|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
 Posted - 01/04/2010 : 19:20:08
|
|
This is a continuation of this thread which has been locked due to length.
|
Edited by - Cuneiformist on 01/04/2010 19:22:09
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2010 : 03:30:53 [Permalink]
|
| IMO the old testament should be completely discarded. |
 |
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2010 : 03:55:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
IMO the old testament should be completely discarded.
|
Jesus said (paraphrasing), "I have not come to deny the laws nor the prophets, but to fufill them." showing that he was guided by the OT. It must be remembered that the early Christians were Jews and the OT was all the Bible they had, the NT being added to it well after his death. It leads one to suspect that his followers were pursuing the man rather than the faith, as is often the case today.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2010 : 04:04:15 [Permalink]
|
| Yes but he also directly contradicted things from the OT, as I'm sure you know. For example, in the OT people are stoned to death for working on the Sabbath. But Jesus claims the Sabbath was created for man, not man for the Sabbath, so clearly on occasion he did deny established doctrines. It's my belief that Jesus' quote about not denying the laws but fulfilling them meant that he was not here to destroy Judaism in the broad sense, but to fulfil the Jewish prophecies. Obviously he came as a teacher, if the OT was perfect, he would not be needed. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 01/05/2010 04:09:19 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 01/05/2010 : 06:46:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Yes but he also directly contradicted things from the OT, as I'm sure you know. For example, in the OT people are stoned to death for working on the Sabbath. But Jesus claims the Sabbath was created for man, not man for the Sabbath, so clearly on occasion he did deny established doctrines. It's my belief that Jesus' quote about not denying the laws but fulfilling them meant that he was not here to destroy Judaism in the broad sense, but to fulfil the Jewish prophecies. Obviously he came as a teacher, if the OT was perfect, he would not be needed.
|
Indeed. And if nothing else, Jesus was a skilled and charismatic politician as witness his following. However, he also said he'd fulfill the prophets, and that was a pretty wild-eyed crew. I confess that I've not read the Bible in a number of years, except for the odd chapter & verse, now and again, but as I recall it only covers a very few years of Jesus' adult life. Who can say what was omitted? Heh, or added & embellished, for that matter.
I wouldn't arbitrary dump the OT. There are lots of good stories in there.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2010 : 08:20:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
IMO the old testament should be completely discarded.
|
You're halfway there.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2010 : 10:14:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
For example, in the OT people are stoned to death for working on the Sabbath. But Jesus claims the Sabbath was created for man, not man for the Sabbath, so clearly on occasion he did deny established doctrines. |
Doctrines established by God. I know a lot of people try to make the OT into just a bunch of Jewish "reporting" of what went on in those days, but when it comes to the 613 commandments, they are all in quotes in a few huge sections each beginning with "God said..." God commanded people to stone to death those who worked on the Sabbath, so when Jesus comes along and says, "no, no, that's wrong," we're basically seeing God contradict himself. Or at least, Jesus is offering a change of policy (but if God never changes, this should be impossible).
Hey, On fire for Christ, are you ever going to answer my questions? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1487 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2010 : 11:34:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
IMO the old testament should be completely discarded.
|
You're halfway there.
|
My sentiments exactly. 
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 01/05/2010 : 16:59:08 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
For example, in the OT people are stoned to death for working on the Sabbath. But Jesus claims the Sabbath was created for man, not man for the Sabbath, so clearly on occasion he did deny established doctrines. |
Doctrines established by God. I know a lot of people try to make the OT into just a bunch of Jewish "reporting" of what went on in those days, but when it comes to the 613 commandments, they are all in quotes in a few huge sections each beginning with "God said..." God commanded people to stone to death those who worked on the Sabbath, so when Jesus comes along and says, "no, no, that's wrong," we're basically seeing God contradict himself. Or at least, Jesus is offering a change of policy (but if God never changes, this should be impossible).
Hey, On fire for Christ, are you ever going to answer my questions? |
What the Hell don't you understand, Dave? God can change if he wants to, and classify that change as just more of the same. What are we gonna say about it? If we know what's best for us, nothing.
The religious are simply in a deep and emotional domestic relationship with their God. Yeah, He knocks them around a bit from time to time, but occasionally He reminds them it's only done because He loves 'em.
Good followers of Abrahamic religions are God's codependents. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 01/08/2010 08:03:35 |
|
|
|
matt36
New Member
Australia
49 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2010 : 05:35:22 [Permalink]
|
Personal attacks, niggling inconsistency,s drawn out as if they are the core of the issue, personal pride of knowledge displayed as if its a contest. What is this?
I have never said creation is proven. Evolutionists the world over claim evolution is proven time and time again, claimed by such as richard dawkins in his new book. The onus is on you guys to prove this claim and so far none of you have shown the slightest thread of proof. Ive read the comments and the song remains the same. You nit pick, dodge the questions and generally throw up rubbish arguments.
At the end of the day carbon dating has assumptions therefor its not exact science and therefore not proof of anything. So stick to the point and act like adults and prove your claims without sidetracking yourselves. My claim: "Evolution is a lie". Prove me wrong.
Skeptics, yeah right. |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2010 : 06:21:42 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by matt36
Personal attacks, niggling inconsistency,s drawn out as if they are the core of the issue, personal pride of knowledge displayed as if its a contest. What is this?
I have never said creation is proven. Evolutionists the world over claim evolution is proven time and time again, claimed by such as richard dawkins in his new book. The onus is on you guys to prove this claim and so far none of you have shown the slightest thread of proof. Ive read the comments and the song remains the same. You nit pick, dodge the questions and generally throw up rubbish arguments.
At the end of the day carbon dating has assumptions therefor its not exact science and therefore not proof of anything. So stick to the point and act like adults and prove your claims without sidetracking yourselves. My claim: "Evolution is a lie". Prove me wrong.
Skeptics, yeah right.
|
So essentially if we(not evoloutionary scientists) can't prove evolution in a few sentences on an internet forum, then it is unproven. If you really wanted an answer you could read one of the hundreds of books or some of the millions of pages of documentation and research. I have several thousand pages on the subject myself but don't see any reason to re-type them here. Clearly you have no interest in such proof as it is redily available for anyone who actually tries to find it.
P.S. All science which isnt pure mathematics relies on assumptions, feel free to take a basic science class at your local community education facilities. Also you should know that it is up to the claimant to prove his or her claims, "proving a million+ people over multiple generations are all in cohorts lying successfully for 150 years" good luck with that. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
| Edited by - BigPapaSmurf on 01/08/2010 06:28:19 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 01/08/2010 : 07:11:58 [Permalink]
|
C-14, C-14..... Lessee, I've got something about that around here somewhere.... Oh, here it is!
Y'see, no one, no scientist anyway, has ever claimed that the process is anything but an estimate. Properly done, it's usually a pretty damned good estimate, but an estimate nevertheless.
Here's a little more on it. Study those links carefully and then you might know somewhat whereof you speak on the topic.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2010 : 07:20:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by matt36
Personal attacks, niggling inconsistency,s drawn out as if they are the core of the issue, |
The very moment someone claims that the Bible is the absolute word of God, then any inconsistencies becomes important because they either prove that God, the Bible, or the claims in the Bible are bunk. They point to the clear fact that the Bible is shock full shit made up by Man.
| personal pride of knowledge displayed as if its a contest. What is this? |
Of course it's a contest. He who dies with most knowledge wins! Sheesh... 
| I have never said creation is proven. Evolutionists the world over claim evolution is proven time and time again, claimed by such as richard dawkins in his new book. |
Evolution cannot be proven in a scientific sense, since that's not how science work. We've told you this many times, that's why I have to conclude that every time you use the word "proof" you're using it in an ignoramus layman's colloquial terms.
In that sense, evolution is indeed... "proven".
I haven't read any of Richard Dawkins' books, but I've seen a lot of videos of them, and I can't imagine him ever saying that evolution is proven, colloquial or otherwise. So please provide a citation of him saying so.
| The onus is on you guys to prove this claim and so far none of you have shown the slightest thread of proof. |
Yes we have, several separate ones, but you have ignored them all. Or at least not acknowledged them to us. ERV is one example that proves that Man has common ancestry with not only chimpanzees, but gorillas and orangutans also.
| Ive read the comments and the song remains the same. You nit pick, dodge the questions and generally throw up rubbish arguments. |
You dodge questions, and generally don't give a shit what we are writing. That much is obvious, because you've never replied to the many counter-questions we've asked, or commented on the evidence we have provided other than generally dismissing them, which is pretty offensive as some of that describes in detail why they are valid proof of evolution.
Since you don't give us any reasoned argument why you dismiss our evidence, the only conclusion we can draw is that you're unreasonable. (pun intended)
| At the end of the day carbon dating has assumptions therefor its not exact science and therefore not proof of anything. |
At the end of the day, you've proved that you know jack-shit about carbon dating and are only parroting what other proven liars are telling you to say. We've seen no evidence what-so-ever that you can think for yourself in terms of science. So your dismissal of any radio metric technique counts for nothing.
| So stick to the point and act like adults and prove your claims without sidetracking yourselves. |
You're the one sidetracking, by constantly skipping from argument to argument without acknowledging our responses to them. I've proposed that we start new threads to discuss specific lines of evidence, just to keep the discussions from getting sidetrack. That's precisely to avoid the accusation from you. But you have ignored me on that one, so I feel safe calling you a hypocrite.
But I still think that's the best course of action, because you seem to have problems sticking to the subject. Just give me a nod, and I'll set up a thread or two for the purpose of discussing specifics. Like the law of thermodynamics, and radiometric dating.
Remember, the name of this particular thread is Dennett answers NY Times on Dawkins' book II.
My claim: "Evolution is a lie". Prove me wrong.
Skeptics, yeah right.
|
You ignorant little shit. You know nothing of skepticism.
The burden of proof is on the claimant. When you claim "Evolution is a lie" it's up to you to produce substantial evidence that your claim is true.
You need to go back to school and take the logic 101 course.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2010 : 07:29:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by matt36
Personal attacks, niggling inconsistency,s drawn out as if they are the core of the issue, personal pride of knowledge displayed as if its a contest. What is this?
I have never said creation is proven. Evolutionists the world over claim evolution is proven time and time again, claimed by such as richard dawkins in his new book. The onus is on you guys to prove this claim and so far none of you have shown the slightest thread of proof. Ive read the comments and the song remains the same. You nit pick, dodge the questions and generally throw up rubbish arguments.
At the end of the day carbon dating has assumptions therefor its not exact science and therefore not proof of anything. So stick to the point and act like adults and prove your claims without sidetracking yourselves. My claim: "Evolution is a lie". Prove me wrong.
Skeptics, yeah right.
|
The difference between "proofs" of creation and evolution is that evolution has mountains of evidence in it's favor, and creation has no more than an abyss of ignorance created by dedicated superstition. And I remind; not all Creationists are Christian. Y'all don't have the sole franchise on that product.
Now Matt, you have been given the places ro seek out this information by people who were willing to take the time to dig it up for you, yet, if you have looked at even a single page there is no sign of it in your writings.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2010 : 09:07:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by matt36
Personal attacks, niggling inconsistency,s drawn out as if they are the core of the issue, personal pride of knowledge displayed as if its a contest. What is this?
I have never said creation is proven. Evolutionists the world over claim evolution is proven time and time again, claimed by such as richard dawkins in his new book. The onus is on you guys to prove this claim and so far none of you have shown the slightest thread of proof. Ive read the comments and the song remains the same. You nit pick, dodge the questions and generally throw up rubbish arguments.
At the end of the day carbon dating has assumptions therefor its not exact science and therefore not proof of anything. So stick to the point and act like adults and prove your claims without sidetracking yourselves. My claim: "Evolution is a lie". Prove me wrong.
Skeptics, yeah right.
|
So, matt36. Why don't you supply us with an assumption-free proof for a hypothesis. Any hypothesis that is emirically grounded. Either that, or admit that you don't know what you are talking about.
25 years and counting...
(and matt36, this is unfortunately the core of the issue - you are ignorant regarding the topic at hand) |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 01/08/2010 : 09:22:43 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by matt36
At the end of the day carbon dating has assumptions therefor its not exact science and therefore not proof of anything. |
I have asked you several times to provide an example of an "exact science" by your definition, and you have refused to do so. I can only conclude from your reluctance to give even a single example that you know full well that all sciences rest upon certain assumptions, and are just using this canard to smear the real science.| My claim: "Evolution is a lie". Prove me wrong. |
"Evolution is a lie" is a positive claim that you need to support with actual evidence. You have provided nothing but lies, instead. Lies which you refuse to acknowledge as lies, despite careful correction. You've even spread falsehoods about the Bible itself.
So why should we try to jump through hoops for you, when it is clear that you are incapable of discussing these matters with any honesty at all? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Dennett answers NY Times on Dawkins' book II
