TA List Debunked
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-07-2016, 08:57 AM
RE: TA List Debunked
Pointing, Laughing
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Armageddon it's post
03-07-2016, 08:58 AM
RE: TA List Debunked
(03-07-2016 08:57 AM)Armageddon it Wrote:  Pointing, Laughing

Sometimes that's all you can do.

Laughat

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-07-2016, 09:13 AM (This post was last modified: 03-07-2016 09:36 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: TA List Debunked
(03-07-2016 08:34 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  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.

Moses was Jew. The idea of a messiah had not even entered Hebrew thought yet. Too bad you never studied the Bible, or Hebrew culture. Your Moses omen is biased presumption. You forgot to tell us what the difference between omen reading and prophesy is. The role of a prophet was NOT to tell the future.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid257278

Quote: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.

Exactly. No one said they didn't have prophets. The quotes you provided say NOTHING about "telling the future". That was NOT the role of a prophet. You would know that if you had an education in Biblical Studies, (which you obviously do not). Just as the quotes you provided indicate, the role of a prophet was to speak to the people, and to interpret the will of God to the people OF THEIR OWN DAY, not to predict the future.
It's a common, uneducated, street level fallacy, repeated SO often, uneducated people actually think "future telling" when they hear "prophet". It's FALSE. As you were told, too bad in two years you still know nothing about your cult or the Bible.

There was no Moses, (no Exodus, no Adam, no Eve, no Noah, no Abraham ..... all myth). Moses was a myth. He didn't write Leviticus. Levitucus was "assembled" by Judean priests in exile in Babylon. The book was UNKNOWN until Ezra brought it back, along with the rest of the Scroll (Torah) of "Moses" (from Babylon) and introduced it in the Fall Festival, as described in the Book of Nehemiah. How is it you religionists know NOTHING of the history of the Bible or your cult ?




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
03-07-2016, 09:31 AM (This post was last modified: 03-07-2016 10:01 AM by Aliza.)
RE: TA List Debunked
(03-07-2016 08:34 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  
(28-06-2016 11:36 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  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.

Deuteronomy 18:14 is an important opening verse to this passage. It defines the context for the portions you quoted.

14 For these nations, which you are to possess, hearken to diviners of [auspicious] times and soothsayers, but as for you, the Lord, your God, has not given you [things] like these.

Israel is to take over these foreign lands and the people they conquer will use soothsayers to predict the future. Israel is not to listen to them; the Jewish people are to follow the Jewish prophets, who direct them for the time in which they live.

This is not a passage about the future; it's addressing an immediate concern. -And for the record, this is most certainly not a messianic in nature. We know this because of the context of the text, and also because this text predates King David, which was of course the time when the concept of the messiah was conceived. Placing a king over Israel had to be Israel's idea because forcing this upon them violates their freedom of choice. Freedom of choice is a quintessential part of Jewish theology.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Aliza's post
03-07-2016, 09:53 AM (This post was last modified: 03-07-2016 10:02 AM by Jzyehoshua.)
RE: TA List Debunked
(28-06-2016 06:19 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Blink

um welcome back. I see you waited a couple years to make a reply and that was what you came back with? truly?

I'm in the last year of my B.S. right now, am enrolled full-time, and spend a lot of time with my wife. I reply when I find time. I engaged in some lengthy discussion the last time.

(28-06-2016 06:19 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  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.

Many of the founders of science as we know it were the 'non-thinking theists' you deride. Sir Isaac Newton wrote analyses of Revelation and Daniel. Louis Pasteur used experiments to prove life could not arise from nothing. Sir Matthew Maury discovered ocean currents on the basis of what was written in Psalms 8:8.

And the father of empiricism and the scientific method, Sir Francis Bacon, was a Christian who openly criticized atheism and wrote against it. In the words of Bacon, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy brings about man's mind to religion: for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity."

http://knarf.english.upenn.edu/EtAlia/bacon16.html

There are more thorough lists here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...technology

http://www.icr.org/article/bible-believi...ists-past/

(28-06-2016 06:19 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  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.

Scientists have faith in the scientific method and their findings. Faith is just another word for trust. And trust can be placed with varying degrees of evidence. Very few people would trust without evidence.

And there is proof for God. A number of factors about the universe don't fit the Big Bang model and in some cases directly indicate God. For example, under atheistic predictions the universe expansion rate should have been slowing down after the Big Bang. However, the 1998 Hubble Telescope discoveries revealed that it is speeding up, consistent with what the Bible says about a Creator who spreads out the universe.

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/foc...rk-energy/

Another example would be the lack of antimatter. Under a purely naturalistic Big Bang equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have been created, but the antimatter is missing.

http://press.cern/backgrounders/matteran...-asymmetry

(28-06-2016 06:19 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  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.

Once again, Joseph's and Tacitus were some of the best historians in the world during the 1st century B.C. and mentioned Jesus. Neither was the type known for shoddy research or careless claims.

And you're ignoring the Gospels of Matthew and John and the epistles of Peter, James, John, and Jude. Even Luke interviewed Mary just as Matthew did Joseph when writing their Gospels.

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
03-07-2016, 09:56 AM
RE: TA List Debunked
(28-06-2016 06:19 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  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.

I've taken University level biology and anthropology thank you very much. And vestigial organs interpreted as nonfunctional remnants of Evolution from a common ancestor like the appendix and coccyx have been shown to have function after all.

http://www.bereawiki.com/Creationism#Vestigiality

And actually that is what the fossil record shows. The fossil record looks nothing like the steady gradual progression predicted by Darwin. Instead microevolution steadily occurs within core types of life, genera, Biblical kinds/baramin, and then brand new types pop into the fossil record. This is a serious fatal weakness for the theory of Evolution which is why it had to be repackaged as "punctuated equilibrium" by Gould and Eldredge in the 1970s.

http://www.bereawiki.com/Creationism#Pun...quilibrium

(28-06-2016 06:19 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  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.

If science were the "antithesis of faith" then why have so many of its founders and greatest thinkers been Bible-believing-scientists-past Christians?

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
03-07-2016, 10:03 AM (This post was last modified: 03-07-2016 10:32 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: TA List Debunked
(03-07-2016 09:53 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  And there is proof for God. A number of factors about the universe don't fit the Big Bang model and in some cases directly indicate God. For example, under atheistic predictions the universe expansion rate should have been slowing down after the Big Bang. However, the 1998 Hubble Telescope discoveries revealed that it is speeding up, consistent with what the Bible says about a Creator who spreads out the universe.

Show us where, and by whom, there was ever, "atheistic predictions" about the universe expanding. "Spreading out" IN NO WAY implies "speeding up", and BTW, there is no quote in the Bible that saying ANYING about even "creating a *universe* ... the Jews had no concept of *universe* and never used the word. They said "heavens" as that's all they knew about.
http://creationists.org/God-streched-out...erses.html
The Biblical creation stories (and flood myth) were taken directly from Babylonian myths, and PRESUMED a lot. Genesis starts out with the deity moving over the "waters" just like the Babylonian creation myths.
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid160188

Totally false nonsense about "faith" . According to St. Paul (and Jesus "No one shall come to me UNLESS the Father draw him") faith is a GIFT of the Spirit.
If you have PROOF for something, then faith is unnecessary. If you have PROOF of god, you don't need faith, by definition.

All your universe stuff, is "god of the gaps". The people who wrote the Bible KNEW NOTHING about cosmology , in fact the Jews didn't even know about galaxies. They thought there was a "vault" over the earth, in which the stars were embedded.
https://www.google.com/search?q=hebrew+u...CNoQsAQIJA

So, ..... who's stuff is getting debunked again ?
Laugh out load

You may be doing your BA .... I'd demand my tuition back. I sure hope it's not Biola, or Liberty or Bible College.

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
03-07-2016, 10:36 AM (This post was last modified: 03-07-2016 01:04 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: TA List Debunked
(03-07-2016 09:53 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  Once again, Joseph's and Tacitus were some of the best historians in the world during the 1st century B.C. and mentioned Jesus. Neither was the type known for shoddy research or careless claims.

And you're ignoring the Gospels of Matthew and John and the epistles of Peter, James, John, and Jude. Even Luke interviewed Mary just as Matthew did Joseph when writing their Gospels.

Josephus wrote "Antiquities" to show that Vespasian was the messiah. You sure you want to tell us how good he was ? Tacitus mentioned a "Chrestus", while spelling "Christians" correctly. There were a number of dying and rising messiah figures, ... you don't know whom he was referring to. He never said anything about a "Jesus".

If you were James, and you had a brother that actually was THE FIRST human to EVER rise from the dead, would you forget to even mention that fact in your letter ?
The most compelling fact you supposedly knew, in all the world, yet you say nothing about it ? Something's very "rotten in Denmark", I'd say.

Matthew says 500 zombies rose with Jesus on Easter, (and "rocks were split, and tombs were opened")... and walked around Jerusalem. Really ?
Yet no historian ever mentions this zombie invasion. He said the temple curtain spontaneously ripped. Yet not one Jew ever mentioned it .... ever. LMAO.
If that had happened, Jews to this day would still be talking about it.

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
03-07-2016, 09:37 PM
RE: TA List Debunked
(03-07-2016 09:53 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  I'm in the last year of my B.S. right now, am enrolled full-time, and spend a lot of time with my wife. I reply when I find time. I engaged in some lengthy discussion the last time.

B.S. in what?

Quote:Many of the founders of science as we know it were the 'non-thinking theists' you deride. Sir Isaac Newton wrote analyses of Revelation and Daniel.

He also practiced alchemy and was a thoroughly unpleasant fellow.

Quote:Louis Pasteur used experiments to prove life could not arise from nothing.
[/quote

No, he disproved spontaneous generation - not at all the same thing.

[quote]
Sir Matthew Maury discovered ocean currents on the basis of what was written in Psalms 8:8.

Well, no. He collected data and analyzed it scientifically.
Quote: Maury's primary duties were to care for the U.S. Navy's chronometers, charts, and other navigation equipment. He had access to thousands of ships' logs and charts from all over the world. He used this material to compile and interpret data about winds and currents. In 1847 he published the Wind and Current Charts of the North Atlantic.[quote]
And the father of empiricism and the scientific method, Sir Francis Bacon, was a Christian who openly criticized atheism and wrote against it.

And he was a pederast who, at the age of 45, married a 14-year-old girl.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
03-07-2016, 09:41 PM
RE: TA List Debunked
(03-07-2016 09:56 AM)Jzyehoshua Wrote:  If science were the "antithesis of faith" then why have so many of its founders and greatest thinkers been Bible-believing-scientists-past Christians?

Faith is the abandonment of reason. Faith abjures evidence, science requires it.

Sounds like the very definition of antithesis.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: