Question about flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-03-2015, 08:33 PM
RE: Question about flood
(23-03-2015 06:19 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  sigh, is this delusional ineducable tyro troll still here? I would bother to eviscerate each and every posit he has made in the last three pages, but it would be a time suck. He is the typical tap dancing apologetic xtian who waves aside the boatload of superior countering evidence and chooses instead feelings Rolleyes

My fav so far was his idiotic reasoning that because africanus mentioned something it must be true. Lets look at africanus...

Thallus/africanus, In the ninth century a Byzantine writer named George Syncellus quoted a third-century Christian historian named Sextus Julius Africanus, who quoted an unknown writer named Thallus on the darkness at the crucifixion: 'Thallus in the third book of his history calls this darkness an eclipse of the sun, but in my opinion he is wrong.' All of the works of Africanus are lost, so there is no way to confirm the quote or to examine its context. We have no idea who Thallus was, or when he wrote. Third century would have put him being born long after jesus's alleged death, thus hearsay. Born 160 CE and died 240 CE....yup, hearsay at its finest. Good enough for Cartilage of the Wild to gobble up though Thumbsup

Matthew 27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

Mark 15:33 And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.

Luke 23:44-48 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.

Unfortunately for believers, there is not one shred of evidence that this happened...zero, all of the royal scribes, historians, philosophers, and literate people who wrote down and recorded EVERYTHING of any significance, failed to note the whole earth going dark mid-day for three hours...an eclipse lasts about 7.5 min max, so it wasn’t that, and there were two renowned historians who recorded each and every eclipse, as well as any other astronomical oddity....nothing, .....zero. Never happened.

You are a cool dude, GWOG...it's a shame that you are too chicken to take our Resurrection debate elsewhere. You messed up the last one, and I was so ready to put a whoopin on you.

But, life goes on, I guess.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2015, 08:35 PM
RE: Question about flood
(23-03-2015 06:20 PM)daniel1948 Wrote:  
(22-03-2015 02:00 PM)Anjele Wrote:  I think I love you...you can stay. Thumbsup

Thanks, Anjele. If you are female and moderately attractive I want to meet you.

Now, back to the subject...

We have a real disconnect between Call_of_the_Wild and most of the rest of us. Mr. Wild has decided that the Bible is the Word of God™ and therefore cannot be wrong. He has further decided that his own understanding of the Bible must be the correct one. Therefore, when facts refute the Bible, well, the facts must be wrong. How does he know all this? Faith! He has faith, so he must be right.

Never mind that the hundreds of millions of fossils so far disinterred from the Earth showing clear and irrefutable lines of gradual shift from one species to another (archaeopteryx to modern birds, Australopithecus to Homo Sapiens, a land quadruped that might remind someone vaguely of a wolf to whales and dolphins, and many thousands more, showing the evolution, baby step by baby step; since this all disagrees with his own particular interpretation of the Bible, well, all those fossils must be wrong.

Never mind that the Romans never allowed crucified criminals to be buried, the Bible says that Joseph went to Pilate and asked nicely to be able to bury this particular criminal, and the Bible says that Pilate allowed it, well, that must be true. No confirming evidence? The Bible don't need no confounded confirming evidence, because it's the inerrant Word of God™.

Facts cannot influence faith. That's the definition of faith: Belief against and in spite of all evidence. Christians actually pride themselves on rejecting all evidence that contradicts their faith. They actually like it when there are more facts that disprove their beliefs, because the more facts you can reject, the more evidence you can deny, the stronger, and therefore better, is your faith.

None of this means that Call is a bad person. He actually seems to comport himself pretty well, given the attitude of some of our more enthusiastic posters. He, like all believers in any and all religions, is clearly delusional, but ever since the five years I spent working in a homeless shelter, I have somewhat of a fondness for the mentally impaired.

There was this one guy at the shelter who owned the Burlington Northern Railroad. Or at least he seemed to think he did. And then there was the guy who thought he owned all of downtown Dallas, TX, though he was always trying to bum cigarettes from the other guys, and made himself unpopular by cheating at checkers. Some of them used real words, but never seemed to make them into a comprehensible sentence. I liked these guys. I see a kind of kinship between these guys and a theist who would come onto an atheist forum just to show how firmly his faith can stand in the face of massive evidence against him. If I was still a drinker (I'm not: alcohol didn't really agree with me) I'd happily sit down and have a beer with Mr. Wild and argue about whether the God of the Bible or the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the real creator of the universe. (How can you not believe in a god who has a beer volcano in heaven?)

So don't be too hard on my pal here. He's completely delusional, but that's not always such a bad thing.

I like your posts and I agree with you on Wild however I probably wouldn't sit down and have beer with him. One, I can't stand beer and two, I'm not fond of banging my head against walls. Gives me a headache. We'd have to keep our conversation confined to two subjects, sports and knitting.

People like Wild believe because they want to believe and have never learned another method of thought. Kinda sad actually.

Carry on.

(This thread just won't die, will it)

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2015, 08:56 PM
RE: Question about flood
(23-03-2015 10:52 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Consider

Except... by the definitions of evolution... things can, in a way/effect, actually become 'better' animals.

Yeah, if the standard is "better" for survival purposes..but again, why would survival be a good thing?

(22-03-2015 12:20 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  I can say the same thing to you, after all, it is as a child that you learn about shit like evolution.

(23-03-2015 10:52 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Consider

Now, this sentence has me wondering.

Call_of_the_Wild how do you perceive the study and or theory of evolution?

Do you some how see scientists as saying "Okay, we've got the evolution theory sorted. Pack it on the shelf and lets go find another theory to test."

As in the theory of evolution is done. it's finished with. It's over, nothing more to learn here. ?

I'm kind of interested in trying to get to the understanding of what you're trying to mean by your post above.

Much cheers to all.

Well, included in the theory is the notion that long ago, when no one was around to see it, animals were having reptile to bird kinds of transformations. Not only is that my understanding of the theory, but that is the actual theory. And I am saying there is no evidence for it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2015, 09:02 PM
RE: Question about flood
(23-03-2015 06:20 PM)daniel1948 Wrote:  If I was still a drinker (I'm not: alcohol didn't really agree with me) I'd happily sit down and have a beer with Mr. Wild and argue about whether the God of the Bible or the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the real creator of the universe. (How can you not believe in a god who has a beer volcano in heaven?)

You are in Dallas? I don't drink, but you could get intellectually spanked over dinner (a female would have to be there, to balance out the male/male shit that disgusts me) since I like to have conversations like this while I splurge on steak and potatoes.

Or, we could have the discussion at a pool hall. You have a beer, and I have a soda Thumbsup

I go to Texas every so often on business. I can bring an extra can of ass whooping the next time I visit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 12:20 AM
RE: Question about flood
(23-03-2015 08:56 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Yeah, if the standard is "better" for survival purposes..but again, why would survival be a good thing?

So.... 'better' and 'Survival' aren't good things? Consider

(23-03-2015 08:56 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Well, included in the theory is the notion that long ago, when no one was around to see it, animals were having reptile to bird kinds of transformations. Not only is that my understanding of the theory, but that is the actual theory. And I am saying there is no evidence for it.

This... is not an answer in relation to my actual question. I was wondering if you think the 'Theory of evolution' is complete. Finished with. That science and scientist are 'Moving on' now that the theory is done with. I hope you're understanding my words.

(23-03-2015 08:56 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Well, included in the theory is the notion that long ago, when no one was around to see it, animals were having reptile to bird kinds of transformations.

This is in no way what the theory is saying or about.

(23-03-2015 08:56 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Not only is that my understanding of the theory, but that is the actual theory.

Again, this is in no way what the theory is saying or about. You, perhaps, might want to actually look into reading about the theory?

(23-03-2015 08:56 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  And I am saying there is no evidence for it.

So... what then do you say the bone/shell/etc shaped rocks are? Consider



Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 12:28 AM
RE: Question about flood
(24-03-2015 12:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(23-03-2015 08:56 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Well, included in the theory is the notion that long ago, when no one was around to see it, animals were having reptile to bird kinds of transformations.

This is in no way what the theory is saying or about.

(23-03-2015 08:56 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Not only is that my understanding of the theory, but that is the actual theory.

Again, this is in no way what the theory is saying or about. You, perhaps, might want to actually look into reading about the theory?

Ye Gods Facepalm *This* is what Christian fundamentalism is reduced to? Actively seeking to be a cretin? Faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 01:22 AM
RE: Question about flood
Call of the wild is apparently showing us what a brain looks like in our more animalistic cousins.

No higher level brain functions.
Lacks understanding of facts.
Feels pack mentality must be a pathway to truth.
Eats his own poo.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 04:54 AM
RE: Question about flood
(23-03-2015 08:33 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-03-2015 06:19 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  sigh, is this delusional ineducable tyro troll still here? I would bother to eviscerate each and every posit he has made in the last three pages, but it would be a time suck. He is the typical tap dancing apologetic xtian who waves aside the boatload of superior countering evidence and chooses instead feelings Rolleyes

My fav so far was his idiotic reasoning that because africanus mentioned something it must be true. Lets look at africanus...

Thallus/africanus, In the ninth century a Byzantine writer named George Syncellus quoted a third-century Christian historian named Sextus Julius Africanus, who quoted an unknown writer named Thallus on the darkness at the crucifixion: 'Thallus in the third book of his history calls this darkness an eclipse of the sun, but in my opinion he is wrong.' All of the works of Africanus are lost, so there is no way to confirm the quote or to examine its context. We have no idea who Thallus was, or when he wrote. Third century would have put him being born long after jesus's alleged death, thus hearsay. Born 160 CE and died 240 CE....yup, hearsay at its finest. Good enough for Cartilage of the Wild to gobble up though Thumbsup

Matthew 27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

Mark 15:33 And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.

Luke 23:44-48 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.

Unfortunately for believers, there is not one shred of evidence that this happened...zero, all of the royal scribes, historians, philosophers, and literate people who wrote down and recorded EVERYTHING of any significance, failed to note the whole earth going dark mid-day for three hours...an eclipse lasts about 7.5 min max, so it wasn’t that, and there were two renowned historians who recorded each and every eclipse, as well as any other astronomical oddity....nothing, .....zero. Never happened.

You are a cool dude, GWOG...it's a shame that you are too chicken to take our Resurrection debate elsewhere. You messed up the last one, and I was so ready to put a whoopin on you.

But, life goes on, I guess.

*pats child on head* of course you were Cartilage of the Wild, of course you were Laughat

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
24-03-2015, 11:06 AM
RE: Question about flood
(24-03-2015 12:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  So.... 'better' and 'Survival' aren't good things? Consider

I am not too sure how, if we are just small conveniences on earth, that survival suddenly becomes something to hold on to. That's just me tho.

(24-03-2015 12:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  This... is not an answer in relation to my actual question. I was wondering if you think the 'Theory of evolution' is complete. Finished with. That science and scientist are 'Moving on' now that the theory is done with. I hope you're understanding my words.

Oh, yeah...it is complete in the sense that there is almost no question within the scientific community about whether it occurred or not...but the magnitude of how far it can go on a transitional scale, that is something that isn't complete, apparently.

(23-03-2015 08:56 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Well, included in the theory is the notion that long ago, when no one was around to see it, animals were having reptile to bird kinds of transformations.

(24-03-2015 12:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  This is in no way what the theory is saying or about.

I said "including in the theory is the notion that long ago, when no one was around to see it, ainmals were having reptile to bird kinds of transformations".

In response to this, you said "this is no way what the theory is saying or about".

Yet, evolutionists believe that reptiles evolved into birds? Consider Makes no sense whatsoever.

(24-03-2015 12:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Again, this is in no way what the theory is saying or about. You, perhaps, might want to actually look into reading about the theory?

Man, it never fails. It never ever fails. Every single time a person expresses doubt about the ToE or questions it, they always get accused of being ignorant of the theory. It never fails. "You just don't know what evolution means", or, "Thats not what evolutionists is"...as if they are so smart, and we are so dumb.

I will put it to you this way, Peebo, whatever the theory is regarding the macro stuff, I don't believe it. So any conceivable theory that evolves macroevolution, I don't believe it...so that covers pretty much everything, right?

(24-03-2015 12:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  So... what then do you say the bone/shell/etc shaped rocks are? Consider

Nothing at all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2015, 11:12 AM
RE: Question about flood
(24-03-2015 04:54 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  *pats child on head* of course you were Cartilage of the Wild, of course you were Laughat

Very funny Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: