it would seem that you didn't watch the series (as the series does give book, chapter and verse of the designs (on screen) along with supported archaeological proof)

I make it a policy to not watch videos in lieu of conversation or in debates.  If there is information I need to support one of my points, it is incumbent on me to provide it.  Not to tell you "oh, it's in this book.  Go read it."  Imay on occasion watch a video to supplement a conversation, but usually not, because there is a pattern of them just wasting my time. 

If it is not important enough to you to go through the video(s) yourself to let me know the verses and chapters, then that is your prerogative.  I consider the point sufficiently unsupported as to call it defeated.  There is no mechanical engineering in the bible. 

...but then you attempt to discredit the person referencing the book, chapter and verse, which is a little dishonest.

Just because I did not watch your videos does not mean I did no research.  I do not find him credible.  I found no credentials that would make him credible as an archaeologist.  This site details some other problems with his credentials as a scholar.  I have no idea whether that site is valid, so take it with a grain of salt.

Hmm..? No, I said time was relative for each person experiencing it,

What specifically do you mean by that?

Time is a concept and (itself) ISN'T practical except to those who use it in such a way.

Just like food is not practical except to those who eat it.  I'm not sure what you are trying to communicate to me here.

But to clarify, I first stated that there was evidence of "ATM" in scripture (after which you asked for proof/location)...now you ask to "explain what's 'advanced' about it"...ok so let's explain what's "advance" about this time measurement...:

Let's just be clear - there is no moving of goal posts on my part.  My original question:
As for "advance time measurement", please explain how it is that and not hyperbole.  I am curious how you know it is "advance time measurement", what the conversion is and how it is useful.

I ask for it all there.  If I keep asking, or ask in different ways, it is because your answers seem to indicate you misunderstand what I am asking.

1. We measure time on 1 dimension/plane (some call it the 4th); it's linear and from our perspective (using our units of measurement).

What do you mean by "from our perspective"?  What other perspectives are there?

2. However, since we weren't "there" at the beginning of this linear plane (nor will we be there at its end) we can't conclude that our perspective (units of time) is constant, but that - indeed - they [units of time] are variable...but "by how much", we can't know.

I have no idea what you are trying to communicate here.


4. A "Yom" is a perspective...

Why on earth would you conclude that this represents "ATM" and not a paucity of language?  Why would anyone think this has anything to do with

Well wait a sec!? Was Yah lying? Is this an error in scripture? No, this is scriptural proof that time is measured on a more advanced level than our own; Advance Time Measurement.

Or it was just crappy writing by unsophisticated iron age goatherds?  I see no reason to believe there is anything advanced about this.  You propose a unit of measure that is changes arbitrarily and in meaningless ways.  You propose no conversion factor and no reason to use this measure. Your statement should be dismissed out of hand.

You see...if you gave me a measurement in time, it's ok because your perspective is the same as mine (because we are two persons who are similar lifeforms) and it would be safe to assume that I could directly relate to that unit of time. But if (let's say) Yah gave you a measurement in time, your perspective is not the same as his (because you are two persons who measure time differently) so you couldn't simply relate to it on a human level.

Say you were god of some bacteria.  And say you gave them a time reference.  Would you give it to them in a way they could understand, or would you give it to them in a way only you could understand?

Why anyone would worship a god too stupid or inconsiderate to speak in terms they can understand is beyond me.

Cicadas only live for two (of our) weeks once they're adults, but is that any less a lifetime from their perspective? No. We have a more advance measurement of time as different lifeforms compared to them.

1. why on earth would god speak in "lifetimes" and mean cicadas when talking to people?
2. you still have not shown how it is more advanced.

As Einstein said, "time is relative".

This does not come within shouting distance of what Einstein said.  I'll let the people here who understand relativity better address that, though.

I give you more credit than this. This isn't an intellegent way to respond. Respond to any of my points in full. Don't snag this quote out of context (c'mon dude?).

In what way is it out of context?

With respect, the bank does NOT own the car when you ask for a car loan (or mortgage or personal loan). YOU agree to forfeit the car (the house or thing) if YOU can't pay the cost of borrowing money from the bank.

You are being pedantic and arguing against things I have not said. 

When you take out a loan, the bank owns the thing that is collateral until the loan is paid off.  If the thing is a house, they hold the deed.  If the thing is a car, they hold the title.  The bank owns the thing.  You pay the bank.  When you have been paid, you get the deed or the title or whatever.  YOU are not owned.

They don't own the item until you break the first part of the agreement.

No, that is just when they take it.


Someone has been lying to you.

I am sure someone has.  However, it is not the people you think.


"Balloon Payment"'...."Refinance"..."Trade in"..."lease to own"..."credit extension"...

Irrelevant.  Those do not make you the property.


There's no speculation if the event actually happened...stop dodging the proof. And (lol) it doesn't say zombies rose from the grave.

It is not a proof.  Nor was it a dodge.  I am not arguing whether an eclipse happened.  I am saying, it is not proof of anything other than an eclipse. As for the zombies, others have addressed it. 

It could not be any clearer that you'd rather say "it can't be proven" (and maybe you don't want it to be), than to take your time and study the proofs I've offered even to disprove them.

I've told you, I am not going to go watch your videos and I've told you why.  I consider it a concession on your part that you will not provide the information and keep telling me to watch an 11 part video.
 1. was that Carl Sagan?  Arthur Clark?  I forget who...
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline Joshua

Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #107 on: December 26, 2010, 07:54:45 PM »
^^ all shampooed and clean undies too?

Bling-Bling!! (lol)

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10545
  • Darwins +263/-33
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #108 on: December 26, 2010, 07:57:00 PM »
...which words are we talking about? "Zombie" & "undead" or (mine) "ptoma" & "sotoma"?

"Zombie" and "bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life"
Basically using the word "zombie" to refer to those people

EDIT #1:
On relativity:
Basically depending on your speed, time around becomes slower or faster. IIRC[1] it has something to do with faster things not being as influenced by gravity (and thus its distortion of space-time)

Take the first edit with a fat grain of salt, since I don't remember relativity that well. However, I think that's somewhat close

EDIT #2:
And now I must go to sleep. I shall check this topic in the morning and reply to any posts related to me (and the ones that aren't that I feel like replying to)
 1. If I Remember Correctly
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 08:02:45 PM by Blaziken_rjcf »
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #109 on: December 26, 2010, 08:24:16 PM »
Funny, if it were anything but the bible, Joshua would probably be happy to call them "zombies" or "undead" but because it's the BIBLE we CAN'T call them those names... If it were Harry Potter or Edgar Allen Poe they would be "undead" or "zombies" but we can't call them that if they are bible zombies.

I would if it actually used those names, Ag...but it doesn't.

You are simply in denial because you don't like having those words attached to your holy book. It doesn't have to use those words explicitly in order for us to use other words that mean the same thing. And, like I said, if it were any book but the Bible you wouldn't think twice about calling them "undead" or "zombies."

This is a huge red herring, anyway.
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline Joshua

Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #110 on: December 26, 2010, 08:38:07 PM »
Well if you consider it "magic" then you limit yourself, as one can pick any form of modern medicine or technology and use a time machine (hypothetically) to show it to earlier man and they will most definitely call it magic or sorcery for no other logical reason than the fact that they can't explain how it works, right? Absent of explanation doesn't lend itself to absent of existence (of particular knowledge)...and that's not to say that if they are educated in it they can't eventually understand, correct?

So you are saying yhwh's powers are not magic, but actually advanced technology?  I have heard the quote[1] that sufficiently advanced technology will appear to be magic to a less advanced culture.  But I have never heard yhwh's powers characterized that way.  If it is not magic, what is it?
 1. was that Carl Sagan?  Arthur Clark?  I forget who...

Knowledge is power.

Ok. I will...but my point is "(a) the very basis of a prayer - any prayer (as framed) - that is directed towards 'self' will fail, and (b) any prayer that lacks the principal foundation of 'faith in the existence of Yah (to even hear the prayer)' will fail, and (c) any prayer to Yah from someone who's not first "right" with Yah (i.e. obedient to his instructions & in his presence) will fail. These qualifications disqualify both the [cafeteria] xian (and most xians - like 90% - are such) and the atheist (100%).

I fail to see what this has to do with our conversation at all.

If you've failed then there's no need to continue with it.

From the responses it would seem that you didn't watch the series (as the series does give book, chapter and verse of the designs (on screen) along with supported archaeological proof)

I make it a policy to not watch videos in lieu of conversation or in debates.  If there is information I need to support one of my points, it is incumbent on me to provide it.  Not to tell you "oh, it's in this book.  Go read it."  Imay on occasion watch a video to supplement a conversation, but usually not, because there is a pattern of them just wasting my time. 

If it is not important enough to you to go through the video(s) yourself to let me know the verses and chapters, then that is your prerogative.  I consider the point sufficiently unsupported as to call it defeated.  There is no mechanical engineering in the bible.

Its a good thing that's your policy...although I'm curious, if I had a similar policy for an athiest's scientific proofs against my beliefs, what the response would be. Any takers? Anyone? What would you say to me if I took this stance if the situation were reversed?

Say you were god of some bacteria.  And say you gave them a time reference.  Would you give it to them in a way they could understand, or would you give it to them in a way only you could understand?

Why anyone would worship a god too stupid or inconsiderate to speak in terms they can understand is beyond me.

"and god said to this bacteria, 'a day [yom] for a year...', understand?"

This does not come within shouting distance of what Einstein said.  I'll let the people here who understand relativity better address that, though.

You say that it doesn't come close to what Einstein said, and yet you leave it to someone else to explain it? But surely you know enough to make this determination.

With respect, the bank does NOT own the car when you ask for a car loan (or mortgage or personal loan). YOU agree to forfeit the car (the house or thing) if YOU can't pay the cost of borrowing money from the bank.

You are being pedantic and arguing against things I have not said.


NOTE: I Created the engarged bolded in poster's quote. He did not enlarge it or bold it himself. I merely want to show that he's again being a bit dishonest...
Incorrect.  They do not own any part of me.  I am not collateral.  When I take out a loan for a car,the car is collateral, so the bank owns the car, not me.  If I do not wish to continue to pay for the car and I stop paying the bank, they take the car, they do not take me.  If they tried, not only would I have firm legal ground for killing them, they would also be subject to criminal charges and a rather lucrative civil suit.

As far as taxes, I am not owned.  As a part of a civlil society where I enjoy the benefits of roads, bridges, police protection and laws, I am responsible to contribute. 

I am afraid, Joshua, that your perspective has been perverted by idiots who do not have your best interests at heart.

They don't own the item until you break the first part of the agreement.

No, that is just when they take it.

This is false, buddy. Obviously you didnt read even the beginning of "Modern Money Mechanics", but then again maybe you have a book policy?

"Balloon Payment"'...."Refinance"..."Trade in"..."lease to own"..."credit extension"...

Irrelevant.  Those do not make you the property.

I never said they did.


There's no speculation if the event actually happened...stop dodging the proof. And (lol) it doesn't say zombies rose from the grave.

It is not a proof.  Nor was it a dodge.  I am not arguing whether an eclipse happened.  I am saying, it is not proof of anything other than an eclipse. As for the zombies, others have addressed it. 

It could not be any clearer that you'd rather say "it can't be proven" (and maybe you don't want it to be), than to take your time and study the proofs I've offered even to disprove them.

I've told you, I am not going to go watch your videos and I've told you why.  I consider it a concession on your part that you will not provide the information and keep telling me to watch an 11 part video.

(lol) You can consider it whatever you want. Heck, you make your own policies right, so why is this any different? But if you showed evidence that you tried to watch it (because you can't help but to quote verses if you did) I would reciprocate and this conversation could continue (since when were videos held to a different standard than other references? This whole thread was started because of several videos, LOL).

EDIT: Added last 2 sentences
« Last Edit: December 26, 2010, 08:47:49 PM by Joshua »

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6856
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #111 on: December 26, 2010, 08:52:40 PM »
Quote from: joshua
5. Debt is natural. Ownership of persons, places or things is transferred when people can't pay. But I bet most people never read that while man will KEEP people in slavery, Yah DEMANDS ALL debts be forgiven and slaves freed EVERY JUBILEE YEAR.

So you haven't read the bible. Gotcha.

To be fair: Why don't you mention the other god-sanctioned ways israelites scored free labour?

BUMPED and BOLDED
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline Joshua

Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #112 on: December 26, 2010, 09:22:16 PM »
Quote from: joshua
5. Debt is natural. Ownership of persons, places or things is transferred when people can't pay. But I bet most people never read that while man will KEEP people in slavery, Yah DEMANDS ALL debts be forgiven and slaves freed EVERY JUBILEE YEAR.

So you haven't read the bible. Gotcha.

To be fair: Why don't you mention the other god-sanctioned ways israelites scored free labour?

BUMPED and BOLDED

Ah, Mr. Bold! <said in my best Dr. Evil accent>

Free labour? Haven't read the bible? what means thou?

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6856
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #113 on: December 26, 2010, 09:44:08 PM »
Reading your posts, it seems you present the issue of slavery as if it was only about debt.

I was wondering why you are omitting instances of non-debt related god-ordained enslavement. If a justification for bible slavery (that is consistent with your god concept) is your aim, then you're not doing a fair job of it by not including all of the facets of it.

My original assumption was that such conduct couldn't be willful, thus my assumption that you've not yet done a full bible read. I have now had the chance to see this sort of thing from you in another thread, and am able now to consider a few more options.
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline Agamemnon

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4940
  • Darwins +15/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #114 on: December 26, 2010, 09:51:17 PM »
I hope you are not considering a lie by omission, Pony...
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.  --Bertrand Russell

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1984
  • Darwins +187/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: "10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer"
« Reply #115 on: December 26, 2010, 11:14:18 PM »
Quote from: modbreak
removed unnecessary nested quotes
((this is a little wierd...a believer saying "prayer fails" and an atheist saying "prayer works"  :o))

Trust me it didn't and would never work if directed towards Yah (outside of the conditions I stipulated). Now...whomever else you pray to who answers your prayer positively is between you and them.

How can you say it didn't work if I got what I wanted?  I was trying to show you that none of your criteria are requirements for affirmative answers to prayers as you claim them to be.  I wasn't trying to show you that prayer doesn't work... at least not in that post.  I was, however, trying to set the stage for the post that does show you that prayer doesn't work.   

Look, you say prayer will only work if people meet the specific criteria you listed.  But what if I give you evidence that I do not meet even a single one of your criteria, yet it can still seem like I get my prayers answered with a yes?  How do you explain that away?  Doesn't that defeat your entire criteria argument?  For example, if I say "God you don't exist, but if you do, fuck you... Oh, and please let the Patriots win their first playoff game this year"... if the Pats win the game, how can you say God didn't answer my prayer?  You say "trust me" as if that's some sort of evidence or something.  No, I won't trust you with this.  I got what I wanted, didn't I?  I prayed, didn't I?  It was a selfish prayer, I don't have faith in God, I'm not "right" with God, yet I still get what I want.  None of your criteria met, yet Pats win.  What gives?  The answer is pretty easy isn't it?  And the answer is entirely the point.

Understand that I am absolutely sure the Christian God does not answer prayers because He doesn't exist.  If I operate under that assumption, which I do, then I have to explain occurrences like the example I listed above.  Like I said, very easy!  Prior to my prayer, there was a good chance they would win the game in the first place!  They were the better team.  You might even agree with me that God had nothing to do with it.  GREAT!  That means you're using your head.  The entire point I am trying to make is that everything anyone asks for in prayer is exactly the same situation.  It doesn't matter how devout, or faithful, or "right" with God someone is; the odds of them getting what they pray for are EXACTLY the same, pre and post prayer.  It changes nothing. It all has to do with the circumstances and the events surrounding that which was prayed for; just like the Patriots game.   Until you can prove that isn't the case, why would anyone believe otherwise?   

When people say "God answered my prayers", how do you determine whether or not God actually did that?  When people say "Thor answered my prayers", how do you personally know this is NOT the case?  Probably because you don't believe in Thor, right?  So how do you explain it when people who pray to Thor appear to get their prayers answered?  Normal circumstances?  Blind luck?  Statistical probability?  Yeah, all of those things.  You would probably explain it the same way I do.  Now all you have to do is understand that your God is exactly the same!  Meeting the criteria you outlined doesn't improve your chances in the slightest.  It just doesn't.  You can say it does all you want, and you can say "trust me" until you turn blue, but until you can provide a single shred of evidence in favor of that, then your God theory on prayer has no more believability than the Thor theory does. 

When you understand why you KNOW Thor doesn't answer prayers, you will understand why your God doesn't either. 
« Last Edit: December 27, 2010, 09:56:46 AM by Moderator_020 »
Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT