TA List Debunked
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-06-2016, 05:05 PM
RE: TA List Debunked
(28-06-2016 05:01 PM)Thinkerbelle Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 12:59 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Oh, Thinkerbelle, how I've missed you! Smile

I lurk. Sometimes I have so little to add that I just soak up the wisdom and remain silent, lest I be thought a fool. And like that stuff. Popcorn

I don't think anyone here would ever label you a fool. Smile

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Anjele's post
28-06-2016, 05:48 PM (This post was last modified: 28-06-2016 05:52 PM by Born Again Pagan.)
RE: TA List Debunked
How many soldiers does the United States have at present? I don't know, but i will say off the top of my head that it is probably the only power on earth that has more than a million people under arms, How could one desert tribe have even a population of over a million people much less have over a million soldiers.Pure unadulterated fiction! Okay, I just looked it up. China has 2,333,000 USA and India each have the same amount 1300,000 and North Korea is listed as in the over a million soldiers also, but Israel has less than 200,000 at present. Repeat Pure unadulterated fiction pretending there was over a million soldiers wandering the desert attacking whom ever God said to attack!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2016, 05:57 PM
RE: TA List Debunked
(28-06-2016 05:05 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 05:01 PM)Thinkerbelle Wrote:  I lurk. Sometimes I have so little to add that I just soak up the wisdom and remain silent, lest I be thought a fool. And like that stuff. Popcorn

I don't think anyone here would ever label you a fool. Smile

Thank you.

I live in an area where the average level of schooling seems to be "graduated kindergarten," and I worry that my brain cells are in a state of atrophy.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled troll..........

We have enough youth. How about looking for the Fountain of Smart?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thinkerbelle's post
28-06-2016, 06:19 PM (This post was last modified: 28-06-2016 06:25 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: TA List Debunked
(28-06-2016 10:20 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  1. Faith does not require a lack of evidence or Jesus wouldn't have encouraged Thomas to physically touch and see the evidence of His resurrection so Thomas would "be not faithless but believing." (John 20:27) Faith can be without evidence but humans generally have a reason, i.e. some kind of evidence, for what they believe. Evidence is not always physical, e.g. logical evidence.

2. We agree on the definition of delusion which applies quite well to atheism. Life is far too diverse and complex to deny a Creator. Examples include Macropina Microstoma, a fish with a transparent head and 360 degree rotating eyeballs, the Lygodium Spider Moth, a moth with a picture of a spider on its wings (one of many cases of Batesian Mimicry that could be provided), and of course the Bombardier Beetle with its complex firing mechanism which combines two otherwise useless chemicals into a deadly fiery concoction.

3. What differentiates the evangelical atheist intent on spreading their beliefs and enforcing them via government regulation from a religious person? A religion is just a belief system, and atheism is a religion. This forum serves as a congregation.

4. Daniel wasn't excluded from the Hebrew canon which is why it was preserved among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Furthermore the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 perfectly predicted the coming of Jesus as the Messiah in 30 A.D. so even if you were to argue for a composition date of 200 B.C. (which by the way makes little sense, there are manuscripts that old, which were copied from still older ones, plus numerous archaeological artifacts have verified its details, e.g. the Nabonidus and Cyrus Cylinders) that still wouldn't nullify the prophetic accuracy of the book of Daniel, because the prophecy would have still come 200 years before it's fulfillment.

Blink

um welcome back. I see you waited a couple years to make a reply and that was what you came back with? truly? You haven't even tried to refute my well researched and cited paper on Daniel. I would have hoped in 2 years you could have at least embarked on some studying of theology. Well, my dear ineducable friend, you came to the right place. This is afterall theTHINKINGatheist, and the best experts on the bible are atheists....that's why we are atheists, we actually read it, and applied critical thinking skills and comparitive studies to it. A bit busy tonight, but I can spend a few minutes helping you. No need to thank me, teaching theists to think is my hobby. I will answer you by number to match your points in the quote above. Let us begin:

1. No, faith does require a lack of evidence, that is how it works. If it had evidence, it wouldn't require faith, as it would just be fact.

"Faith can be without evidence but humans generally have a reason, i.e. some kind of evidence, for what they believe. Evidence is not always physical, e.g. logical evidence."


Wrong. Having a reason for faith is not the definition for evidence. People purport to believe all sorts of nonsense. The belief itself is not evidence. Being taught a lie, is not evidence, being taught that there is an unevidenced transcendental god who designed everything is not evidence.

Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion. This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion.

There is ZERO proof of god. Incidentally, there is ZERO first hand evidence for jesus. No one who EVER wrote of jesus, knew him. Not even Paul. No, his story of a hallucination while on the road to Damascus doesn't qualify. Why? One, people who see shit that no one else does is having a hallucination. Two, since his story is uncorroborated, his testimony doesn't count because he is the leader of the cult, thus he will, by design, say anything to create belief. That is how cults work.

2. "We agree on the definition of delusion which applies quite well to atheism. Life is far too diverse and complex to deny a Creator."

To believe in something even in the face of superior evidence to the contrary is delusion. Atheism is one who doesn't believe in god/s. Theists believe in god and the bible even in the face of superior evidence to the contrary. There is zero evidence for god or jesus the miracle performing super star. Nice try though.

Life is not designed in such a way to suggest a creator. Take some biology classes. Look up vestigial organs, and dormant genes. Look up the design of the eye by richard dawkins.

In fact when we peel back the layers to life, we find exactly what we would expect to find from an organism that evolved from lesser forms, turning off genes as it mutated successfully for survival. What we dont find is VOILA! life! If we were created, we wouldnt have recessive and dormant genes which trace our evolutionary crawl, we wouldnt have vestigial organs and bone formations wihtin our bodies that are still leftover in physical form from our evolutionary crawl.

When we look at fossil evidence, we don't see nothing, then BAM! all life in its current form, then BAM! mythical global flood kills all life. What we do find is exaclty what evolutinary science predicted...layers upon layers of simpler and simpler forms of life going back millions of years.

3. "What differentiates the evangelical atheist intent on spreading their beliefs and enforcing them via government regulation from a religious person? A religion is just a belief system, and atheism is a religion."


Wrong. Atheism is not a belief, it is just the opposite. We do not believe in a god because there is zero evidence for a god, and overwhelming evidence against a god existing.

Science is the antithesis of faith. Science is a process that contains multiple and redundant checks, balances, and safeguards against human bias and error. Science has a built in corrective mechanism..hypothesis testing...that weeds out false claims. Claims that come about as a result of a scientific process are held as tentatively true by scientists..unlike claims of faith that are held as eternally true with zero evidence. Related to this, claims that come about as a result of a scientific process are falsifiable, that is, there is a way to show the claims are false. This is not the case with faith claims. For example, there's no way to falisify the claim that the norse god Loki was able ot assume other forms.

Scientists try to prove claims false (falsification), unlike faith leaders who unequivocally state their faith claims are true. If a scientist can demonstrate that a popular scientific claim is false, he or she can become famous, get tenure, publish books, earn more money and become respected by her or his peers. If a preacher states that the claims of his faith tradition are false, he's excommunicated, defrocked or otherwise forced to abandon his position...the stifling of growth and enlightenment basically.

Science is a method for advancing our understanding. It is process we can use to bring us closer to the truth, and to weed out false claims. Science thus is the best way we've currently found to explain and understand how the universe works...unlike the religious leaders who base it on a superstitious fictional book put together and sold to the masses. The greatest pyramid scheme in history: religion. Money goes up, noting of intrinsic value comes down.

4. "Furthermore the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 perfectly predicted the coming of Jesus as the Messiah in 30 A.D. so even if you were to argue for a composition date of 200 B.C. "

Wrong. I have already solidly refuted Daniel in my earlier post. No where in the OT is jesus mentioned. nowhere. The authors of the OT (575-550 BCE by Judaen priests) compiled a collection of traditional stories based off of older Sumerian, Crete, and Greek myths. Moses is a fabricated character by the way. When the plethora of non-eyewitness authors of the NT put together their collection of stories based off of stories etc, they penned jesus in an attempt to show that the messiah of OT legend was here. It was written to make it seem that the OT had prophesied his coming. Sadly he is a false messiah (although a true messiah has never existed, as god doesnt exist) as evidenced by his failings as per the "prophesy."

The following quote from Stephen L. Harris, Professor Emeritus of Humanities and Religious Studies at California State University- Sacramento, completes this point with a devastating argument. Remember that Jesus was a Jew who had no intention to deviate from the Hebrew scriptures:

“Jesus did not accomplish what Israel’s prophets said the Messiah was commissioned to do: He did not deliver the covenant people from their Gentile enemies, reassemble those scattered in the Diaspora, restore the Davidic kingdom, or establish universal peace (cf.Isa. 9:6–7; 11:7–12:16, etc.). Instead of freeing Jews from oppressors and thereby fulfilling God’s ancient promises—for land, nationhood, kingship, and blessing—Jesus died a “shameful” death, defeated by the very political powers the Messiah was prophesied to overcome. Indeed, the Hebrew prophets did not foresee that Israel’s savior would be executed as a common criminal by Gentiles, making Jesus’ crucifixion a “stumbling block” to scripturally literate Jews. (1 Cor.1:23)”

Jesus’ immediate followers, mostly his 12 disciples, probably did not immediately identify this failure, because after Jesus’ body was likely stolen and concealed, a rumor spread that Jesus had been resurrected from the dead. A sense of optimism overcame their grief about his execution and renewed some hope that he was a true messiah. If they had known then that there was to be no return in the near or long-term future, they likely would have abandoned any further activity. Despite this resurgence in their faith, they never agreed with Paul’s concept of Jesus as being divine. Anything written in the Bible to suggest that they did is probably a result of later editing by some of Paul’s followers. Such a belief would have been an exceptional departure from the Jewish faith.

You have much to learn, and I have much to teach, but I do not have the time to spoonfeed you every step of the way. Go read, research, think and evolve. Come back when you have at least a basic comprehension of christian theology. When you do, hop into the boxing ring area of the forum and challenge me. You and I can go one on one and I will drag you through the garden of knowledge.

Peace be with you grasshopper

Flex

"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
[+] 4 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
29-06-2016, 05:49 AM
RE: TA List Debunked
(28-06-2016 10:20 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  Life is far too diverse and complex to deny a Creator.

The argument from incredulity? GTFO n00bsauce. Tongue

(28-06-2016 10:23 AM)Anjele Wrote:  You haven't been here in three years???? I thought the resurrection thing was in three days...or maybe days means something different Biblically speaking.

[Image: Jesus-respawn_fb_86355.jpg]

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like houseofcantor's post
29-06-2016, 08:21 AM (This post was last modified: 29-06-2016 09:01 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: TA List Debunked
Jesus never told Thomas to put his fingers in his wounds. They made that up. The fact is, in Jewish culture, what a post-mortem body that "appeared" was, was called a "shade". Shades were not recognizable. It's part of the complex set of reasons that some CHRISTIAN scholars (including at least one NT seminary professor) have reevaluated the language and translation surrounding the "resurrection", and placed it in it's real context. Almost every time there is a post-resurrection sighting, it says they were afraid, and "doubted" including the last one in Matthew at the "great commissioning". It all makes sense in the context of Jewish Apocalypticism. Then Christians later turned it all on its head to mean something it didn't. Becoming "the exalted (*raised up*) one" does NOT mean "rising physically" from the dead.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...other-look
http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/h...Am8C8P8HAQ
https://www.amazon.com/How-Jesus-Became-...0061778184

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2016, 12:47 PM
RE: TA List Debunked
HOW DO THESE THINGS GET BUMPED SERIOUSLY

Who's out there thinking, "well, you know, I got eviscerated with my idiotic internet arguments two years ago, but now seems like a great time to go back to them..."

Okay, yes, that question's rhetorical. OP is thinking precisely that.

There's a psychology thesis in there somewhere.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like cjlr's post
01-07-2016, 09:18 PM
RE: TA List Debunked
As often happens, the critic's faulty reading comprehension comes into play here. The passage never says "The Midianites sold Joseph to the Ishmeelites." Reading the passage in context clearly shows it was Joseph's own brothers who sold Joseph to the Midianites/Ishmeelites. Ishmeelites was just a synonym for the Midianites. Joseph's own brothers sold him to the Midianites/Ishmeelites. In fact, the passage itself clearly shows this if read in context, but TheThinkingAtheist.com failed to quote the key verse 27 that would've made this obvious. As v. 27 clearly shows, it was Joseph's brothers who sold him to the Ishmeelites, because the Ishmeelites and Midianites are one and the same. For example, I am both an American and an Illinoisan, they are two different names for what I am, but one defines me by continent, and one by state. In the same way, one can be a member of two groups. The context in this passage was very obvious just from a single verse earlier, that this got called a contradiction is simply ridiculous. Therefore, Joseph's brothers sold him to the Midianites/Ishmeelites, who in turn sold him to Potiphar. A reading of the chapter in context clearly shows these were two separate events.


It seems that your own reading comprehension lacks something. Where did you get the term Ishmeelites? It is Ishmaelites in the Bible, unless you have a different model than I studies way back when.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2016, 09:32 PM
RE: TA List Debunked
(10-07-2014 03:29 PM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  Bible of a contradiction that does not in fact exist.

The fact that the four gospels do in fact contradict each other is apparent evidence that you have failed in your apologetic attempts.

The bible is nothing more than fictional trite.

You'll most likely die believing in a lie, and that is no concern of mine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2016, 08:34 AM
RE: TA List Debunked
(28-06-2016 11:36 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 10:42 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  5. My understanding is that scholarly 'consensus' contains a range of opinions on Daniel's dating. The only ones who assume a later date are those who atheistically assume supernatural prophecy cannot occur, and given Daniel’s detailed prophecies infer that it must be written later than it claims - which of course is circular reasoning, assuming that prophecy can't occur to deny evidence of prophecy, and then using that assumption to disprove prophecy. For example Gerhard Hasel points out the discovery of Daniel among the DSS is very problematic for those claiming a later date:

"For those supporting the historical-critical date of the book of Daniel new issues are being raised. Since there is a manuscript of Daniel that supposedly dates within 50 years of the autograph, is there enough time for the supposed traditio-historical and redaction-critical developments allegedly needed for the growth of the book? Supporters of the Maccabean dating hypothesis of Daniel will be hard put to explain all of this in their reconstructions. To express it differently, do the early dates of the fragments from Cave 4 leave enough room for the developments, editorial and redactional as well as others, that are so often proposed (e.g., Koch 1986:20–24)? The verdict seems to be negative, and an earlier date for Daniel than the second century is unavoidable."

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/201...rolls.aspx

It's all bullshit.
The role of a prophet was never to tell or predict the future.
That's a fundamental ignorant error many Fundamentalists make.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid257278
It proves you have never studied Biblical Studies under a competent scholar.

Fortune telling and divination are different from Biblical prophets prophesying the future. You quoted Leviticus, one of the books of Moses, but Moses was also a prophet who foretold the coming of Jesus. So actually by citing Moses you destroy your own argument.

Deuteronomy 18:15 The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
16 According to all that thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.
17 And the Lord said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

Acts 3:22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.

My website refuting alleged contradictions will be at BereaWiki.com.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: