Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sir, I "heard" voices many time, just like everybody else...
I heard voices, too.
Then I quit doing LSD.
I believe it was somewhere under a green light and I said: Captain Beefheart Save Me.
No one has ever provided me any proof of a god thing so the initial premise of their argument is based on nothing.
They're making positive assertions with no proof.
No one would try that in any discussion except for religion.
Silly that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWD39
Your definitions here are irrelevant. The context of "myth" presented here in this forum is that the Biblical accounts are fiction.
If you're making a positive assertion and you're asked for proof, you need to provide it.
Until then, yeah, they're fiction.
There's no proof of a jesus fellow.
Nor is there proof of a god thingie, nor a satan character.
And you can't use a book to prove itself, nor can you base your proof on a bad 1970s song title.
Last edited by chielgirl; 02-04-2013 at 11:30 AM..
It doesn't matter if the word has multiple definitions. The thing that matters is the position of the OP and the position most certainly was that Jesus never existed.
The multiple definitions of words in english DOES matter as the onus is on us in every conversation to establish what a person actually means by their words and not presume to dictate to them what they mean by them.
Evidence that there actually was a Jesus is thin on the ground. Skepticism on the point is warranted. Even if there was one this in no way supports the claims of all the events surrounding him. Especially the supernatural ones but not only those.
Given the time period and their lack of media and record keeping all kinds of "Chinese whispers" could be applied to a story of a bronze aged preacher. It is likely, for example, that many of the words and actions of the Jesus character are actually an amalgamation of more than one preacher but "word of mouth" had the tales of some people applied to others. You can imagine the conversations and how easily this can happen:
Person 1 "There was a preacher in town and he said <insert teaching here>"
Person 2 "Who was it?"
Person 1 "Not really sure".
Person 2 "Might it have been Jesus? I have heard things about a Jesus"
Person 1 "Oh it probably possible could have been him".
Later that week
Person 2 "Oh Jesus was in town last Wednesday and he said some great stuff"
Person 3 "You sure it was him?"
Person 2 "Oh I am, my best friend said it definitely was and he never lies"
And so on and so forth. This is what happens with word of mouth. There may never have been a Jesus. There may have been. But even if there was there is no way to be sure that everything ascribed to him actually was him. Let alone can we verify the supernatural claims made about him. I gave you a full list of such claims for example and you could not even evidence one of them. Instead you pretended I asked you to verify ALL of them (I did not) and retreated behind the usual mantra of atheists asking for untenable levels of evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWD39
But I will certainly be on watch, and the moment one you atheists make a false blanket statement like the Bible is a book of myths, I'm calling you on the carpet.
But again: Depending on the definition of "myth" you are using such as the ones I pasted above... it IS a book of myths. Calling it a "blanket statement" or churning out some feux fighting talk like "carpet" does not change that fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWD39
this was your (Nozz) quote:
"And yet no one is declaring any such thing and you will never find a single quote out of all my 100s of posts where I ever did."
Look at the third last word in the quote. I will help you. The word is "I".
"I" am not rifleman. So I am not sure what your point is here. Worse I am not even convinced YOU know what your point is here.
If you're making a positive assertion and you're asked for proof, you need to provide it.
Until then, yeah, they're fiction.
There's no proof of a jesus fellow.
Nor is there proof of a god thingie, nor a satan character.
And you can't use a book to prove itself, nor can you base your proof on a bad 1970s song title.
I see your comments as a logical fallacy. For example, a missionary in the 1800s goes to a remote Amazon tribe and tells them about snow. He has no way to prove to them that it exists, and they think he's nuts. Using your logic, since there is no proof, snow does not exist.
Course, the fact that you use belittling terms like "god thingie" demonstrates that you will turn a blind eye to evidence anyways.
Look at the third last word in the quote. I will help you. The word is "I".
"I" am not rifleman. So I am not sure what your point is here. Worse I am not even convinced YOU know what your point is here.
You said "no one". That means you must have supreme knowledge and have witnessed that not a single person on this earth as ever made such claims. You are wrong.
I see your comments as a logical fallacy. For example, a missionary in the 1800s goes to a remote Amazon tribe and tells them about snow. He has no way to prove to them that it exists, and they think he's nuts. Using your logic, since there is no proof, snow does not exist.
Put 'em on the boat and sail 'em back to North America, Europe or West/southwest to the Andes and they would find ALL the proof they need.
You said "no one". That means you must have supreme knowledge and have witnessed that not a single person on this earth as ever made such claims. You are wrong.
Way to ignore the vast % of the post you were "replying" to. Same ole same ole from you. Two huge sections of my post just edited out and ignored.
The "no one" was referring to the thread at the time I wrote the post. Not AFTER i wrote the post. Quoting someone AFTER my post does nothing.
It would be like me walking into a party and saying "No one here has red hair" and then an hour later when someone walks in with red hair you point out I was wrong.
If you are THAT desperate for a "win" then take what you can from it. It is about all you are going to get it seems. This is a forum for debating and discussing religious points and you are desperately trying to debate a mute point of linguistics in order to get some kind of "win" over me. A wasteful win, even if you could manage it in the end, given the things I have said already in my posts. I have already acknowledged there are atheists who make sweeping statements but they are few in comparison to the rest of us. The majority of us merely point out that the existence of god is a hypothesis.... as valid as any hypothesis that someone just made up on the spot.... but a hypothesis that to date remains not just slightly... but ENTIRELY unsubstantiated by even an iota of evidence, argument, data or reasoning to lend it even a modicum of credence.
Last edited by Nozzferrahhtoo; 02-05-2013 at 07:45 AM..
Reason: Spelling check.
a missionary in the 1800s goes to a remote Amazon tribe and tells them about snow. He has no way to prove to them that it exists, and they think he's nuts. Using your logic, since there is no proof, snow does not exist.
False. He has lots of ways to prove it. Just not with mere words. He could for example take them to witness some. Or he could at least establish the basic plausibility by showing how water freezes and so forth.
You are just playing the "Well just because I have no evidence there is a god that does not mean there is no god" card here. A standard cop out for those who want to claim there is lots of evidence but also want to make excuses for providing none at all.
It might sound good on paper to someone like yourself who already thinks there is a god. But it is just white noise to anyone who does not. Mainly because you can apply the same "reasoning" to just about anything you make up on the spot.
An argument that can literally apply to just about everything... really applies to just about nothing it seems.
Way to ignore the vast % of the post you were "replying" to. Same ole same ole from you. Two huge sections of my post just edited out and ignored.
The "no one" was referring to the thread at the time I wrote the post. Not AFTER i wrote the post. Quoting someone AFTER my post does nothing.
It would be like me walking into a party and saying "No one here has red hair" and then an hour later when someone walks in with red hair you point out I was wrong.
If you are THAT desperate for a "win" then take what you can from it. It is about all you are going to get it seems.
Your bloated post wasn't worth addressing.
Now your exact comments:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo
And yet no one is declaring any such thing and you will never find a single quote out of all my 100s of posts where I ever did. But someone not saying something has... since you joined this forum.... never stopped you claiming they did. "
There is nothing in those comments even suggesting that you are speaking within the confines of this thread only. You didn't say "no one here", and even if you did, I would have interpreted that to mean anyone in the forum, not this specific thread. I proved you wrong, but not because I want a win. I just want to expose the games atheists play.
Your bloated post wasn't worth addressing.
There is nothing in those comments even suggesting that you are speaking within the confines of this thread only. You didn't say "no one here", and even if you did, I would have interpreted that to mean anyone in the forum, not this specific thread. I proved you wrong, but not because I want a win. I just want to expose the games atheists play.
The irony of the complaints you are receiving is not lost on anyone here, TWD. You are doing a good job of exposing their own tactic of ignoring the major % of posts to spout their agenda . . . without having to address any salient points made against them. Bravo.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
