David, The Theist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 5 Votes - 2.6 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-10-2012, 08:36 AM
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 08:22 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Let's put your logical thinking skills to the test.

What evidence do you have for the existence of a literal Adam and how did you validate this evidence?

Did you read my post on the historicity of the Bible? First read that. Just a couple of posts above. Its a long one, but if you want to put me to the test . . . Then you might want to possibly rethink what it might mean to validate the evidence.

How ridiculous is it to say that Adam didn't exist? How you going to test that negative? You going to dismiss, what is, according to the Father of modern Science, Sir Isaac Newton said was the most remarkable of all ancient histories?

Now that you can do. Look at the Myth in just the recent American History. That's just roughly 200 years. Start a rumor at work, see how that goes.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2012, 08:36 AM
RE: David, The Theist
The Tolkien analogy is an example of the Fallacy of the False Analogy. No one said not to "reference" the Lord of the Rings. The correct analogy is to use the CONTENT of the Ring, in trying to establish it's authority. As you see, David The Conflicted Gay Theist is not aware what "circular" means and how that would invalided his arguments.

The whole game of mental masturbation in establishing relative dating similarity is utterly misguided. Proving I said some thing in 2011, does not prove I told the truth in 2011.
Eusebius ? Oh the Eusebius who said the reason he chose 4 gospels was because there were 4 winds, and 4 columns, and was a master deceiver. That Eusebius ?
Bishop Eusebius, the official propagandist for Constantine, entitles the 32nd Chapter of his 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation:
"How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived."
Eusebius is famously the author of many great falsehoods, yet at the same time he warns us:
"We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity."
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2
THAT Eusebius ? Hahahahahaha.

The fact that Zeus is referenced, in a known accurately dated text in Greek history does NOT mean the myth has any authority or truth. So skip all your gymnastics with dating. They ARE circular. You must establish the "authority" of the text. If you know what that means, you must do so with EXTERNAL evidence. Nice try,
David The Conflicted Gay Theist. Try harder. So far all your arguments fall flat on their ass.

Israel Finkelstein, has demonstrated that widespread use of domesticated camels is absent in the archaeological record, and that the Sea People were not in the Levant until around 1000 BCE, so ALL dating claims before that are impossible.

"The Hyksos period of Egyptian history warrants the same degree of caution and suspicion. Some believe that the Hyksos were a foreign people that gained control of Egypt and place Joseph's and then his family's entry into Egypt as being during that period of the Hyksos rulers, but only on the premise that it would have been more likely for a foreign ruler to have given a non Egyptian the position of second ruler.

But that theory disagrees with the Bible. Potiphar the court official was an Egyptian (Genesis 39:1) and Joseph was surrounded by native Egyptians. (Genesis 43:32)"

------ is a perfect example of circular. David The Conflicted Gay Theist thinks he can prove the Bible using the Bible. More circular crapola. The pile is getting bigger.

The Mernepteh Steele shows there may have been some sort of "Exodus event". It validates NOTHING about the claims made about the myth, as we know there were already settlements of Hebrews in Canaan before that.

"Wait for archeology. It usually catches up with the Bible."
Hahahaha. It proves the sources were entirely 100% cultural, and not inspired.
You forgot to talk about you god's wife. Ashera. Found in Dan, Beth-El, and Jerusalem.



In short, David The Conflicted Gay Theist, you get an "F". Fail. All this crap proves nothing.
"Dating" a story about Christ does not "prove Christ". The fact that Saul of Tarsus CHANGED his message, proves the New Testament is one giant piece of crap.
Nice job, pasting in your crappy website nonsense. You have established NOT ONE THING about "authority" or WHY historical context could or would establish authority. In fact historical context DISPROVES "inspiration", as there is NOT one unique piece of information, or data, or ONE concept which is unique to the Bible texts, which are NOT known in context. They had a dumb god.

"John was six months older than Jesus and began his ministry in the spring of that year (Luke 1:35-36) Jesus was born in the fall of the year and was about 30 years old when he came to John to be baptized (Luke 3:21-23) putting his baptism in the fall - about October of 29 C.E. Counting back about 30 years would put us at the fall of 2 B.C.E., the birth of Jesus. Daniel's prophecy of "70 weeks" points to the same time (Daniel 9:24-27) From the year 455 B.C.E. when King Artaxerxes of Persia, in the 20th year of his rule, in the month of Nisan, gave the order to rebuild the wall of the city of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 2:1-8) to 29 C.E. when Jesus was baptized was 69 weeks or 483 years."

-----utterly circular crap.

BTW, Genetics, (Mitochondrial Eve), DNA prove beyond a shadow of doubt that "Adam"'s dating is impossible, AND David The Conflicted Gay Theist DOES believe in Evolution, as he takes antibiotics, and if he were in prison for "foot tapping in an airport bathroom", he would use DNA to get out of prison.

Try harder David The Conflicted Gay Theist.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2012, 08:38 AM
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 07:50 AM)lucradis Wrote:  extroidinarily messed up

Uh huh. Dodgy

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2012, 08:41 AM
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 08:06 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  It's frustrating when people destroy the bridge that I try to build.

What bridge are you trying to build? What do you mean by that? I certainly wouldn't want to destroy anything someone was trying to build.

(19-10-2012 08:06 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Almost as frustrating is the lack of lucidity in this topic.

Here! Here! Lets wrap it up.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2012, 08:49 AM (This post was last modified: 19-10-2012 08:54 AM by Vosur.)
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 08:36 AM)The Theist Wrote:  Did you read my post on the historicity of the Bible? First read that. Just a couple of posts above. Its a long one, but if you want to put me to the test . . . Then you might want to possibly rethink what it might mean to validate the evidence.
Yes, I have read your posts. What about my question? It'd be also important to know whether or not you think that evolution occured, because it's incompatible with your view.

(19-10-2012 08:36 AM)The Theist Wrote:  How ridiculous is it to say that Adam didn't exist? How you going to test that negative? You going to dismiss, what is, according to the Father of modern Science, Sir Isaac Newton said was the most remarkable of all ancient histories?
Isaac Newton was a scientist, not a historian or a bible scholar. What makes you think that his opinion on this topic has any merit? Note that it's a rhetorical question, because it's an argument from authority either way.

And it would be perfectly rational to conclude that Adam never existed, seeing that there are no extrabiblical sources for his existence and that the mere possibility of his existence is ruled out by the theory of evolution.

(19-10-2012 08:36 AM)The Theist Wrote:  Now that you can do. Look at the Myth in just the recent American History. That's just roughly 200 years. Start a rumor at work, see how that goes.
I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2012, 09:00 AM
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 08:36 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Try harder David The Conflicted Gay Theist.

I was once a contributor to Sam Harris' Project Reason Scripture Project until they figured out I didn't agree with them, and when the forum started up I posted my article on hell there, which they loved until they found out I was a believer, then a regular poster there named John started accusing me of being homophobic. In GREAT BIG subject headings: BIGOT AND HOMOPHOBIC BIBLE THUMPER!

So I told him I was gay and he started posting GREAT BIG subject headings: FAG! QUEER! and all sorts of homophobic insults and jokes.

Project Reason.

It always amuses me when, in the guise of intellectual pursuit or scientific advancement, atheists are so emotionally blinded to the very reason they wish to promote.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2012, 09:01 AM
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 09:00 AM)The Theist Wrote:  It always amuses me when, in the guise of intellectual pursuit or scientific advancement, atheists are so emotionally blinded to the very reason they wish to promote.
What's with all these broad generalizations? Consider

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
19-10-2012, 09:03 AM
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 08:49 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(19-10-2012 08:36 AM)The Theist Wrote:  How ridiculous is it to say that Adam didn't exist? How you going to test that negative? You going to dismiss, what is, according to the Father of modern Science, Sir Isaac Newton said was the most remarkable of all ancient histories?
Isaac Newton was a scientist, not a historian or a bible scholar. What makes you think that his opinion on this topic has any merit? Note that it's a rhetorical question, because it's an argument from authority either way.

Even if the argument from authority were an acceptable form of argument, Mr Newton studied alchemy, so LOL!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like caffeinesoul's post
19-10-2012, 09:03 AM
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 09:01 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(19-10-2012 09:00 AM)The Theist Wrote:  It always amuses me when, in the guise of intellectual pursuit or scientific advancement, atheists are so emotionally blinded to the very reason they wish to promote.
What's with all these broad generalizations? Consider

Not generalizations, General. Factually correct data made from observing atheists in the wild doncherknow ? Laughat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-10-2012, 09:15 AM
RE: David, The Theist
(19-10-2012 08:49 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Yes, I have read your posts. What about my question? It'd be also important to know whether or not you think that evolution occured, because it's incompatible with your view.

Your question: Was Adam a real person? Yes. He was listed in the legal genealogy as a father to children, therefore we can safely assume that he was, at least according to the writers of the Bible, a real person. He was referenced as a real person by future writers of the Bible. They didn't think of him as allegorical.

(19-10-2012 08:49 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Isaac Newton was a scientist, not a historian or a bible scholar. What makes you think that his opinion on this topic has any merit? Note that it's a rhetorical question, because it's an argument from authority either way.

Isaac Newton was, by far, the most respected and learned expert on ancient texts of his time, perhaps all time, and he was a theologian.

(19-10-2012 08:49 AM)Vosur Wrote:  And it would be perfectly rational to conclude that Adam never existed, seeing that there are no extrabiblical sources for his existence and that the mere possibility of his existence is ruled out by the theory of evolution.

So if there were extrabiblical sources how reliable might they be? Compared to the Bible? There are no extrabiblical sources that can compare to the Bible.

(19-10-2012 08:49 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(19-10-2012 08:36 AM)The Theist Wrote:  Now that you can do. Look at the Myth in just the recent American History. That's just roughly 200 years. Start a rumor at work, see how that goes.
I genuinely have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm talking about the unreliability of secular histories.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: