|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
|
|
changingmyself
Skeptic Friend
USA
122 Posts |
 Posted - 05/20/2011 : 15:35:07 [Permalink]
|
David, since this is not for YOUR money, YOUR rules do not apply. As I stated in the beginning, you post your junk and I post MY evidence and THEY get to decide. THIS is why I said NO SPECIAL PLEADING. This whole point for ME is to let the people actually GET the information and letting THEM decide.
Just as YOU have repeatedly used Josephus for "evidence of Jesus" I am using Macrobius as "evidence for Horus's birthday" and since you say it doesn't matter because Jesus birthday was assigned to him, I am just showing the PARALLELS between the TWO dates that were assigned to him and WHY.
Again, NO SPECIAL PLEADING, no attempting to sway the vote.
LET THE PEOPLE decide for themselves. That is all that I am asking.
|
"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts"
-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
|
 |
|
|
Hercules
New Member
35 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
|
teched246
Skeptic Friend
123 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 19:00:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
How did you folks choose our little corner of the Web for judging, anyway?
|
Isn't this exciting? Did you wake up today thinking to yourself that such a controversial topic would become so hot on this little ole forum...i love it!
We (changingmyself, Jcm, GodAlmighty, Nanuex, Hercules, etc too many to name) have been debating kingdavid and others for nearly a year -- at least for me -- either on youtube or freethoughtnation.com (acharya's website) and it has reached a point where the debates have become so heated, and the research involved has become so intensive, that we just have to settle this once and for all. Even picking a forum on which we would settle this was debated for the purpose of fairness. Finally, we agreed on this site, and aren't you guys blessed that we did so? Things are about to heat up. We haven't even begun to unleash the bulk of our sources. That little tidbit you've seen on the other forum (ZG evidnece) was but a taste of what's in store. Christianity comes from the egyptian, sumerian, pagan, and eastern solar religions and they know it.  |
"For all things have been baptized in the well of eternity and are beyond good
and evil; and good and evil themselves are but intervening shadows and damp
depressions and drifting clouds.Verily, it is a blessing and not a blasphemy
when I teach: ‘Over all things stand the heaven Accident, the heaven
Innocence, the heaven Chance, the heaven Prankishness." -Nietzsche |
|
|
|
changingmyself
Skeptic Friend
USA
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 19:13:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
How did you folks choose our little corner of the Web for judging, anyway?
|
Sorry we do not mean to disturb your forum at all, I first chose the James Randi forum because there are tons of people there and a large variety of beliefs but for some reason they aren't accepting applications for enrollment to their forum. he he.
|
"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts"
-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
|
|
|
|
tw101356
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 20:51:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
Originally posted by Dave W.
How did you folks choose our little corner of the Web for judging, anyway?
|
Sorry we do not mean to disturb your forum at all, I first chose the James Randi forum because there are tons of people there and a large variety of beliefs but for some reason they aren't accepting applications for enrollment to their forum. he he.
|
Speaking for myself, this is interesting. I don't recall seeing a discussion or debate moving itself wholesale to SFN before. The only element of this which I find slightly bothersome is the link formatting, as Kil has explained in the other thread. Hopefully you'll be able to edit the posts and tidy that up a bit for readability.
|
- TW
|
|
|
|
changingmyself
Skeptic Friend
USA
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/20/2011 : 21:26:42 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tw101356
Originally posted by changingmyself
Originally posted by Dave W.
How did you folks choose our little corner of the Web for judging, anyway?
|
Sorry we do not mean to disturb your forum at all, I first chose the James Randi forum because there are tons of people there and a large variety of beliefs but for some reason they aren't accepting applications for enrollment to their forum. he he.
|
Speaking for myself, this is interesting. I don't recall seeing a discussion or debate moving itself wholesale to SFN before. The only element of this which I find slightly bothersome is the link formatting, as Kil has explained in the other thread. Hopefully you'll be able to edit the posts and tidy that up a bit for readability.
|
I went back over mine and fixed them, I am sight impaired and I have difficulty reading small print so I had to go back over it and put in the right symbols.
Side note:
Thank you kil, for your help with this!!! |
"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts"
-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 05/20/2011 : 22:09:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
Side note:
Thank you kil, for your help with this!!!
|
You're very welcome. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 06:28:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
David, since this is not for YOUR money, YOUR rules do not apply. As I stated in the beginning, you post your junk and I post MY evidence and THEY get to decide. THIS is why I said NO SPECIAL PLEADING. This whole point for ME is to let the people actually GET the information and letting THEM decide. |
I agree, and have not and will not post any anti-ZG links in the "evidence" forum. But if Hercules is going to post pro-ZG links in an attempt to sway the forum, then I will post other links to show them there there is more than one side to the issue, that even irreligious skeptics don't support this stuff. But I promise not to post those links in the evidence forum, even though Hercules has already posted links there. If you're asking me not to post links to avoid swaying the SFN members, could you at least do the same for Hercules?
| Just as YOU have repeatedly used Josephus for "evidence of Jesus" I am using Macrobius as "evidence for Horus's birthday" and since you say it doesn't matter because Jesus birthday was assigned to him, I am just showing the PARALLELS between the TWO dates that were assigned to him and WHY. |
All you have to do is show that Horus was born on 12/25, since that's all that Zeitgeist claims. It really doesn't matter that Jesus wasn't born on 12/25, since that's not one of the claims that I'm asking you to provide evidence for. If you can show that Horus was indeed born on 12/25, then you've proven Zeitgeist's claim that Horus was born on 12/25. That's all.
The same goes for the three kings at his birth. There were no three kings at Jesus' birth. They showed up at his family home when he was about a year old, they weren't kings, and the Bible doesn't say there were three of them. But still, all Zeitgeist claims is that there were three kings present at Horus' birth, so that's all you have to show. That it's not truly a parallel to the Jesus story is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
Again, NO SPECIAL PLEADING, no attempting to sway the vote.
LET THE PEOPLE decide for themselves. That is all that I am asking.
|
I've agreed not to respond directly to your evidence, and have even been nice enough to agree not to respond to Teched's, even though that wasn't part of the original deal. But then Hercules shows up and post links in an attempt to sway the skeptics here, so I think I have every right to respond in kind. He's also been launching personal attacks against me, and I'm not hearing any complaints from you or Teched about that, either. I'm doing, and even exceeding, what I originally agreed to. I told you earlier that I reserved the right to respond to anyone else who brings up an issue (though I do promise not to use this as a "back door" to address your evidence directly) |
| Edited by - KingDavid8 on 05/21/2011 06:42:49 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 06:31:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by teched246
Isn't this exciting? Did you wake up today thinking to yourself that such a controversial topic would become so hot on this little ole forum... |
It's not like we're strangers to it:| We (changingmyself, Jcm, GodAlmighty, Nanuex, Hercules, etc too many to name) have been debating kingdavid and others for nearly a year -- at least for me -- either on youtube or freethoughtnation.com (acharya's website) and it has reached a point where the debates have become so heated, and the research involved has become so intensive, that we just have to settle this once and for all. |
Yeah, it'd probably be better if everyone left some of the heat behind on this site right now.| Even picking a forum on which we would settle this was debated for the purpose of fairness. Finally, we agreed on this site... |
What I was curious about was how SFN even got in the running. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 06:38:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
What I was curious about was how SFN even got in the running.
|
I'm the one who chose this site, and I just googled "skeptic forums" and went with the first one who accepted us. We tried James Randi's forum, but ChangingMyself was rejected, and I never got a response. I tried another one (I forget which), but the site said they weren't accepting new members. You were third on the list, and I got through right away, so I recommended this one to ChangingMyself. She agreed.
We also each suggested a specific forum, but vetoed each other's choices. I suggested TheologyWeb (though promised not to accept votes from Christians), but ChangingMyself was still worried about a forum that was generally pro-Christian. She suggested Sam Harris' forum, but that's heavily pro-Christ-myth, so I vetoed that one. |
|
|
|
changingmyself
Skeptic Friend
USA
122 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 07:34:32 [Permalink]
|
David, you agreed that you would NOT respond, you have broken the deal OR remove your post in the evidence thread immediately.
If you do not remove it, you have conceded.
Now, the REASON I am saying this is because people need ALL the evidence that we have and not just YOUR approved evidence. Remember, THEY get to decide whether the proof is valid or not by voting yes or no.
If you cannot follow the rules, I am done here. I am not going to carry on a 'debate' with you, as I have stated before, if we are going to just a debate, we can do that on the freethought nation forum or zeitgeist video. END OF.
I AM following the rules as is Teched and ONLY the rules that I agreed on. HIS evidence is an explanation of MINE in which I have SCHOLARLY proof for. Hercules is not part of my and Teched's team. I do not speak for him or tell him what to do or not to do. Although I do hope he would follow along and discuss things here instead of on the evidence thread. |
"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts"
-Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School
|
|
|
|
teched246
Skeptic Friend
123 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 07:56:23 [Permalink]
|
| The evidence thread is becoming quite cluttered with non-evidence replies. Now that we have all of our kinks worked out let's cut the fat. |
"For all things have been baptized in the well of eternity and are beyond good
and evil; and good and evil themselves are but intervening shadows and damp
depressions and drifting clouds.Verily, it is a blessing and not a blasphemy
when I teach: ‘Over all things stand the heaven Accident, the heaven
Innocence, the heaven Chance, the heaven Prankishness." -Nietzsche |
|
|
|
KingDavid8
Skeptic Friend
USA
212 Posts |
Posted - 05/21/2011 : 08:06:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by changingmyself
David, you agreed that you would NOT respond, you have broken the deal OR remove your post in the evidence thread immediately. |
No, I agreed not to respond to your evidence. I haven't. We never said I couldn't post at all.
| Now, the REASON I am saying this is because people need ALL the evidence that we have and not just YOUR approved evidence. |
That's incorrect. The question was whether you could meet the challenge as I laid it out on my website. I'm specific about what types of evidence I will accept, and most of what you've posted is not that type of evidence, but just people repeating the claims, exactly as Zeitgeist does. In other words, it's no stronger evidence than Zeitgeist itself is, so it does nothing to validate the claims.
| Remember, THEY get to decide whether the proof is valid or not by voting yes or no. |
No, they get to choose whether *it meets the standard of evidence I laid out* by voting yes or no. If you wanted a different standard of evidence, you should have said something before we started this. You keep asking me to change the rules, and I've agreed to change any rule that I felt was reasonable. I already agreed to essentially drop my definitions of "baptism" and "resurrection" from my site, and leave the definitions to the SFN members. I also agreed to not respond to evidence posted by Teched. But you can't seriously be asking me to just forget about the challenge altogether. That's what we we're here for in the first place.
| If you cannot follow the rules, I am done here. |
I am following the rules, and am even following rules I didn't initially agree to. We never said I couldn't post at all, just that I couldn't respond to your evidence. I haven't. Which piece(s) of evidence do you think I've responded to?
I'll tell you what - I'll agree to stop posting in that forum and even delete all of the posts I made so far, if you'll agree to delete any type of evidence that doesn't meet the criteria I set out in my challenge, and any evidence you leave in, or post in the future, you have to explain how it meets my criteria.
| Hercules is not part of my and Teched's team. |
I know. Which is why it's permissible for me to respond to him. I can respond to *anything* he says, or *anything* said by anyone else besides you, and now Teched, though I promise not to use them as a back door to go after your evidence. I can also respond to you and Teched (as I'm doing now) as long as I'm not addressing the pieces of evidence you're giving, which I'm not. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Evidence for Zeitgeist’s claims?
