Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Religious Discussion / Re: No True Scotsman
« Last post by wheels5894 on Today at 03:28:36 AM »

Okay let's start there.  I will assume since you are claiming it didn't happen that you have researched Ezekiel 29:11.  Some commentaries suggest this occurred, or may have occurred, during the time of Nebuchadnezzar.  What makes you right and them wrong?


No, you are wrong. I am claiming that there is no evidence of it ever happening. Given the importance of the area for access to the Med, the food sources provided by the Nile Delta it seems extremely unlikely that the whole area would not see a human foot for 40 years, doesn't it?


So to see if it happened, we are looking for evidence that some other power in the region collected up the entire population, took them somewhere else, and then guarded the land to stop anyone getting in. Remember the claim is that no a single human would be in the area for 40 years. So, evidence then?


Now I am aware that at some time in the future, some 5 billion years to be accurate, no one will be living on the planet as the whole of the solar system will be enclosed in our sun, which will be, by then, a red giant. However Egypt will then not be unoccupied for 40 years by for ever.


So, I am open to any evidence. What have you got?
2
General Religious Discussion / Re: No True Scotsman
« Last post by Anfauglir on Today at 03:20:27 AM »
A couple of questions I've asked recently that Jst has not answered - I've bolded the direct questions because he must have missed them.

I'm sure (Abraham)loved his son dearly, just as much as he loved his god.  But when push came to shove, he was prepared to kill his son to do god's will.  And that's an exact parallel to when Christ says "If anyone comes to me and does not hate (their family)--such a person cannot be my disciple".  Not that they should "hate" their family, I'm with you on that.  But that - if push comes to shove and there is a crunch point - they MUST put Christ's wishes first.

Suppose your god spoke to you tomorrow, and said "hey Jst - I need you to walk out on your family, right now, and depart for Africa to minister.  You can never see or contact them again".  What would you do, in that situation? Because that's where Christ's words in Luke become important, when service and love of Christ over and above your family becomes a one-or-other option: and Christ's words themselves indicate that in such a circumstance, you follow Christ rather than stay with your family.

Are you as true a disciple as Abraham was?

So: your assertion now is that Christ's message "be nice, because you never know when it will be me" is not even targeted at Christians, but at those who don't believe him in the first place?  For an omnipotent being, that seems like a most peculiar thing to do.  After all, Jst, how much notice do you take of what the Hindu gods tell you?  When did you sit biting your nails over the things the Koran tells you are important?
.....
After all, this isn't a god saying "help others, because its the right thing to do", or even just "help others, and you will get a reward".  No, this is "help others - or you will get an eternity of horrific punishment".  And that's not for the people who are hanging on his ever word, either.  No, this is for the billions who may never hear it, or not understand, or who have (quite valid) reasons for being afraid to do so.
3
Chatter / Re: How to Know You Won a Political Debate on the Internet
« Last post by Anfauglir on Today at 02:58:33 AM »
he's deleted most of his worst stuff, but one can still find it on other websites that took him to task for his claims.  just google "scott adams misogyny" and you'll get quite a few hits.

Do you have a link to a site that shows his whole original article?  I've found several that quote paragraphs, but I have a vague memory of reading the whole things and that memory says that the quotes I've found aren't the main thrust of the article.  But my memory isn't what it was (I think.....I can't remember!) so would like to read the whole thing again if its still available.
4
Chatter / Re: How to Know You Won a Political Debate on the Internet
« Last post by Azdgari on Today at 01:01:17 AM »
What constitutes "sufficient justification"?  You should already know, since that is what you already said.
5
Chatter / Re: How to Know You Won a Political Debate on the Internet
« Last post by eh! on Today at 12:37:47 AM »
Mysogyny is used too often and without sufficient justification these days.

Yeah, whatever you do, don't Google "scott adams misogyny" like velkyn suggested, because "you'll get quite a few hits" and be able to determine for yourself if the suggestion that he's misogynistic is being "used too often and without sufficient justification these days".  Thor for-fucking-bid you check your assumptions by actually doing a simple internet search.

Gonna do that and report back, assuming he is the most vile women hater in the galaxy I still stand by my comment.....and Thor is not even the one true god.
6
Chatter / Re: How to Know You Won a Political Debate on the Internet
« Last post by Mr. Blackwell on Yesterday at 11:44:28 PM »
I'm just asking about his argument in the OP about how to know when you have won an internet argument. Far as I can tell, only a couple people responded to that. Then it turned towards his misogynistic alt right tenancies, which have nothing to do with what was presented. So, are we going to just dismiss his claims in the OP because he also happens to be a dirt bag? 
7
General Religious Discussion / Re: No True Scotsman
« Last post by Jstwebbrowsing on Yesterday at 11:08:44 PM »


Yes I did make that claim.  Ignore it if you like.  Any others?

I've also read your propaganda before and also your erroneous translations of the scriptures that you use to support it.  It's bunk.

Where did I claim that God has communicated only with me over the past 2000 years?  Evidently you place liitle value on truth when making accusations, you and the others making accusations along with your demeaning ridicule.  Here is a true statement from the scriptures:  "From the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks."  What kind of heart produces ridicule and false accusations?  Not one whose thoughts matter to me. 

If it is true that atheists produce the same fruit as Christians, which I believe may be true to an extent, you four accusers do not provide evidence.  You fit the stereotype of the angry atheist very well so far.  So I see no reason to take anything you say seriously.  Of course, there's still time to change the road you're on.     


So I take it, Jst, that you have the necessary languages to be able to translate the biblical texts and that's how you know some translation are wrong? If not, then you, like everyone else in your position (i.e. most people who think the bible is important) are relying on what other tell them and thus not on a very sound footing for such a claim. If you want to make such claims, you are going to have to come up with the tools and the examples to discuss. I am not the only one with such languages here so we could discuss you examples.


However, the heart of what you are saying is that the bible have some real significance in the world and that it predicts the future. This is a baseless claim since,


a. there is no way to show the authorship or the inspiration of the writers and redactors of the text - indeed we don't even know who they are.


b. because no one has shown that there is even a god who could want rules written down.


c. because if we look at other predictions in the bible, they are either trivial - yes, wars happen - or they are used in the NT to write the text of the NT. Matthew does this a lot. Finally, ones like Ezekiel 29, especially verse 11. Maybe you could tell me when that came true? It is one of the failed prophecies, actually.


So, the point here is simple - you make unsubstantiated claims and expect other to accept what you say as, er... 'gospel' when it is just a claim. You are you church could do better than this. What are the reasons that we should even consider the bible to have any truth in it that cannot be found anywhere else?

Okay let's start there.  I will assume since you are claiming it didn't happen that you have researched Ezekial 29:11.  Some commentaries suggest this occurred, or may have occured, during the time of Nebuchadnezzar.  What makes you right and them wrong?
8
Chatter / Re: President Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson
« Last post by albeto on Yesterday at 10:22:47 PM »
Sure, why not?  Let's have all kind of people who know nothing about he job run.  I want my next doctor to be my former garbage man.

Heehee, reminded me of this:

9
Chatter / Re: How to Know You Won a Political Debate on the Internet
« Last post by Jag on Yesterday at 08:49:22 PM »
Mysogyny is used too often and without sufficient justification these days.

Yeah, whatever you do, don't Google "scott adams misogyny" like velkyn suggested, because "you'll get quite a few hits" and be able to determine for yourself if the suggestion that he's misogynistic is being "used too often and without sufficient justification these days".  Thor for-fucking-bid you check your assumptions by actually doing a simple internet search.
10
Chatter / Re: How to Know You Won a Political Debate on the Internet
« Last post by Jag on Yesterday at 08:44:01 PM »
Well, did he win the debate?

Because It looks to me like we are just attacking the person instead of addressing his argument.
Who is attacking who? What argument? Emma asked a question, I answered it, velkyn added some details. His arguments weren't what was being questioned, just what had formed the impression that he might be kind of a dick.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10